Why aren't the Dem Candidates going after the Repugs?

[KoKo]

Over at TPM a reader asks Josh Marshall that question. And, what about those Neo-Cons? Why is Podhoretz still allowed to show his face in the media shouting "Bomb Iran" or you will be enabling a Nazi!

--------------------------

It Would Be a Start

TPM Reader KB ...

Why are the republican presidential candidates the only ones going after their opposite numbers in the other party?

Rudy and the gang have gleefully used Clinton, and to a lesser extent Obama and Edwards as foils and rhetorical ploys in their daily campaigning. But the Democrats running for President never name any of the Republican candidates. Obama could gain serious points by going after Rudy and his wacky team of neocon advisors. Why not do it? What does he have to lose? It would at least put Clinton on the defensive about Iran, and force her to comment on the latest Podhoretz nonsense.

It leads to a larger question: at this late date, after all that has happened in Iraq, why are the neocons not on the defensive within the context of this presidential season? Given current public opinion polling, the neocons should be hiding under a rock, and the Democratic candidates for president should be the ones who put them there.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

[cuke]

1. Hillary has

[Jane Austin]

2. They're following DU and just attacking Dems?

Like calling one of our candidates a bigot?

Sheesh.

[Bitwit1234]

3. Cause they don't have the guts.

Hillary is the only one that is going after the republicans. In one of the debates right on stage she went after them...but the democratic wimps like Obama are so damn busy bashing Hillary he doesn't have time.