Monday, June 27, 2005

Ain't Life a B*&^%?!

Gee Whiz. What's a conservative media outlet to do? It stacks the decks in favor of the Republican administration and congress and still can't come up with a unified response to last week's Karl Rove remarks?

While we're on this subject again, will all the liberals and Democrats responding to Rove's remarks with their up-with-nationalism, yeah-but-we-supported-the-war-in-afghanistan crap, please shut the hell up. You're hurting America.

Democrats don't need any more me-too-ism on the "war on terra". There may have once been a time when questioning the administration's war policies--in afghanistan as well as in iraq--was risky business. But not anymore. The president's poll numbers stink. Even his poll numbers on terrorism and foreign policy are down. Now is not the time to retreat to gingoistic, tough guy talk when the supposed tough guy is looking pretty feeble.

Now where was I? Oh, yes, Rove. Like Bilmon suggested last week, I think Rove's outburst of bile to a NY group of conservatives may actually be an encouraging sign for progressives.

First, it demonstrates that an administration barely six months into its second term is already coming apart at the seems. It shows that even with the media and congress on its side, it still thinks its base is shaky. And that since Rove's speech didn't show any signs of wanting to make friends or influence people, it sounds an awful lot like they've given up on any significant policy measures until at least after the 2006 elections.

Second, Democrats could use the opportunity Rove provided for re-evaluating our response to the events of 9-11. Despite all the rhetoric from conservatives that liberals supposedly just wanted to blame America for the attacks, there has been precious little attention given in the media or in our nation's response policies to just what extent our historical involvement in the middle east contributed to the attacks on the towers and pentagon.

It isn't wrong to blame America if in fact, America deserves some blame. I doubt the public wants to hear that message, but until it does, further Iraq's may be more likely to happen.

However, despite the range and volume of their critique of the administration's war policies, Democrats have not clearly stated an alternative. Now would be a good time to start doing so.

What would such an alternative set of policies look like?

Tune in next time and Bulworth will lay out some starting principles.

No comments: