Page 1 of 1 pages
I would like to believe that the Democrats are indeed using a strategy that involves “never interrupting your enemy while they are making a mistake.” I would like to believe that they have adopted his strategy of using a circumspect defense and a sudden offensive thrust. I really would.
More than likely you capture the current state of affairs quite nicely in your piece. It’s not a strategy so much as a the fear of one. It’s a tactic without a strategy. The Dems have given the Repub enough rope. Now how much more can they really hang themselves before the Dems move in and take the initiative?
Posted by Neruda on Oct 25, 2005 at 7:24 AM
I refuse to give the Democratic National Party any money.
I give to specific candidates I support (for example- MY SENATOR BYRD), but the party won’t get my money.
Wanna know one reason why?
Last week, when the congress was scheduled to vote on majot cuts is social services, while handing out tax cuts to the wealthy, I called them and asked what they were doing to stop a passage of this bill.
They suggested I call my elected reps.
In other words, they had no answer for me. They were silent, as far as I could tell.
As I said in front of the white house on September 24th with the rest of the 150K.
“SHAME, SHAME, SHAME”
Posted by robin on Oct 25, 2005 at 11:12 AM
>> Hurricane Katrina has created the moment for a true paradigm shift in American politics, because many Americans have actually become scared about what it means to have an eviscerated, dysfunctional federal government. <<
Probably not. Katrina was not the biggest disaster to hit the USA since President Bush first came into office. Besides 09/11, there were other hurricanes, including four major hurricanes to hit Florida in 2004, and Rita and Wilma after Katrina. Except for Katrina, all of these situations were handled with a minimum of trouble and disruption, considering the scale of each of these problems.
So what was different about Katrina? Well, New Orleans and Louisiana have long celebrated a culture of corruption. And Louisiana and New Orleans were the only sites that had a Democratic governor and a Democrtic mayor. And Louisiana was the only place where the elected officials refused/declined/failed/whatever to call an emergency with a Cat 5 hurricane bearing down on them. And when President Bush called the governor and the mayor on Saturday and suggested they declare an emergency, they waited until Sunday morning to act, just 24 hours before the hurricane hit. And Louisiana and New Orleans had detailed emergency plans in case of a hurricane, but the plans were not activated on time. The plans called for a 72 hour evacuation procedure, but many things were not accomplished because the plan was implemented late. The most important thing that was not done was the failure to mobilize the school buses and the city buses to evacuate the poor and the immobile, as the plans called for. The school bses ended up in water up to their sparkplugs. Consequently, tens of thousands of people who should have been several hundred miles north were stuck in the Superdome and the Convention Center with no electricity and few supplies, because the emergency supplies, like the buses, were never mobilized. Then the mayor panicked and started talking about rapes and murders and 10,000 dead, but the real number of dead was about 1000, there were few rapes, and there were only four murders, about normal for New Orleans.
Now, there were some real shortcomings in federal planning, and these must be corrected. But these shortcomings did not show up to any great extent in all of the other disasters we have discussed. They would have been much less obvious in Lousiana if Louisiana authorities had acted on their own emergency plans.
And I know Mary Landrieu is upset, but everyone in the nation could track what was going on in New Orleans. And if you think you can make political capital out of the Democrat’s or the Republican’s performance in New Orleans, I think you are crazy. But knock yourself out, lady.
Posted by scorp on Oct 25, 2005 at 10:54 PM
The Democrats are out of touch with their base because they are too obsessed with reacting against anything the Republicans do. The electoral failures of 2002 and 2004 was an obsession to oppose the President on the Iraq War, more so out of sheer contrarism than any “swelling grassroots opposition” to the War. The Democrats refuse to believe that the reason Bush won in 2004 is exactly because of the War.
Or rather, the Democrats’ gross miscalculations.
Ditto on what Douglas says about the failures that Katrina exposed,
<blockquote>Katrina exposed the nation
Posted by Jay Cline on Oct 26, 2005 at 11:15 AM
In point of fact, Bush did not win Ohio in 2004, any more than he won Florida in 2000. Purging of voter rolls, voter intimidation, long lines and malfunctioning voting machines that without exception malfunctioned in Bush’s favor, even machine tampering by employees of the manufacturer so as to avoid a manual recount, are what gave Ohio to Bush, while exit polling, accurate in every other state in the union, in every other election in which it was used, as well as in some former soviet republics where we depended on it to allege election fraud, gave Ohio to Kerry, just as eventually a statewide manual recount in Florida would have given Florida to Gore had not the SCOTUS violated the constitution to install GWB. Imagine the possibilities, no war in Iraq, no out of control debt, no tax breaks for the top 1% and the oil industry, very likely no 9/11, as Clarke would still have been on the job.
Posted by Kenneth D. Brown on Oct 26, 2005 at 9:51 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
I would like to believe that the Democrats are indeed using a strategy that involves “never interrupting your enemy while they are making a mistake.” I would like to believe that they have adopted his strategy of using a circumspect defense and a sudden offensive thrust. I really would.
More than likely you capture the current state of affairs quite nicely in your piece. It’s not a strategy so much as a the fear of one. It’s a tactic without a strategy. The Dems have given the Repub enough rope. Now how much more can they really hang themselves before the Dems move in and take the initiative?
I refuse to give the Democratic National Party any money.
I give to specific candidates I support (for example- MY SENATOR BYRD), but the party won’t get my money.
Wanna know one reason why?
Last week, when the congress was scheduled to vote on majot cuts is social services, while handing out tax cuts to the wealthy, I called them and asked what they were doing to stop a passage of this bill.
They suggested I call my elected reps.
In other words, they had no answer for me. They were silent, as far as I could tell.
As I said in front of the white house on September 24th with the rest of the 150K.
“SHAME, SHAME, SHAME”
>> Hurricane Katrina has created the moment for a true paradigm shift in American politics, because many Americans have actually become scared about what it means to have an eviscerated, dysfunctional federal government. <<
Probably not. Katrina was not the biggest disaster to hit the USA since President Bush first came into office. Besides 09/11, there were other hurricanes, including four major hurricanes to hit Florida in 2004, and Rita and Wilma after Katrina. Except for Katrina, all of these situations were handled with a minimum of trouble and disruption, considering the scale of each of these problems.
So what was different about Katrina? Well, New Orleans and Louisiana have long celebrated a culture of corruption. And Louisiana and New Orleans were the only sites that had a Democratic governor and a Democrtic mayor. And Louisiana was the only place where the elected officials refused/declined/failed/whatever to call an emergency with a Cat 5 hurricane bearing down on them. And when President Bush called the governor and the mayor on Saturday and suggested they declare an emergency, they waited until Sunday morning to act, just 24 hours before the hurricane hit. And Louisiana and New Orleans had detailed emergency plans in case of a hurricane, but the plans were not activated on time. The plans called for a 72 hour evacuation procedure, but many things were not accomplished because the plan was implemented late. The most important thing that was not done was the failure to mobilize the school buses and the city buses to evacuate the poor and the immobile, as the plans called for. The school bses ended up in water up to their sparkplugs. Consequently, tens of thousands of people who should have been several hundred miles north were stuck in the Superdome and the Convention Center with no electricity and few supplies, because the emergency supplies, like the buses, were never mobilized. Then the mayor panicked and started talking about rapes and murders and 10,000 dead, but the real number of dead was about 1000, there were few rapes, and there were only four murders, about normal for New Orleans.
Now, there were some real shortcomings in federal planning, and these must be corrected. But these shortcomings did not show up to any great extent in all of the other disasters we have discussed. They would have been much less obvious in Lousiana if Louisiana authorities had acted on their own emergency plans.
And I know Mary Landrieu is upset, but everyone in the nation could track what was going on in New Orleans. And if you think you can make political capital out of the Democrat’s or the Republican’s performance in New Orleans, I think you are crazy. But knock yourself out, lady.
The Democrats are out of touch with their base because they are too obsessed with reacting against anything the Republicans do. The electoral failures of 2002 and 2004 was an obsession to oppose the President on the Iraq War, more so out of sheer contrarism than any “swelling grassroots opposition” to the War. The Democrats refuse to believe that the reason Bush won in 2004 is exactly because of the War.
Or rather, the Democrats’ gross miscalculations.
Ditto on what Douglas says about the failures that Katrina exposed,
<blockquote>Katrina exposed the nation
In point of fact, Bush did not win Ohio in 2004, any more than he won Florida in 2000. Purging of voter rolls, voter intimidation, long lines and malfunctioning voting machines that without exception malfunctioned in Bush’s favor, even machine tampering by employees of the manufacturer so as to avoid a manual recount, are what gave Ohio to Bush, while exit polling, accurate in every other state in the union, in every other election in which it was used, as well as in some former soviet republics where we depended on it to allege election fraud, gave Ohio to Kerry, just as eventually a statewide manual recount in Florida would have given Florida to Gore had not the SCOTUS violated the constitution to install GWB. Imagine the possibilities, no war in Iraq, no out of control debt, no tax breaks for the top 1% and the oil industry, very likely no 9/11, as Clarke would still have been on the job.
register a new account »Posting Security