Make the Bush Record the Issue

NEWSWEEK

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: stephenkla @ 11/18/2007 4:57:11 PM

    "...and thus are invested from the beginning in governing competently, efficiently and fairly." The notion that noble ideas about the role of government lead to good governing is rather quaint. What's up for the next column-"When you smile the whole world smiles with you"?

    • Posted By: david78209 @ 11/18/2007 5:18:46 PM

      The comment by stephenkla at 4:57 PM, raisies eyebrows at the comment that "[Democrats] thus are invested from the beginning in governing competently, efficiently, and fairly." I have to agree that it has a touch of Pollyanna. Perhaps it would have been more balanced to write, "Democrats thus are invested AT the beginning..."

      But that may illustrate the point even more starkly. Do you want to elect politicians who start off with some ideals and have to be seduced through a slow process to become corrupt? Or would you rather elect seasoned prostitutes, who start auctioning off government policy to the highest bidder as soon as they land in Washington?

      • Posted By: stephenkla @ 11/18/2007 6:43:12 PM

        David-inferring noble motives from a politician merely because he or she parrots a talking point that sounds noble is a real stretch. Also, this idea the Democrats are unblemished by special interests is ridiculous. One thing Washington does not suffer from is a lack of highest bidders clamoring for the attention of officials on either side of the aisle.

  • Posted By: kimoco @ 11/18/2007 5:46:07 PM

    I find it sad that almost 5 years after Bush started the unnecessary war in Iraq there are still some Republicans (the 24%ers) that insist that Iraq is 'extremely winnable'. Wow.

    I wonder what these folks think winning is. At this point it seems the current Iraqi government is not working well, while violence is down, it is not gone. I would love to hear what you 24%ers think winning is.

    After all, didn't Bush delare Mission Accomplished over 4 years ago?


  • Posted By: kimoco @ 11/18/2007 5:42:38 PM

    fkfkfk

  • Posted By: Ready4Change @ 11/18/2007 5:35:36 PM

    Blaming the absolute inability of a Democratic led Congress to make headway in approving, supporting, and implementing positive change, since they won the leadership role just 12 months ago, and were sworn in just 10 months ago, ALL THE WHILE STYMIED AT EACH AND EVERY STEP BY BUSH AND HIS CONGRESSIONAL PUPPETS USING EVERY TRICK IN THE BOOK TO OBFUSCATE, DEMEAN, AND PROCEDURELY THWART REFORM, AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW COURSE, is the height of Rebublican arrogance! I'm sorry, but to try and blame the Democrats for what is NOT happening in Washington is laughable, if not supremely cynical, at best. Markos has it right, and the Republicans are stuck with it!

  • Posted By: david78209 @ 11/18/2007 5:17:49 PM

    The comment by stephenkla at 4:57 PM, raisies eyebrows at the comment that "[Democrats] thus are invested from the beginning in governing competently, efficiently, and fairly." I have to agree that it has a touch of Pollyanna. Perhaps it would have been more balanced to write, "Democrats thus are invested AT the beginning..."

    But that may illustrate the point even more starkly. Do you want to elect politicians who start off with some ideals and have to be seduced through a slow process to become corrupt? Or would you rather elect seasoned prostitutes, who start auctioning off government policy to the highest bidder as soon as they land in Washington?

  • Posted By: david78209 @ 11/18/2007 5:17:32 PM

    The comment by stephenkla at 4:57 PM, raisies eyebrows at the comment that "[Democrats] thus are invested from the beginning in governing competently, efficiently, and fairly." I have to agree that it has a touch of Pollyanna. Perhaps it would have been more balanced to write, "Democrats thus are invested AT the beginning..."

    But that may illustrate the point even more starkly. Do you want to elect politicians who start off with some ideals and have to be seduced through a slow process to become corrupt? Or would you rather elect seasoned prostitutes, who start auctioning off government policy to the highest bidder as soon as they land in Washington?

  • Posted By: Raging Moonbat @ 11/18/2007 5:16:18 PM

    The Republican peaked in 2004. Everything after the '04 election has been a complete and utter disaster. Ever since Katrina there's been a slow but very real shift away from the GOP because they really only stand for being anti-gay, anti-Meican and pro Iraq war. Talk to any Republican for 5 minutes and they'll be complaining about one of those three issues.

    The Democrats don't really deserve to dominate the next generation of politics, but they will. They will have the final say on immigration reform, social security, healthcare, the Iraq war and the capture of bin Laden.

    Bin who? You know, the guy who killed 3000+ on US soil. He still matters. Republicans don't dare say his name or Bush's name in public.

    But a Democrat will probably be in the White House when he's killed, and the Dems will take credit. And yes, Markos is right - it will be the Democrats Era because of our 43rd President, George Walker Bush.

  • Posted By: roalhv @ 11/18/2007 5:05:01 PM

    1. times are not tough for the Republicans
    2. doesn't

  • Posted By: D-wall @ 11/18/2007 10:14:10 AM

    Wow. Hiring Moulitsas and saying he is "progressive" and that his Web site generally supports Democrats. What a bunch of BS. The only Dems they don't support are the ones that agree with President's policies, like Joe Liebermann and Brian Baird. Don't try to cover up your liberal sensibilites Newsweek. You along with your other cohorts in the media have jumped off the deep end and are so agenda driven that you are blinded by your hatred for anything on the other side of your opinion. Bush Derangement Syndrome at its highest.





    That would be like hiring Ann Coulter to write opinion (which you won't)

    • Posted By: bluemoon @ 11/18/2007 4:49:17 PM

      Pfft- "
      That would be like hiring Ann Coulter to write opinion (which you won't)"

      Far from it, they gave us worse: Rove- whose moronic worship of party over country stains America forever.

    • Posted By: caseynm @ 11/18/2007 4:39:08 PM

      You know, you 24percenters are a bit much. The fact that Bush has run a horrible presidency doesn't indicate that those who think he's run a horrible presidency are deranged. Indeed, we just look at reality and see how it is, rather than what we want it to be.

  • Posted By: bluemoon @ 11/18/2007 4:46:30 PM

    The nation just aches to put the dark Bush years behind us.

    I really wish the GE were today.

    The mind reels at the thought of a year plus left of traitor Karl Rove posting as a supposed counterweight across from Markos Moulitsas. Rove should be jailed or exiled.

  • Posted By: mikesorensen @ 11/18/2007 10:38:41 AM

    While the idea of capitalizing on Bush hatred may appeal to some leftists, it is a terrible idea to attack Bush???s strongest attribute. Facts are stubborn things and in this case they testify powerfully in Bush???s favor. Though leftists enjoyed screaming failure, war crimes, and quagmire at every military endeavor, they look foolish now. I???m talking about two crushing defeats for al Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan. Fifty million people set free from unspeakable tyranny, and no terrorist attacks for years and years against Americans. Through Bush diplomacy, North Korea???s nuclear program is disabled. A.Q. Kahn???s nuclear bazaar put out of business. Libya???s WMD programs eliminated. Public opinion of terrorists and terrorism has plummeted. France and Germany got rid of their anti-American leaders, and on and on.

    An even worse idea would be to bring up the facts on the economy. Though Bush inherited a recession and a bursting economic bubble from Bill Clinton, and we suffered economically from the 911 attacks, corporate scandals, and even acts of God, the economy has flourished. We haven???t had just a strong economy but a record setting one. We???ve had record highs in the stock market, record setting consistent job growth, low taxes. Despite increases in defense spending and new social benefits such as the hugely successful Medicare prescription program, the budget deficit has steadily declined and is now less than 1% of GDP.

    • Posted By: caseynm @ 11/18/2007 4:34:13 PM

      Oops! The one successful attack on American soil happened under: Bush! And because he ignored the intelligence!

      Your claims of victory in Iraq ring hollow and premature--kind of like "Mission Accomplished!"

  • Posted By: wilsan @ 11/18/2007 4:12:12 PM

    Yes, please, mighty Kos; Let's use the Bush record. Let's stop the hate "journalism",lying, and demonizing that wholly constitutes the Left's issues with respect to the national Scene. I won't review all the lies that Kos has put out, from Katrina, to the economy, to terrorism - it would take too ling; I will point out this, tho:

    Isn't it amazing, now that we will probably have liberal Democrat in office in 2008, that we want to play ' nice ', and focus on 'records'... just in time for the benefit of the Left. Get real; you people practiced the politics of the Big Lie, demonizing, and hate and now that is what you are going to get in return - Hillary is already a failed President, probably will be impeached, and her scandal ridden administration gone down in flames. Thank You, Kos (and moveon.org), for setting such standards. Can you feel the sarcasm?

    maybe after Hillary is impeached, we'll have a national dialogue about how to conduct politics for the national good. And maybe Mr. Kos (and Mr. Soros) will leave the country to those that want to see it succeed.

  • Posted By: suny @ 11/18/2007 4:03:37 PM

    Voice from another "mouth":Richard Benedetto was for many years the White House correspondent for USA Today. Now retired, he teaches journalism at American University in Washington, D.C.

    When U.S. troop deaths hit a monthly high in April, that was front-page news in most major newspapers, Mr. Benedetto noted. But when U.S. troop deaths fell in October to their lowest levels in 17 months, that news was buried on page A-14 of The Washington Post and mentioned on Page A-12 in The New York Times. (The Post-Gazette put the story on the front page.)


  • Posted By: suny @ 11/18/2007 4:02:09 PM

    Voice from another "mouth":Richard Benedetto was for many years the White House correspondent for USA Today. Now retired, he teaches journalism at American University in Washington, D.C.

    When U.S. troop deaths hit a monthly high in April, that was front-page news in most major newspapers, Mr. Benedetto noted. But when U.S. troop deaths fell in October to their lowest levels in 17 months, that news was buried on page A-14 of The Washington Post and mentioned on Page A-12 in The New York Times. (The Post-Gazette put the story on the front page.)

    Sid Lewis

  • Posted By: kaizencreative @ 11/18/2007 12:33:33 PM

    Please stop telling me what's wrong with the current (and former) state of politics. Tell me what the Dems have to offer and maybe I'll listen. Your article sounds like a 3rd grade girl complaining that someone stole her brush during recess. Drop your purse and show me what you guys really stand for.

    • Posted By: pjlewis_451 @ 11/18/2007 2:07:51 PM

      Amen. I'm as left as they come. While Moulisas' rhetoric of blame (eventhough it's technically correct) and pointing to the faults of others is great for giving voice to the seething anger and resentment many feel toward the current administration and conservative ideology, this is not a stand-alone tactic for winning the Presidency (because the reality of running for president isn't merely standing and shouting from your soapbox). You simply can not convey your identity as a democratic presidential nominee by repeatedly telling Americans how terrible they should feel about the current administration. Democrats HAVE to transcend the role of bearers of bad news and anger--democratic presidential nominees must convey a strong, positive, emotionally-charged vision of what America "really" is, and how they will restore and celebrate the dignity, strength, and freedom of OUR America, democratic and republican, alike. This vision must encourage and inspire much more than it reminds people to feel angry and discouraged with where are today...How do you think Reagan and Bush won two terms despite failed initiatives and policies. Each ran on a a powerful vision of restoration to some notion of values that had been lost--Reagan aimed to restore some sense of strength, pride, and patriotism; Bush ran to restore dignity to the "oval office." Though I believe each of these presidents' administrations came with much more downside than upside, both of them were able to overcome the indadequacy and harm of their administrations (in regards to re-election) because each were successful at conveying rhetoric that successfully conjured an idea of America that inspired and encouraged Americans to feel good enough to vote for them. What SO many liberals like Moulitsas (and myself and one point) have a difficult time understanding is that Americans (and people all over the world, for that matter) by and large do not complete point-by-point analyses of candidates before voting. Voters vote with their hearts, not their minds. As for me, I don't want to choose a candidate simply because she or he ISN'T the other guy; I want to feel inspired and uplifted by the candidate's vision of inclusion, freedom, and empowerment; I don't want to be cooly convinced to vote for a candidate based on the results of a point-by-point data analysis and comparison with a republican candidate and, unfortunately, the rest of America doesn't either.

  • Posted By: EastsideDem @ 11/18/2007 12:32:00 PM

    The 2006 elections served as a notice of how the country feels about republican leadership. Even Karl Rove's genius could not prevent the overwhelming series of defeats that put democrats in control of congress. The democratic candidates all have outlined strong programs to put this country back on the right track. In 2008 we will find out which one the country prefers.

  • Posted By: bandershot @ 11/18/2007 12:23:56 PM

    Nice debut Markos - your advice to the Dems is to run against someone who isnt running. I am sure that out in the fever swamps of Bush Derangementville that sounds like a no-brainer but I doubt even as big a UFO spotting loon as Dennis Kucinich will avail himself of your sudden campaign expertise. Maybe one day we can all live in a world as facile and apparent as your but until that time I would advise the dems to continue to shower your ilk with the same false promises and hyperbole they have been using to quicken you out of your hard earned dollars while simultaneously trying to address the FUTURE and why they are better than the other ACTUAL candidates. Americans aren't searching for the candidate that is most "not Bush" , thats not the criteria they are currently using in their selection process its just happens to be the one you are stuck on after you imagined that you bought and owned the Democratic party. Seeing Newsweek giving you a larger voice makes me think they are almost being cruel to you in a manner reminiscent of having Will Hung from American Idol sing at a football game.

  • Posted By: EqualitywithoutConformity @ 11/18/2007 11:41:35 AM

    Repugs and Dems; nary a dime's worth of difference between em. One group speaks out of the right side of their mouth, while the other uses the left side. Both are beholding to the money that gets them in. Both use the same tactics to get people to vote for them; basically it's use of emotions over reason. Fear, Anger, Hope and Pride...in that order. Critical thinking has never been valuable in the world of Talking Heads and Sound Bites. The only exceptions I have seen this time around; Ron Paul and Kucinich. They are immediatedly labeled as Nuts.

  • Posted By: EqualitywithoutConformity @ 11/18/2007 11:34:37 AM

    Republicans and Democrats; nary a dime's worth of difference. One group talks out of the left side of their moths, the other through the right side. All are beholding to the money that gets them elected. Both use the sure fire tools on the public. virtually all votes are from the gut, not the head. So far, the only exception I see to this standard is Ron Paul and Kucinich-both immediately dragged to the sidelines with the label of "Nuts". Although I

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse