September 22, 2005
Republicans and conservatives sometimes sentimentally yearn for the good old days, wondering why Democrats don't play by the old rules. No such luck. Some of the loudest and most influential voices in the Democratic Party -- such as Simon Rosenberg of the New Democratic Network, and blogger Markos Moulitsas from the Daily Kos -- care more about creating acrimony than alternatives. These activists dominate party voters, volunteers and contributors, and their message to Democratic congressional leaders is clear -- combat yes, consensus no.Someday about five to ten years from now, somebody is going to write a book about the continuing decline of the Democrats and an appropriate title would be something along the lines of "The Un-making Of A Political Party".
As Howard Fineman wrote in Newsweek recently, Mr. Rosenberg and his new Democratic allies argue success lies "not (in) ideological purity but combativeness." The "left" wants Democratic lawmakers to erect barriers blocking the party's move to the center and to hamper cooperation; congressional leaders have clearly heard the request and already started construction -- a political public-works project that won't stop anytime soon.
Then again, maybe a better title would be "The Democratic Party: Stuck On Stupid".
September 20, 2005
What is it with these Democrats these days? I swear, if I woke up everyday so full of bile and rage, I think I'd probably kill myself. Go check out these mean old meanies here.
September 18, 2005
Brazile, author of "Cooking With Grease: Stirring The Pots In America", writes of her strong support for President Bush's plan for the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast region. She writes:
On Thursday night President Bush spoke to the nation from my city. I am not a Republican. I did not vote for George W. Bush -- in fact, I worked pretty hard against him in 2000 and 2004. But on Thursday night, after watching him speak from the heart, I could not have been prouder of the president and the plan he outlined to empower those who lost everything and to rebuild the Gulf Coast.Unlike so many other Democrats who seek to use this national tragedy as merely a blunt instrument to beat up on the President, Brazile recognizes the need for the this country to come together for its citizens. Her words are a breath of fresh air from a political environment that has been poisoned by her party.
Bush called on every American to stand up and support the rebuilding of the region. He told us that New Orleans and the entire Gulf Coast would rise from the ruins stronger than before. He enunciated something that we all need to remember: This is America. We are not immune to tragedy here, but we are strong because of our industriousness, our ingenuity and, most important, because of our compassion for one another. We are a nation of rebuilders and a nation of givers. We do not give up in the face of tragedy, we stand up, and we reach out to help those who cannot stand up on their own.
The president called on every American to reach out to my neighbors in New Orleans and throughout the Gulf Coast. The great people of this country have already opened their hearts in the immediate aftermath of the storm, and their tremendous generosity has done more than just provide extra comfort -- it has saved lives. Now the crisis of survival is over. But the task of rebuilding remains, and the president made it clear that every single one of us has a role to play.
September 12, 2005
Bush administration officials have said Katrina's damage could not have been anticipated, but Gore rejected that.Implicit in this charge is that the extent of the damage could have somehow been prevented - and that the administration did nothing about it.
"What happened was not only knowable, it was known in advance, in great and painstaking detail. They did tabletop planning exercises. They identified exactly what the scientific evidence showed would take place," Gore said.
Clearly the former Vice-President is off his meds again. So Al, how's your multi-million dollar public access channel doing these days?
On a related note, Mac Johnson of Human Events lays out five proposals that would make future efforts more successful.
September 08, 2005
"What the American people have seen is this incredible disparity in which those people who had cars and money got out and those people who were impoverished died."Mary Jo Kopechne was unavailable for comment.
h/t: Best of the Web (2nd Item down)
September 07, 2005
Since the end of 2001, Bush has remained steady and consistent in both his policies and his outlook. If anything he's one of the most predictable Presidents in U.S. history. A huge majority of Americans (91% at one point) approved of him then. But many over the last four years have decended into bitter partisan attacks on the President - attacks fueled by the increasingly angry Left.
Patrick Ruffini hits the fallacy of Balz's assumptions right on the head:
Balz doesn't examine the profound change in the Democratic Party that comes closest to explaining the sharply disparate reactions to the two disasters. Four years ago, Daily Kos was barely a glimmer in our eye, Joe Lieberman was a frontrunner for the 2004 nomination, Howard Dean was still considered a "moderate", the DLC was still ascendant, the words "liberal" and "lefty" were almost never spoken in polite conversation, The New Republic represented the mainsteam of Democratic thinking inside the Beltway and you wouldn't think twice about calling David Corn and The Nation "far-left." As I've documented, the party's vitriolic reaction to Katrina was shaped on the blogs. Had those blogs been around on 9/11, we would have seen the same response, with immediate cries of "Bush knew."Just look up at that quote in the Ex-Donkey banner. Those words have never been more true than they are today. Which is why Democrats keep losing elections. And based on the growing strength of that party's apoplectic Left-wing grassroots - it's only going to get worse for them.
115 queries taking 0.0621 seconds, 252 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.