It isn’t just morally correct for Democrats to strenously stand up to the war and its execution, it’s politically smart
Republicans said a convergence of events - including the protests inspired by the mother of a slain American soldier outside Mr. Bush’s ranch in Texas, the missed deadline to draft an Iraqi Constitution and the spike in casualties among reservists - was creating what they said could be a significant and lasting shift in public attitude against the war.
The Republicans described that shift as particularly worrisome, occurring 14 months before the midterm elections. As further evidence, they pointed to a special election in Ohio two weeks ago, where a Democratic marine veteran from Iraq who criticized the invasion decision came close to winning in a district that should have easily produced a Republican victory.
“There is just no enthusiasm for this war,” said Representative John J. Duncan Jr., a Tennessee Republican who opposes the war. “Nobody is happy about it. It certainly is not going to help Republican candidates, I can tell you that much.”
Democrats: the strategy of marching in lockstep with the Republicans on war and hoping that clears the table for “safe” issues like Social Security, Medicare, etc. is a loser strategy. It’s a large part of why John Kerry lost and why we did so poorly in 2002. A “me too” policy on war will not work - please pay attention Senator Clinton, Senator Edwards, Senator Biden, and other ‘08 potentials.
Congratulations to the New York Times for finding one of the few Republicans against the war and portraying him as the “concience” of the party.
Where was the NYT when Zell Miller was giving Democrats advice?
What can Democrats do? Demand an immediate pull-out? Second guess how it started- which might not work because the vast majority are on record as authorizing the war and like John Kerry, have pledged to continue it - mostly with MORE troops. Very little they can really do and they have to be careful that this desire to get Bush via the war doesn’t drive them into Durbin-like hydrophobia.
Dugger
I believe they were printing ZigZag’s picture on their front page, weren’t they?
Could you point out where the Times called them “the conscience of the party”?
Besides, having a conscience doesn’t mean questioning the war effort only when poll numbers are threatening his seat.
Farris, my republican congressman voted against this war. He also supports a resolution to bring our troops home. And I will go as far as saying that the Democrats who voted for the Iraq resolution are just as responsible as the republicans who voted for it. Based on his past experience, he should have known better, no matter how politically advantageous it might have seemed at the time.
Farris - you obviously commented on the NY Times article without reading it.
A number of your fellow Republicans were quite blunt in calling George Bush a liar. Have you heard of Newt Gingrich and Richard Viguerie (amongst others).
See exact quotes here. Truth and Lies: Blog for A Better America: Republicans on White House Lies
The tide is turning.
(html link here: http://reliantmedia.blogspot.com/2005/08/republicans-on-white-house-lies.html)