Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011

Why They’re Flailing

I don’t agree that what ails the Bush administration is their partisanship. They’ve lost the middle. That includes centrist-conservative Democrats, centrist-progressive Republicans and out and out independents. The Republican strategy is predicated on the narrative of George Bush as the brave leader facing down international terrorism, and while the bulk of Americans have never overwhelmingly supported his policies, they went along because quite frankly the Democratic leadership’s response was “us too”.

After prevailing in Afghanistan, we’re failing in Iraq – holding together a powder keg that’s now a proven launching ground for terrorism. The right will keep yakking about how there have been no terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, but turns a blind eye to the fact that Al Qaeda is now free to attack us and our allies on multiple continents. If you think that attacking London is a world of difference from hitting New York, L.A., Washington or Chicago — you’re delusional.

That’s why Bush and Co. are flailing and unable to get out the vote in Virginia. The middle bought what they were selling because they thought this guy would kill the terrorists. They were wrong, and now they’ve got buyer’s remorse.

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

12 Responses to “Why They’re Flailing”

  1. Semanticleo says:

    The ‘War Powers Act” was designed as an expeditious detour for the normally slow legislative process.

    It is based upon an implicit trust in the executive branch.

    If there should be a need for ‘trust’ in the President’s judgemental sense and the trustworthiness of his advisors in the future, what do you suppose the reaction is going to be if a true need for a ‘preemptive’ strike against
    another country should arise in the future?

    The damage these a.) dolts, in the best case scenario, or b.) criminals
    have done to this country’s security is beyond any historical precedent.

    They have set the war on terrorism back better than Al Qaeda could have accomplished on their own.

  2. elrod says:

    I wouldn’t call Afghanistan a failure on the level of Iraq.

  3. Matty says:

    Oliver,

    What’s with this “After prevailing in Afghanistan” crap?

    Bush completely blew it in that country, too.

  4. Jadegold says:

    By any measure Afghanistan was a massive failure.

    Let’s remember what our objectives were for invading Afghanistan:

    1. Eliminate AQ;
    2. Eliminate the regime (Taliban) that supported AQ.

    No. 1 hasn’t happened; in fact, AQ is probably stronger now than before 9/11.

    No. 2; the Taliban still exists and holds parts of Afghanistan. The rest of Afghanistan is now controlled by warlords who have restarted the heroin biz and have–on occasion–helped AQ.

  5. Dugger says:

    Started strong, then you messed up.

    “After prevailing in Afghanistan, we re failing in Iraq – holding together a powder keg that s now a proven launching ground for terrorism. The right will keep yakking about how there have been no terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, but turns a blind eye to the fact that Al Qaeda is now free to attack us and our allies on multiple continents. If you think that attacking London is a world of difference from hitting New York, L.A., Washington or Chicago  you re delusional.”

    First of all, Iraq was involved in terrorism before the war – “now”? Al Qaeda has always been ‘free’ to attack us on multiple continents. Are you seriously claiming that pre-war they weren’t free to attack us? After all, they hit us in NY CIty and Wash DC – pre war.
    And certainly there is a huge difference between London and the cities you mentioned. We, our governemnt, is responsible for protecting those cities. The Brits are responsible for London. And post 9-11, London has been somewhat successfully attacked by Ts, while the US has not. Credit to Bush is appropriate.

    And I wouldn’t call Afghanistan a failure – period.

    Dugger, Calm and Analytical As Always

  6. kincaid says:

    2,057 dead

    15,477 wounded(Many with injuries such as lost limbs and sight)

    2,057 dead does not include the many who have committed suicide.

    15,477 wounded does not include the many who will have mental problems.

    We should respect all these men and women.

    We owe them we owe them everything.

    They fight, kill and die for America.

    We owe it to them to make America something worth fighting for.

    The infant mortality rate in the US is now the same as in Malaysia.

    Blacks in Washington DC have a higher infant death rate than people in the Indian state of Kerala.

    Congress has not did anything this year to help the hard working men and women of the nation.

    It has mostly passed laws to protect gun companies and the like.

    The rich get richer and the poor don’t get a d@# thing is not the American way.

    http://www.novus-ordo-seclorum.us/

    http://novus-ordo-seclorum.us/2005/11/iraq-by-numbers-on-this-veterans-day.html

  7. buma says:

    Afghanistan is raking in the money now with their bumper opium crop. You call that a failure?

  8. Dugger says:

    Sane briffy, sane.

    Dugger

  9. TomY says:

    It’s clear that Bush didn’t help anything, though. Look at the Arizona Republicans run!

  10. briffy says:

    the virginia elections were not a referendum on bush. kilgore lost that election all by himself. It was kilgore’s death penalty ads, comments about widening I-66, poor debate performances, and gov. warner’s popularity that cost kilgore the election, not any association with the president.

  11. buma says:

    Please please please keep believing that Bush didn’t hurt Kilgore. Even dugger is convinced you are the voice of reason. Heckuva job.

  12. phinky says:

    Even Santorum is running away from Bush.