I don't hold The Current Administration as any paragon of The Ideal, by any means, hobitbob ... there's plenty there I'm unhappy with. However, I see '04 giving the Repubs a clear majority and by effect a popular mandate. If you think the Left is upset now, wait 'till they start tryin' ta figure what went wrong and where to lay the blame. Likely, they won't even be able to effect much of a challenge in '08, the way things are goin'. That dismays me considerable ... I feel there is a balance of sorts when the Legislative Majority and the Executive Office are held by opposing parties. I don't trust either party with unassailable control.
Opinions are fortunately like asses and I have yet to find a crystal ball that works - with that said, Bush is history! I have yet to find one thing good about this administration.
I don't think it is as certain as you claim, Timber. As i recall from a few months ago, you supported an invasion of Iraq, because we had to relieve Saddam of weapons of mass destruction--which have not to date surfaced. Pardon me if i doubt the clarity of vision in your crystal ball.
I thoroughly agree with your statment about opposing parties controlling the Congress and the White House. I certainly do hope that we get rid of the Shrub and his gang of venal, self-centered crooks. And i think it is too close to call right now. Many conservatives are made profoundly uneasy by the Shrub, and by Rumsfeld and Ashcroft. Those jokers will not likely be able to pull off another war for electioneering purposes, and the "jobless" recovery looks less and less like recovery to much of the public. I sincerely hope you are as wrong about the next election as events have proven you to be about weapons of mass destruction. I do think the Congress will remain largely in Republican hands, although good campaigning could give the Democrats a shot at a slim majority in the Senate. It's rather like the Texas voters situation, they largely vote Republican, they can go either way on the Governor, but they steadfastly vote for conservative Democrats for the House of Representatives, and many are resentful at DeLays efforts to pack the Texas delegation by a redistricting which would effectively disenfranchise rural and samll town voters. Similarly, i think, the Republicans will continue to control the House because of voter loyalty, and i believe that unless something very good turns up for the Shrub and company, House Republicans will not appeal to the administration for electoral support--if things go badly for the White House, they may even take the line of distancing themselves from the administration.
There is also a ground swelling of electoral frustration and discontent - from both parties.
What continues to surprise me, though it's become a regular occurence, is listening to right-wing radio out of San Antone (in my car, as I'm doing my errands) and hearing the various talk show hosts condemn the administration. Though they were all pro-Bush two years ago, only two of the hosts continue to defend him.
This morning's host, a conservative+libertarian, had a guest from Washington -- I'll try to come up with an identity -- with whom she obviously agreed. He was recounting from apparently first-hand knowledge the mess Iraq is in. "Remember when Bush was saying we should invade Iraq and put in a stable government to prevent terrorists from operating from that soil? Well, as we know now, terrorists weren't operating on that soil. Saddam, terrible though he was, provided a stable government and was antithetic to Al Qaeda and interference from the outside. What have we got now? We have no stability there and we have terrorists coming in to take advantage of the unstable situation. Quagmire? Worse than that."
Reference the above, I called the station and found out the guest was one Simon Marks who seems to be all over the place...
http://www.simonmarks.com/pages/699342/index.htm
Actually, Set, if you'll recall, my support for the war was based on Saddam's 12 year defiance of the provisions of the '91 Ceasefire, and in greatest particular, his failure to comply with UNSCRs 1248 and 1441. I hammered on that a lot ... not whether or not he HAD WMD, but that he failed to provide proof as required he had disposed of those he was known to have had. I saw the WMD issue, as promoted by Bush et al, as a distracting sideshow ... though I was and remain confident vindication from that front is yet forthcoming, though it may not be of a form satisfactory to the more vigorous objectors. I know The Left is unhappy at the moment, and I suspect they're gonna have great cause to be unhappier following the coming election. The economy continues to improve, not just domestically but globally, the reconstruction of Iraq, overall, is proceeding, with the next six months promising significant oil exports and increased civil order with greater indigenous Iraqi control and international involvement (watch for Russia to play a major role ... in return for certain economic incentives)global terrorism is on the wane, the Arab Street is quiescent, The RoadMap, while troubled, is not dead, DPRK is talking, and polls show very little reason for Democrats to perceive any sort of groundswell of support. These things take time ... and really, the picture is not at all bleak for The Current Administration.
Well, i can't agree to that rosey a picture, which i suspect you know.
The administration is sending more troops and beckoning to the UN precisely because of their poor planning, the terrorist attacks and the threat of civil war. Not to mention the US can also run low on dough! This is a bomb with the fuse lit in my estimation and could blow up in the administration's face. THe vacillation of involving the UN makes them look weak and indecisive.
What to be expected of chickenhawks!
Timber, thanks for answering my question without invective. I disagree with many of your points, but your politeness goes a looong way!
bob, you can expect that of timber, he's a real good one and he'll cover your back if you cover his. A real good man
Hey, thanks, guys ... I may not share your politics, but I really appreciate, and reciprocate, your respect.
Doo, itashimashite, gozaimasshita!
(Don't touch my moustache, grouchoMarxa!
)
Sorry, couldn't help it....just back from teaching white belts.
P Diddie writes about the "Emerging Democratic Majority".
P. Diddie should review the reviews.
For instance, the Council on Foreign Relations' Review by Russell Mead says:
"The case for a new Democratic Majority may not be as clear as the authors may wish."
They are suprisingly weak on foreign relations matters and speak of the new Majority as "Potential".
In the meanwhile, the Texas re-districting, sure to occur, will net the Republicans five or six seats while the latest Gallup poll gives George W. Bush a 59% Job Approval Rating.
Books are fine. Judis writes well.
But losses in the House of Represenatives to come will be REAL and Job Approval Ratings are real.
I eagerly await Judis's next book to be published after November 2004 entitled:
"How the Emerging Democratic Majority will really really be formed this time"
Well, let's see, I must be watching the wrong programs again.
I thought we were spending a billion, (with a b), a week, (with a W), in Iraq while losing over three million jobs in the past twenty-two months, with tax cuts that hugely benefited the wealthiest and now a 'jobless recovery' which means that there will be profits for those who have ownership but not for those who produced them on the factory floor. That doesn't seem so rosy, but now Timber has given me hope. The Russians are going to help us in Iraq. Oh joy! I'm sure they will be as welcome in Bagdad as they are in Checnya and the Islamists in both Iran and Iraq will see the Russian um assistance as a good thing. Da! Could we get them to help us in Israel too?
Joe Nation
Tell ya Joe, where the Ruskies are gonna help ... it'll be their money that revitalizes the Iraqi Petroleum Production Infrastructure ... and it'll be their money payin'the Iraqis for the oil that comes out of it. France is gonna be pissed, but what the heck ... the Russkies' are pretty much gonna get what they figured they had comin' before the war ... their contracts will be fulfilled, more or less. They and the Iraqis, BTW, have longstanding commercial ties. Ivan is a familiar sight in and around Iraq, and has lots of freinds there. Washington figures that Putin is all in all a pretty good driver over there in Moscow, steady, predictable, and sober, with a pretty well developed profit principle. Putin wins, Iraq wins, and, of course, Bush wins.
The funny thing is that there is already a Democratic majority, as evidenced in the last (maybe in more ways than one) presidential election.
