2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

Good point Italgo (though I suspect you deliberatly missed the greater point that it should not be so), this is called "creating facts on the ground".

I think that P Diddie is correct. Bin Laden may be kicking George W. Bush's ass- metaphorically.

But will that change the fact that the Texas Governor( in P. Diddie's state, no less) is calling a special session that may result in the Texas Representative Ratio in the House of Representatives changing in November 2004 so that there will be six new Republicans in seats formerly held by Democrats.
If so, perhaps there will be enough Representatives to place pillows under the President's bruised rear end.

If you ask me, Bin Laden doesn't look strong enough to even lift his leg more than six inches, let along give someone a kick.

Dear DeKere:

I may be missing something which some of the more learned on this post can supply for me but is it not true that Perception can equal reality?

If two thirds of people polled have a perception that Saddam helped AlQuada, it seems to me that would be definitive insofar as that perception would aid the present administration steer course.

Now, the learned professor Hobobit may indeed be correct.

Conversely, the ever persuasive Timberlandko may have the answer.

I hold that the perception of the American people that Saddam did aid AlQaeda, inso far as it helps to re-elect President Bush, is far more critical than any academic discussion.

Gallup Poll Aug. 25-26

Situation in Iraq

People Approving People Disapproving

57% 41%


President Bush's Handling of Terrorism

Approval Disapproval

66% 31%




Thank You for your insight- Mr. DeKere

Yeah, but the guy's got friends to do his dirty work for him, Ital. Whereas Bush seems to have a (weakening) cheering squad and fewer and fewer people willing to do his bidding. The fact that the overtime thing got backstopped in Congress today is a signal: honeymoon is over, marriage may be in trouble.

Local radio today hinted that one or two Republicans, disgusted by DeLay and Perry, may cross over and vote with the Tex Dems. I think it's unlikely, but we'll see...

Dear Mr. Tartarin:

I will continue to watch the polls. When the support drops below 50%, I will agree with you. Until then, I will rely on the professional methods utilized by the Gallup Organization.

Italgo,

In politics perception IS reality. As evidenced by what we have been witnessing. I did agree with you in that. Still, the perception we speak of (the Iraq - 9/11) connection) was deliberately created from almost thin air.

So while I recognize that ultimately the fact that this perception exists is the reality we have to deal with I bemoan the stupidity of the teeming millions who swallow such drek and allow a war to be based on shoddy evidence.

When I said that you missed the greater point I was saying that yes, I agree that this is the reality, but the discussion was along the lines that this reality sucks.

Dear Mr. DeKere:

You are indeed correct. Reallity does sometimes suck.

That's what the Wehrmacht said when the Allies invaded at Normanday instead of at Calais.

The Allies, however, were quite pleased to have fooled the Nazis.

It all depends on your poing of view, does it not, Mr. DeKere?

Ah, Gallup. So reliable.

The perception has been created in large part by the media. I don't trust any of them, but I have noticed that they are questioning the perception more and more. That will inevitably sow some doubts. This is going to be interesting to watch! Tectonic shifts, slow, almost imperceptible, quiet...

I agree with Italgato, perception is everything. Never mind if it's true or not.

Anybody want to discuss religion? That's the point.

Italgo,

Yes it does. But I am of the opinion that it'd be more respectable for a proponent of the war to still lament the deception.

Even if you agree with the war you have stated that the connection did not exist.

Just a minor point, Italgato ... it was Hitler and The General Staff puppets who were sure Calais was the invasion target. The Wehrmacht, in the person of the commander responsible for The Atlantic Wall, Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, felt Normandy was the likelier danger point ... precisely why he held 9th SS Panzer Div. and assorted Mechanized Battlegroups in mobile ready reserve, and expended considerable resources to facillitate their timely movement to the Normandy/Cotentin area. Berlin went along with forming the reserve thusly, but retained operational control, essentially removing those units from Rommel's available deployable assets. His urgent requests to release those units to respond to the invasion were denied by Berlin for over 48 hours.

And as they say, the rest is history.

You guys really got me on a roll now ... Clark has had my attention for quite a while ... since well prior to Kosovo, in fact. I figure the more folks know about the jerk the better, even if it deprives the Republicans of a convenient Democratic strawman ... wow, what fun could be had, even, or maybe especially, if he only ran as Veep to Hillary. Anyway,



Here's a bit more fun with Wes

and

Wes at Waco?

timber, I'm sort of leary about any political interest group called "antiwar.com," but the article does point out some disturbing things about this general - if true. But, if Col Hackworth doesn't trust this guy, that says a lot.

LOL, c.i. ... all the Anti-Clark stuff I've cited here is from The Left ... The Right is even more unkind to Wes. To the guy's credit, though, he's never been implicated in kiddie porn or music theft by download ... heck, even his driving record is clean. He's not all bad.

It is not a minor point, Timberlandko. It is a major point. Thank you for your comment.

However, just as the situation in Iraq is complex and evokes numerous and often contradictory responses from military and civilian pundits, the situation in Germany was also quite complex.

As William Shirer pointed out in his classic, the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Rundstedt, the Commander in Chief in the West, had reported to Hitler just a few days before the invasion( I believe it was at the start of June, that the invasion was not immediately immenent.

I also remember that Rommel himself did not think that the invasion would come as late as June 5th because of heavy seas.

I rely on Shirer as an authority on these matters, perhaps, Timberlandko, you have a source which disagrees. Please let me know.

I may have errer in my recollection of specific time frame but I am quite certain about the characters involved.

Timber, You are quite right about the fact that the Fuhrer had given orders not to be awakened and that the requests to release those units was not honored for 48 hours. However, I am certain that the major strength of the Wehrmacht was concentrated North of the Seine.

Italago, I can only recall the sequence of a movie where Rommel is at home taking a break when the invasion takes place.

Oh, you got the time and the characters right, and in fact Rommel felt secure enough about the weather to grant himself a brief leave. He however was quite concerned about the Normandy area, and felt Calais was too obvious a target for the Allies to consider. von Rundstedt, who felt slighted by Rommel's appointment with extraordinary authority to the Western Defenses, and feared Rommel was being groomed to succeed him as Commander in Chief West, neither liked nor trusted Rommel ... a sentiment reciprocated by The Field Marshal. It was on von Rundstedt's orders that Rommel was arrested, and suicided, in connection with von Staufenberg's abortive July 20 assassination plot and coup attempt.

I happen to be a big military history buff, BTW ... while Shirer is indispensible, my WWII reference material alone consists of hundreds of volumes, including actual War Diaries of many units involved, and numerous vanity-published memoirs from both principals and mere players ... and trust me, you don't even want to get me started on The American Civil War, or ANYTHING involving the USMC of any period!