Certainly, but I would hate to see the Teflon president weasel out of this because they are able to cast aspersions on the proceedings.
Erek
Mr. Moto, if what you say is true, then shouldn’t all Presidents and Presidential candidates ignore their base, and always move to the center to get the few Independents left?
I don’t think it’s a question of who votes for whom, but who doesn’t vote at all. Remember, piss off enough of your base, and it’s not that they vote for the other guy, instead they just don’t vote.
Mr. Moto-
Perhaps you are sincerely concerned about the welfare of the Democratic Party. That would be big of you. I can certainly see where the concern may arise from. It’s been over a decade since I registered as anything but independent, but I know if it were MY party that had allowed scandal-mongering to blind its better judgement to the point that it placed a deeply corrupt and incapable man in the position of Leader of the Free World surrounded by his power-mad cronies to completely reverse the good fortunes the country had enjoyed in the previous years, I certainly would feel that I had a cautionary tale to pass along to the other side. Of course, if you really wished to discuss the Dems, you might have made those issues the bulk of your OP, rather than the Libby affair, but perhaps that can be excused.
A man stands accused today for what amounts to complicity in putting fear for their very lives into the hearts of a covert CIA operative and her immediate associates, not the mention the fate of their efforts, by means of what is most certainly an act violating federal law.
That this act was performed as means of silencing an underling who had flown in the face of the acceptance of untruths that have resulted in the completely unnessecary deaths of 2,000 American soldiers and countless others only pours salt on the wound in the Republican Party.
This wound is further aggravated by the vocal internal opposition to the President’s most recent nomination, as well as the administration’s recent public embarassment at their inability to properly plan for domestic natural disasters.
And yet, in the midst of this, when so many on the right are focusing their attention on the visible cracks in their foundation, we hear the cry of Mr. Moto, a lone voice in the wilderness, calling out: “Won’t someone think of the poor Democrats?”
A man among men, you are, sir. Kudos to you.
I think Bush will skate out, as he always has. There will always be someone else to take the heat, someone else to blame. It’s the way he’s always been. Nothing is ever his fault, he never knows anything. All we can hope for, is for him to become a lame duck and fade into oblivion.
I do not expect Bush to take the heat. He’s a piece being played by his father as far as I am concerned. I am not interested in hurting either Bush in this case, it’s their minions that I want to hurt, I want to diminish their support base. If some minions go down, then it hurts the power of the George HW Bush, by beleaguering the son. The son has enough plausible deniability to save him. The Daddy is hard to touch because he’s the Wizard behind the curtain, but I wanna see Libby and Rove fried.
Erek
Mr Moto, you exemplify everything that is wrong with politics in the US.
Party before country? Party before right and wrong? Satisfying an impulse? Think about it.
Sure. Spit in the face of those lives sacrificed by these “current decisions”, as you so neatly phrase it. Get over it and move on? Is that the best you can do in lieu of polished party talking points?
We were fucked over. All of us. All of us. Are you getting it yet? All of us. People. Dead or maimed for life. Or knowing and/or loving someone dead or maimed for life.
Do the math. World wars and genocide have been perpetrated for less. Crack open a history book and come to your senses.
And until you - and others like you - can see that, we will continue to be fucked over. Or dead. Or maimed for life. Or bitter enough to support yet another senseless war.
As a former Republican, it wouldn’t bother me in the least, to see the GOP dismantled and discarded. It’s outlived any usefulness it may have had, and is screwing the country for the benefit of a small minority of extremists and big shots.
The Crédit Mobilier is a dead scandal. So’s the Teapot Dome. But there’s still life in Watergate. If there wasn’t, it wouldn’t have been mentioned in the OP.
Watergate will never go away because for the past 30 years, we just add -gate as a suffix to pretty much any scandal.
Mr. Moto, I am a lifelong Democrat and I pretty much agree with everything in your original post. The Democratic Party has an opportunity here. Not a sure march to victory, an opportunity. There’s a possibility for a big win in 2006, but not a guarantee. If the election were held today, it would be at best a minor pickup for the Democrats. But in 2006 the Republicans will have tons of money to spend on their usually slate of slanderous attack ads, memory of the current scandals will fade quickly, and the Pubs will probably find some way to shore up their base during the coming. If the Democratic leadership decides to base its 2006 strategy entirely on the current scandals, they’ll get a rude surprise on election night.
Here’s an outline of the situation. Roughly forty percent of the nation will vote Pub in 2006, and roughly 40% will vote Dem; those two blocks have already decided and will not be swayed by anything. So the election will be decided entirely by the middle 20%. Now what is the middle 20 thinking right now? Well, they’ve been thoroughly convinced that the Republicans are a bunch of corrupt, rich, arrogant, crony-appointing, Dobson-obeying jerks. However, they still view the Democrats as a bunch of special-interest-controlled, big-government-liking losers. To actually make the middle 20 shows up at the polls and vote Democrat, we need a clear set of policies that actually appeal to that middle twenty.
Feels a bit like a student who’s just recieved a scholarship being advised in a solemn and avuncular fashion to forget such dreams and consider the advantages in a good trade school. Typewriter repair, something with a future.
Looking back, those sure were some pretty mild “scandals” weren’t they? (Oh my God! The Clintons lost money in a real estate investment! Oh my God! Hillary was involved in firing the White House travel staff!) :rolleyes:
Plastics.
Serious shit, wasn’t it. heh heh. My memory of those investigatiosn was that they were instigated by the opposition (Republicans), who gave Starr a blanket endorsement to keep turning rocks over, until something (anything) was found. In short, a political witch hunt.
I agree with this. Based on available evidence, I think a neutral, reasonable prosecutor would see something worthwhile to pursue in the Plame leak. A neutral, reasonable prosecutor would not have persued the Clinton issue. (Note: after Clinton lied under oath - different story. But the prosecutorial attention that
LED to his lying under oath was partisan.)
I just wanted to give a nod to The Graduate reference. Tres cool.
Dead on. Just what I was trying to say, and seemed to convey poorly.
I think scandal ought to be attended to, surely, but the purpose of political parties is to advance policy and win elections. And this purpose ought not be ignored long, on either side.
And I just wish they’d be more fair-minded now. I’ll never defend an illegal act, no matter the party, no matter how high up the food chain it goes, nor will I ever understand those who do. Believe me, I can appreciate the urge to defend my guy, but could never reclaim my integrity if I did.
If he asked Lewinski to lie, wasn’t that suborning perjury?
Related reading: Fitzgerald is no Ken Starr (originally from Slate)