Hey, I tried. We’ll just have to agree to disagree. But at least we disagree politely.
Right. And which one of the spurious reasons for attacking Iraq are we trotting out today? WMD? Peace and freedom for the Iraqi people? The possibility of some components of possible WMD development programs? Saddam was an asshole? Iraq attacked us first?
Or is it one of the non-spurious but not-particularly-noble reasons? We need oil? We need a base in the ME outside of Saudi Arabia? We have all this shiny neocon military theory and we need a way to test it?
Oh, yes, we had plenty of reasons to attack Iraq. Too bad most of them are lies. Or make us look bad. Either one, really.
I’m so glad we finally have a thread in which we can debate the Iraq War…
…or George Bush’s approval ratings, or how nasty those conservative pundits are.
Are you suggesting there was still any merit to the debate about “Is Howard Dean screwing up as DNC chairman?”
Basically that boiled down to:
Conservative Talking Point: “Howard Dean is screwing up as chairman. His fundraising is in the tank.”
People such as myself: “Actually, his numbers are very good in comparison to past DNC chair performance.”
CTP: “We… he says mean things so you guys are going to lose.”
This is the debate you think we should keep up?
I’m suggesting that it is silly for every political thread to degenerat into a debate about the Iraq War. Everyone knows where everyone else stands on that issue.
The stuff about Dean is at least new. The quote I posted from today’s paper is some of the first inklings I’ve seen that Congressional Democrats aren’t too happy with him.
It is interesting, though, how both sides seem unable to discuss their own party leaders without deflecting the discussion to the other party.
Moto, John, niether of you are stupid. So, please, stop batting the big brown innocent eyes while you straighten the pleats in your communion dresses.
No, you’re quite right, GeeDubya will not be a candidate. So the Pubbie candidate will repudiate the Bushivik policies, and alienate his core while reaching for the voters from the other side? Hardly seems likely. Whomever the Pubbies offer up will be saddled with the Bush legacy. Unless he wants to throw away the hard core of Pubbie activist support and come in third behind the Libertarian candidate.
That dog won’t hunt. That dog is dead. Jim, this dog is dead. He’s dead, Jim.
Certain Democratic leaders are distancing themselves from Dean. I think that’s smart. It gives you the best of both worlds- you get to take advantage of Dean’s attacks while at the same time insulating yourself from the backlash. If I’m a Democratic politician, I’d publicly express regret over Dean’s comments but then call him privately and say “good show”.
What flavor is the DNC Kool-Aid, anyway? Sour Grape? Seriously, I’m not getting into this discussion again, nor am I willing to let you or any of the other usual suspects shift the discussion or frame the debate. More intelligent people than me have gone over this. If you don’t understand by now, I can’t convince you. Nobody can.
You’re quite right. Neither of us **is **stupid.
But what is your point-- do you feel as though you have patent on sarcasm? Send me a bill if you think I owe you any royalties.
Not necessarily. McCain has been very successful in embracing Bush when needed and distancing himself from Bush when it’s expedient. Plus, there’s 3 years for him, and other candidates, to distance themselves even further if necessary.
If I thought Cheney was going to run, you might have a point. But I don’t think he will, and even if he tries, I doubt he’ll get the nomination.
But I was also making the perhaps naive assumption that this thread was about Dean.
The only dog in this discussion was yours, and it was barking up the wrong tree.
Do you have any evidence that this is happening? The article I linked to indicated the opposite. You’ve got a nice hypothesis, but no data to back it up.
That’s just my wild guess with no evidence whatsoever. Nobody in their right mind is going to give the other side ammunition in the next election. And if anyone is patting Dean on the back in private they’re going to keep it that way.
The distinction between “distancing” and “repudiating” being what, exactly?
Which would be fine by me. My issue isn’t the party label, Pubbie or Dumbocrat, my issues are the godforsaken mess GeeDubyaCo has made of my country. Hell, I’d even be willing to vote for that Librarian Party you guys keep talking about!
Politics.
Good point. And my point is that Kerry (he’s the French guy, btw, not Dean) bumbled his way thru a losing campaign against Mr Lightweight himself (Bush). It would be sad to see the Dems shoot themselves in the foot yet again.
I’m sure the Dems will want to make '08 all about Bush. That might work, but they better have a vision of the future, too. Fighting yesterday’s battle is not a good gameplan.
Dean’s mouth isn’t even half as much of a danger to me, my family, or my nation as the Iraq war is.
So what? You seem to be implying that no subject may be discussed as long as you still have something to say about Bush and Iraq.
If that subject interests you, start a thread about it.
It’s sad when Howard Dean is the Fred Phelps of the left. There’s gotta be someone more loony the centrists can look at that makes the rest of the left mainstream. Whereas about the only person who does that for the right is Fred Phelps (ironically a Democrat – a conspiracy perhaps?)
But for now, I think that’s just what is happening, even if Dean doesn’t deserve it. Distancing themselves from him is not only providing a distraction from their own policies, but is also making the other democrats seem reasonable and centrist.
Huh? What charge did I make?
Whaddaya want? It is currently impossible to have any serious discussion of national politics without bringing Iraq into it at some point. Iraq is like Vietnam in the '60s – it is the elephant in the living room, and will remain so as long as we continue to have troops there and continue to pour billions of dollars into the occupation every year.
And besides, making much ado about Howard Dean is an easy way to avoid discussing other matters, such as Bush’s continued evasion of the Downing Street Memo, the White House’s stonewalling on papers Congress has requested on John Bolton, and Bill O’Reilly hacking up Joe Biden’s videotaped interview on ABC This Week. I guess the Michael Jackson trial isn’t providing enough distraction this week…