« Chernobyl, beyond the numbers | Main | An Uncommon Vision »

April 28, 2006


another local/national issue that plays differently regionally:

Running for Senate, and Against the War Area's Democratic Candidates Find Support in Calling for U.S. to Leave Iraq

From a cocktail party of liberal contributors in Baltimore to the ball-cap-wearing crowd in a conservative town in southwest Virginia, wherever Democratic loyalists gather, there are five words sure to prompt applause for a Senate candidate:

End the war in Iraq.

Begging your pardon for a small favor, anybody else having trouble getting into firedoglake 4/28 am? [The link here goes to the old version at blogspot.] Sorry for the interruption here.

OT Sorry - but can't get into Firedoglake this a.m. "WordPress" says it cannot establish a database. What is that? Never seen that comment before. Anyone else having trouble or is it just me lacking knowledge of what to do -- again.

Egregous - I am certain I did not see your post before I voiced my concern about not getting my early morning dose of FDL. I tried clicking to FDL from another site but that did not work either.

At least I have good company in the lockout.

good morning egregious and grandmaj - good company ideed
having the same trouble y'all are

egreegious and grandmaj - FDL is back up as of 9:05CST

thanks next hurrah !

our pleasure... FDL is a friend of TNH and vice versa.

Another interesting question is how the latest sex scandal is going to play. It seems that Brent Wilkes and his poker-and-prostitute operation went on for 15 years, entertaiing Congressmen and CIA agents. Money, sex and the CIA--a toxic brew. Even if it doesn't ensnare CIAQ Director Porter Goss, it has already caught his third in command the inimitable Dusty Foggo. This can't be good for them at all, even if there turn out to have been Dem incumbents at the poker parties.

I agree MK -- I suspect if the Sex - Congresscritter - CIA - Wilkes-Wade scandal develops, all bets are off our careful poll watching efforts. What I am interested in seeing is what exactly is involved in the 300 Million Homeland Security Department contract for Limo services from the Shirlington VA firm. Laura Rozen and TPM's Muckraker page are the places to watch, and they promise much more shortly.

Just imagine a Republican Sex Scandal on top of everything else??? I hope someone figures out how to work into this Republican Moral Prescriptions, such as Abstinence Education, Prevention of STD's without Condoms, and other high moral value pronouncements.

But there is also the danger that a nice sex scandal among Republicans could overtake all the other matters that concern us -- Wilson-Plame, the Iraqi War, Katrina, Health Care and all the rest -- and while it would temporarily benefit Democrats, it would not give us any sort of issues mandate necessary to solid political shifts. Rather than an emphasis on the Failure of Republicans to govern well and in the national interest, it points toward individual moral failings that have little political substance. Thus if the Media goes off half cocked on sex stories, I think it appropriate to criticize this harshly. Many missed al-Qaeda because they were focused on Clinton and Monica and we need to remind them of that. But having said that, I am making my lists of potentially vulnerable Republicans, such as those who took money from Cunningam's PAC.

Boy, Dem, you're right about the lameness of Gallup's "it could happen" list. They might as well have included "Marauders from Mars could attack, and Bush could repel them single-handedly with a death ray".

I'm well aware of the hurdles offered by gerrymandering, and still worried about the fecklessness of Congressional Dems. But difficulties for the GOP keep mounting up -- Mimikatz rightly references the latest -- and it's starting to appear this midterm election will contain elements that recall practically all the worst Congressional turnover years of my lifetime. Consider: spiking oil prices (1974, 1980); scandal involving administration employees (1974 if it peaks; minimally, 1958's Sherman Adams vicuna coat); increasingly unpopular war (1966); Congressional corruption (1994's House bank); dissent within the ranks and notion of presidential incompetence (1980). About all that's missing is the deep recessions of 1930/32/74/80 -- but the year's young. It's hard to imagine the GOP holding up under such a sustained onslaught.

I'm sure those sex scandals are all the result of youthful indiscretions, no matter how old the participants were. But if the spinners fail in their effort to appeal to the voters on the grounds that the lapses were actually committed by these guys' inner 16-year-olds, they can always haul out the Jimmy Swaggart tears-and-repentance defense.

That will probably work with some folks, but it undoubtedly means one more bit of good news that DemFromCT notes above: the likelihood that the enthusiasm of some elements of the GOP base will not find it in their hearts to vote this time around. And if the Republicans can't count on turnout, they are really far up the creek, oarless.

Add to that the possibility that the chief dirty trickster may be indicted and - I say this with all due remembrance of my overly optimistic perspective of our chances in 2004 - it's starting to look kind of bright for November.

I notice that today, for the second day running, Rasmussen has Bush approval at 38%. Very low for Rasmussen.

Question: If Karl Rove is indicted, does he still work at his project of electing Repubs in November?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Where We Met

Blog powered by Typepad