by DemFromCT
Two realizations are beginning to permeate the slow-to-change minds of the DC pundits: a Democratic House (with or without the Senate) would mean a shift in policy and Bush agenda, and the Iraq stay-the-course policy is unsustainable. Somehow, despite the Bush Administration insisting on black and white, the press corps is beginning to see a world of other colors. Since 2000 and the need to complete the illusion of a Bush win, the beltway opinionati have done less than their share of challenging, fact checking and outright reporting on the faith-based Bush WH and their disastrous policies.
Not all pundits are created equal; not everyone is as insipid as David Ignatius, who insists Democrats have "no coherent positions on Iraq" :
It's too late for the Democrats to forge coherent positions on Iraq or tax policy before the November elections. But fortune has presented them with a mission that can be summed up in a simple sentence: They must be the party of accountability and reform.
Indeed, but had Ignatius bothered to do the leg work David Broder did in his own paper, he'd have had this to report:
No one speaks more authoritatively for the Democrats on defense and national security issues than Sens. Carl Levin of Michigan and Jack Reed of Rhode Island, both longtime members of the Armed Services Committee. If you want to know what Democratic gains in this midterm election would mean for national security policy, Levin and Reed can provide the answers.
Hey, journalists: this "Democrats don't have any ideas" crap is a GOP talking point. Whenever you get off your lazy butts and talk to the senior people in the House or Senate, you'll find lots of ideas. If you can't do that, then google "100 Hours". You'll even find that Americans prefer the Democratic agenda to the status quo.
Hacks like Ignatius who were responsible for cheerleading this debacle called the Bush Administration have a vested interest in seeing Democrats belittled. After all, if Dems succeeed, their own judgement is exposed as being just as much a miserable failure as Bush's. But what the Iraq, Katrina and Foley debates bring home is that if Dems succeed, so does the country. It's the only way to bring a course correction to a badly drifting America.
So take heart, pundits. Criticism of the Bush Administration is a bipartisan and non-ideological affair, especially over Iraq. That frees you from the Administration minders who give you a hard time about uncomplimentary articles, and allows you to wear your Harry Potter cloak of centrism. We need you, so that the excesses of the Bush Administration are kept in check until this failure of a president leaves the White House for good. Do the country a favor, and do your job.
Wow, DemFromCT,
I get the idea that you are really down on Mr Ignatius.
... really, really, really down.
Get over it. You will have a nice Christmas, I am sure.
:)
Posted by: Jodi | October 23, 2006 at 11:35
What these bozos don't seem to realize is that there is going to be a mid-course correction on Iraq whoever wins. But if the Dems win, it will be much, much easier. You are absolutely right that these pundits don't want the Dems to succeed because it will expose them as wrong on so many levels, and fools for having followed Buish as he led the country off a cliff.
And yes, the Dems have a tax policy. It's called tax fairness and get revenues back toward balance with outlays. And it means people like the top commentators and their patrons will pay more in taxes.
Posted by: Mimikatz | October 23, 2006 at 11:36
"STAY THE COURSE" is DOA, with 15 days to go
and the freepi cheerleaders are still writing about the Democrats' lack of a plan for Iraq ???
What about the REPUGLICANS' lack of a plan for Iraq ???
isn't THAT a story ???
george and baker doing a bullwinkle impersionation is the Repuglican plan for Iraq
HEY ROCKY, WATCH ME PULL A BATTLE PLAN OUT OF MY ASS
Posted by: freepatriot | October 23, 2006 at 18:19