Open Threads

I initially read this Orlando Sentinel story to see the context of this quote by Barack Obama:

The most provocative question was the first.

“I see a Democratic Party afraid to say they’re Democrats, who voted for the war in Iraq and voted for tax cuts for the wealthy,” said Glenn Anderson of Orlando. “Why should I remain a Democrat?”

It was a tough question. But Nelson and Obama tried to answer it.

“The Democrats at times have lost their way,” conceded Obama. “We are trying to decide what our core values are.”

But then my attention turned quickly to this doozy:

Nelson, 62, who faces a tough re-election campaign next year against U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris, R-Sarasota, returned the favor, calling Obama “a rock star who carries himself with dignity and humility and is so smart.”

Attention Orlando Sentinel editors: writer Sandra Mathers is clearly on the brown acid. Qunnipiac:

U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris, still carrying baggage from her controversial role in the 2000 Presidential vote count, trails Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson 50 – 38 percent in an early look at the 2006 Florida Senate race, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Republicans back Harris 72

What Race is She Talking ABout?Post + Comments (15)

Everything is not well with the Republican party. Despite the fact that the GOP controls both the House and the Senate, despite the fact that the President was elected by a larger margin than in 2000, and despite the fact that the judiciary at all levels is being remade in a conservative mold and the President has a pretty historic opportunity to appoint anywhere from two to possibly from Supreme Court Justices, things are not well.

The President’s approval ratings remain, well, terrible, and any further dip in his ratings would put them at what can only be described as Alphonsian depths (a reference to former Senator Alfonse D’Amato). Congress, meanwhile, populated by Republican majorities, suffers from a similar lack of public approval, and if the numbers can be believed, are even less popular than President Bush (althought the Tip O’Neill axiom remains accurate– individual members remain varying degrees of support far above the overall rating of Congree).

The popularity of the War in Iraq has plummeted, with Bush’s handling of the war even lower. So low is domestic support that despite repeated assurances that we will stay until the job is done, rumors of massive troop withdrawals are far more believable than they should be.

Social Security reform, at least for now, is dead. Only 39% of poll respondents approve of Bush’s handling of the economy. Democrats and their grass roots campaigns are raising extraordinary sums of money to fight the Supreme Court nominantions, and for now, at least, Howard Dean has learned how to keep his mouth shut.

The media, which until recently had been nitpicky but generally rather docile, is growing tired of the mendacity of the current administration, and they are subsequently waking from their slumber and are hungrily looking around for a meal. The President’s right-hand man, Karl Rove, is himself recently immersed in a particularly nasty scandal (just keep scrolling), with no sign of relief in the immediate future. Add to all of this the following:

Just nine months after giving George W. Bush the crucial swing votes he needed to best John Kerry, political independents are bolting out of the Republican Big Tent. Angered by GOP meddling in the Terri Schiavo right-to-die case, reeling from record gasoline prices, and depressed by the escalating cycle of violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, unaligned voters are suddenly lining up with Democrats to give Bush the lowest ratings of his Presidency. The disenchantment extends beyond the White House to the GOP Congress: Only 31% of independents say Congress is in touch with their concerns, according to a June 14-15 Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. Amid such dismal data, the only good news for Republicans is that the chronically disorganized Democrats have not convinced swing voters that they are any better — at least not yet.

But that’s cold comfort to the GOP. A June 24-26 Gallup Poll shows independents turning thumbs down to much of the President’s second-term agenda, including his stay-the-course stance on Iraq, partial privatization of Social Security, and a pro-drilling energy policy. Equally worrisome: Just 15% of indies approve of Bush’s handling of the economy, a June 19-22 American Research Group Poll found — down from 44% last November.

To gauge the depth of independent anger, talk to Alan Rego Jr., an assistant supermarket manager in Cleveland. Rego, 23, twice voted for George W. Bush. The unaligned voter viewed Bush as a champion of small business and a stalwart in the war on terror. But he now sees a President bogged down in a Mideast quagmire and a Congress obsessed with a Religious Right agenda he does not share. “Congress is involved in too many social issues that it shouldn’t be, like Terri Schiavo,” he says. “It doesn’t want to tackle the issues that it should be fixing, like tax reform, unemployment, and job creation.”

For Republicans, an exodus of voters like Rego could have profound repercussions. Because 67% of independents think Bush will appoint a Supreme Court justice whose religious beliefs will inappropriately influence judicial rulings, according to Gallup, Dems may be emboldened to dig in for a long showdown .

Add together all the individual issues, tie in the fact that Bush has by all appearances lost the middle, and it appears clear what the strategy for the immediate future entails. Attack, attack, attack.

From top White House operative Karl Rove to two of the party campaign committees, Republicans have launched a full-scale attack on MoveOn.org, questioning the liberal group’s patriotism and worldview. These attacks appear to have two purposes: One is to put the group and its Democratic allies on the defensive over support for the war on terror. And the second is to drive a wedge between Democratic candidates and the millions of dollars that MoveOn’s supporters have pumped into their campaigns. With MoveOn fast becoming one of the Democratic Party’s most important fundraising sources, the second goal may end up being the more important one.”

Take the case of GOP Senator Rick Santorum, darling of the Christer right. The almost-certain Democratic nominee against Santorum next year is Bob Casey Jr., the Pennsylvania State Treasurer, son of a former Democratic governor, and a noted social conservative who opposes abortion. Despite Casey’s conservative views, MoveOn sent out a major e-mailing soliciting funds for Casey’s campaign as a way of defeating Santorum — and with great success, raising over $150,000 for Casey in the first 24 hours after the fundraising appeal.

“But,” reports Roll Call, the National Republican Senatorial Committee immediately went on the offensive with a release titled, ‘Casey Moves In With MoveOn,’ alleging that the group’s e-mail on behalf of Casey shows how closely he is aligned with the ‘ultra-liberal left.’ John Brabender, Santorum’s media consultant, predicted that if Casey continues to accept MoveOn money, he will have to answer for the group’s controversial policies, which include opposing military intervention in Afghanistan. ‘You can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep,’ Brabender said. A group like MoveOn ‘will have a lot of trouble in Pennsylvania, particularly in the middle part of the state. The group will be hung around Bobby Casey’s neck.’ The rhetoric from Brabender and the NRSC is aimed at forcing Casey into a no-win choice: He could pass up a generous source of campaign cash, or he could accept MoveOn’s ample resources, yet face an assault over the group’s issue stances.”

This shouldn’t be surprising for anyone who has watched Rove, as his modus operandi is to always attack.

A typical instance occurred in the hard-fought 1996 race for a seat on the Alabama Supreme Court between Rove’s client, Harold See, then a University of Alabama law professor, and the Democratic incumbent, Kenneth Ingram. According to someone who worked for him, Rove, dissatisfied with the campaign’s progress, had flyers printed up

The Necessity of Partisan AttacksPost + Comments (68)

Social Security reform is, for all intents and purposes, dead right now. With the SCOTUS nominations at hand, the summer recess right around the corner, and a legislative agenda that is bogged down with numerous other items, those in favor of SS reform (yours truly included) will just have to regroup and keep hope alive:

Six months after Republicans began selling Social Security reform, they all but acknowledge that wide-scale changes won’t happen this year. But knowing they must do something, they are pushing a narrower Social Security proposal in the House.

President Bush continues to campaign for comprehensive reform of the system, but Democrats oppose what they call privatization. Congressional Republican leaders realize the public expects action after hearing about the issue for months.

“We’ve told everyone the house is on fire. It’s time to offer them a fire hose or a bucket or maybe a glass of water, depending on what the Senate can pass,” said Rep. Adam H. Putnam, Florida Republican.

Social Security reform appears to be, for now, so dead that it isn’t even making the news right now. Google news offers up a few stories, but one can assume only because they involve Karl Rove stumping for reform. Rove is always a hot topic in the press, but much more so within the current Plame/Rove firestorm.

Further imperiling Social Security, perversely enough, are the imminent Supreme Court fights. There is more than anecdotal evidence that if the social conservative wing of the GOP is not placated by the President’s picks, and not given the candidate they desire, Social Security reform by this administration will be all but dead. A base that has given their blood, sweat, and tears to support, fund, and elect this President and many of the newer members of Congress would be so demoralized by the appointment of a ‘moderate’ Justice or Justices that it is simply absurd to expect them to support this administration in future legislative endeavors. IN fact, it may not be an exaggeration to see a dramatic loss in the mid-term elections by numerous Republican candidates.

With that in mind, it is interesting to revisit who is in favor of Social Security reform in general and privatization in specific. If the numbers referred to by Adam in this piece in Red State are accurate, the heavier levels of support reside within the youth of America:

Recent polls indicate that young people are embracing President Bush’s proposal for private investment accounts as a means to fix Social Security.

In a February poll, the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press reported that 66 percent of Americans between ages 18 and 29 support privatizing a portion of Social Security taxes, up from 64 percent in December.

There seems to be some debate over the accuracy of those numbers, and the Mystery Pollster has more on polling and Social Security awareness.

So, here we are. It appears that for now, Democrats have won the fight, if only temporarily, on the issue of social security reform. Much still hangs in the balance, and it seems as though the fate of social security reform lies with issues wholly unrelated. These include the SCOTUS nominees, the waning popularity of the President, the approval numbers related to the war in Iraq, and the general attitude towards this administration and the current Congress, which as of late appearsto be pretty sour.

We shall see.

The Status of Social Security ReformPost + Comments (96)

Rick passes along this Jerry Bowyer piece in the National Review which is sure to cause a stir and widen the red state/blue state divide (at least in the minds of pundits):

Recently the Bureau of Economic Analysis released two reports which shed a lot of light on what

For Richer or PoorerPost + Comments (24)

I don’t know exactly what to believe right now with the whole Rove/Plame ordeal, as there has been so much spinning going on (I guess what both sides want, the administration probably more than the opposition), it is hard to get to the truth of the matter. I will stick with my initial statement from several years ago when this started:

And he is right- not that politicization of intelligence and this sort of retribution is anything new, as it has been going on for ages, even during the Golden Age of Clinton- but that is not the point. If some ‘senior officials’ compromised CIA agents, heads need to roll and someone needs to go to jail or have his/her career ruined.

regardless of what I think, or what I know, or what I think I know (paging Don Rumsfeld), the White House press reporters smell BLOOD:

Q: “So you’re not going to respond to a question about whether the president has confidence in Karl Rove?”

David Corn: Newsweek put out a story that Karl Roves passed natl security info outing a CIA agent. Are you saying the president isn’t taking any action? The president is free to respond. So are you saying he’s not going to do anything about this until the investigation is fully over and done with?

Scottie: This continues to be an ongoing criminal investigation…

David Corn: You acknowledge that he is free as president of the US to take whatever action he wants to, in response to a credible report?

Q: Did the president discuss Karl Rove’s current situation with him today?

A: Same question relating to reports about an ongoing investigation.

Q: Who is Karl Rove as it relates to this current adminiswtration?

Scottie refused to answer and went to someone else. He’s now refusing to answer anything about Karl.

Q: You said something on this podium months ago that was demonstrably false. Does that concern you now?

A: I will be glad to talk about this at the appropriate time, and that’s once the investigation is complete.

Q: Scott, at this point, are we to consider what you said previously, are you still standing by what you said previously?

A: You’ve heard my response.

Crooks and Liars has the video. This is going to dominate the news cycle, especially considering we are heading into the dead news month of August.

And just to really get people going, here is a run-down on the truthfulness of Joseph Wilson.

Rove/Plame Fall-outPost + Comments (86)

It is just a little tough to get upset about this:

When our side is running around with shit like this on their car:

And then there is this, from the College Republican Convention:

Or the Purple Heart band-aids that were handed out during the 2004 Republican Convention:

Just saying- little tough to get outraged over the ‘Liar, Liar’ t-shirt at a MoveOn meeting.

Via Direland (via C&L), this may be part of a larger strategery:

From top White House operative Karl Rove to two of the party campaign committees, Republicans have launched a full-scale attack on MoveOn.org, questioning the liberal group’s patriotism and worldview. These attacks appear to have two purposes: One is to put the group and its Democratic allies on the defensive over support for the war on terror. And the second is to drive a wedge between Democratic candidates and the millions of dollars that MoveOn’s supporters have pumped into their campaigns. With MoveOn fast becoming one of the Democratic Party’s most important fundraising sources, the second goal may end up being the more important one.”

Take the case of GOP Senator Rick Santorum, darling of the Christer right. The almost-certain Democratic nominee against Santorum next year is Bob Casey Jr., the Pennsylvania State Treasurer, son of a former Democratic governor, and a noted social conservative who opposes abortion. Despite Casey’s conservative views, MoveOn sent out a major e-mailing soliciting funds for Casey’s campaign as a way of defeating Santorum — and with great success, raising over $150,000 for Casey in the first 24 hours after the fundraising appeal.

“But,” reports Roll Call, the National Republican Senatorial Committee immediately went on the offensive with a release titled, ‘Casey Moves In With MoveOn,’ alleging that the group’s e-mail on behalf of Casey shows how closely he is aligned with the ‘ultra-liberal left.’ John Brabender, Santorum’s media consultant, predicted that if Casey continues to accept MoveOn money, he will have to answer for the group’s controversial policies, which include opposing military intervention in Afghanistan. ‘You can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep,’ Brabender said. A group like MoveOn ‘will have a lot of trouble in Pennsylvania, particularly in the middle part of the state. The group will be hung around Bobby Casey’s neck.’ The rhetoric from Brabender and the NRSC is aimed at forcing Casey into a no-win choice: He could pass up a generous source of campaign cash, or he could accept MoveOn’s ample resources, yet face an assault over the group’s issue stances.”

I guess we are now in the conquer stage of ‘divide and conquer:’

“The art of using troops is this:
……When ten to the enemy’s one, surround him;
……When five times his strength, attack him;
……If double his strength, divide him;
……If equally matched you may engage him;
……If weaker numerically, be capable of withdrawing;
……And if in all respects unequal, be capable of eluding him,
……….for a small force is but booty for one more powerful.”
– Sun Tzu, the Art Of War

Fabulous. More acrimony and villainization. Whatever happened to winning over converts to the cause? I am so tired of this, and that goes for both sides.

Sorry, DrudgePost + Comments (88)