Democrats - Relentlessly On Message In '06
Rick makes many excellent points, but I want to focus on the fact that liberals need to adopt the conservative's tactic of being relentlessly on message, even to the point of refusing to explain ourselves. And what is the message? Read on... (Some copied from CV Rick, others added by yours truly):
- Republican's are pro-torture
- Republican's don't believe in the rule of law
- Republican's believe the President is above the law (shades of Richard Nixon)
- Republican's are corrupt
- The war in Iraq is a Republican war
- Republican's trade civil liberties for fictional security
- It's the Republican's fault
( I am still reading)
Will they rent a set of nads and start screaming from the rooftops about what the Repubs have done?
Instead of taking advantage of low public opinion, they remain largely silent and cooperative. What gives????
See we remember the Lewinsky thing and how they relentlessly went for the jugular on everything, even from his law firms days. The high road is nice, but the people who suffer from their niceties will be US.
John Conyers is probably the VERY bravest. But dammit, I don't understand why the dems won't capitilize on the scandals-galore going on.
The Dems have more opportunities here than they could possibly hope for. What gives?
Fear of the pounding by the Limbaugh-Hannity-O'Reilly-Coulter banshees of the media?
Are they more like Bush and Co. than they'd have us believe?
Are they too indebted to the same K Street lobbyists that the Repubs have been purchased by?
As Chili Palmer once wisely observed, "Pressure? No...I'm the one who applies the pressure." Dems need to take that attitude with the bug-eyed right.
Then you should read this post. I've had enough talk about Social Security, there is only one solution, and I want to deal with it and be done.
It seems to me the media is basically corporate, and they report things they think will sell. If this wasn't at least partially true, I think we would be hearing more in the mainstream media about what our Representatives and Senators are doing, i.e. what measures are being introduced, how these people are voting on the measures, etc.... and less about Michael Jackson, runaway brides, etc.
Scandals are things the media seems to like, but if the scandals are negatively affecting the party with which the corporate media tends to get along best, I doubt those scandals would get as much press.
If the news is a business, does it not seem likely that the party which favors the preservation of wealth is the party the media would tend to favor?
I am encouraged lately by the amount of time the media is spending reporting on the various miseries Bu$hCo is encountering. I'm hoping this trend will snowball, that is, the more the public becomes dissatisfied with Bush, the more negative stories will appear in the news, because... it will be interesting enough to attract viewers... and to generate the dollars I believe are really their bottom line nowadays.
Sure as hell wish we could clone Russ Feingold.
Do you feel our country is better off today than it was five years ago.