For instance, The Note actually thought the Terri Schiavo right-to-die debacle was going to be a home run for Republicans. "[T]he Republican leadership seems to have succeeded in framing the discourse around a moral question," wrote The Note at the time, faithfully regurgitating GOP spin.
The Note thought Republicans were winning the post-Katrina spin war: "Mr. Bush still hasn't found his footing or his voice on this story, but his side clearly won the last news cycle in raw political terms."
During the 2006 congressional debate about withdrawing troops from Iraq, The Note thought the Democrats' anti-war agenda -- the same agenda that won them control of the House and Senate in November -- was a huge loser. In other words, they were "on the precipice of making Iraq a 2006 political winner for the Republican Party," in part because "Democrats remain united in their disunity, defensiveness, and distraction." That's right, The Note, deftly reading off Karl Rove's notes, announced Iraq was an electoral problem for the Democrats. ("If I were them," Halperin said of Democrats during a June 22, 2006, interview, "I'd be scared to death about November's elections.")
In June of last year, The Note was confident that "[t]he Democrats still don't actually have enough Senate seats in play to take control of the Senate (or a national message)." Around the same time, The Note accused the Democrats of rooting for more U.S. casualties in Iraq to help the party's political fortunes at home.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Noted
Boehlert writes about Halperin's departure from the Note.
Too Much Credit
JMM:
They didn't get played. They knew what they were doing. The press is just in the habit of reporting White House spin as news in and of itself, at least for the first round. It's habit.
A bunch of reporters got played on this one. And now they're too embarrassed to retrace their steps.
They didn't get played. They knew what they were doing. The press is just in the habit of reporting White House spin as news in and of itself, at least for the first round. It's habit.
They Write Letters
John Conyers writes to Monica "Buzz Saw" Goodling.
We have reviewed Ms. Goodling’s declaration and the letters you sent to us and Senator Leahy, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and we are concerned that several of the asserted grounds for refusing to testify do not satisfy the well-established bases for a proper invocation of the Fifth Amendment against self- incrimination. In addition, of course, the Fifth Amendment privilege, under long-standing Supreme Court precedents, does not provide a reason to fail to appear to testify; the privilege must be invoked by the witness on a question-by-question basis.
Fast Trains
Since people are excited about fast trains, it's worth pointing out that the "emergency supplemental" money giving Bush $100 billion for his pet war could build a lovely fast train from San Francisco to San Diego, with about $70 billion to spare.
McCain's Folly
It occurs to me that Grover understands what Baghdad John does not; it was never about the Iraq war, it was always about supporting Bush. Baghdad John has never been all that consistent with the latter, so his consistent support for the former means nothing to people.
Grover Might Be Right
GFR quotes Grover Norquist:
It's hard for non-lizard brain people to see how they could pivot on a dime like that, but noted Bush basers like Glenn Reynolds spent years arguing against more troops in Iraq then immediately went to arguing the opposite as soon as Dear Leader said it was a good idea.
So, yeah, Grover's probably right. They'd just need to create some fake political event to allow them to declare victory and go home.
But Bush won't do it. And the 30 percenters are happy to stay in Iraq just as they'd be happy to leave. Whatever Dear Leader says is fine with them.
The base isn't interested in Iraq. The base is for Bush. If Bush said tomorrow, we're leaving in two months, there would be no revolt.
It's hard for non-lizard brain people to see how they could pivot on a dime like that, but noted Bush basers like Glenn Reynolds spent years arguing against more troops in Iraq then immediately went to arguing the opposite as soon as Dear Leader said it was a good idea.
So, yeah, Grover's probably right. They'd just need to create some fake political event to allow them to declare victory and go home.
But Bush won't do it. And the 30 percenters are happy to stay in Iraq just as they'd be happy to leave. Whatever Dear Leader says is fine with them.
Bush Fatigue
After all this time I still find the contextless parroting of whatever Bush says by the news media to be rather depressing. It is news when the president says something, but it's bigger news when he's full of shit.
Progress
When August comes, they'll throw in for another Friedman.
It's easy to gamble with other peoples' lives.
It's easy to gamble with other peoples' lives.
Oooga Booga
Word is we're going to get another dose of Strident Bush, lecturing those Democrats, or something. I suppose it'll be about accusing Pelosi of treason as CNN has been dutifully not pointing out all of the Republican members of Congress who have been visiting Syria.
Monday, April 02, 2007
Buh-Bye
We surely will miss her steady optimism.
WASHINGTON - President Bush is losing his top day-to-day adviser on Iraq, the White House confirmed Monday.
Meghan L. O'Sullivan, who has played a key behind-the-scenes role in implementing Bush's controversial Iraq policies over the past four years, will leave later this spring.
Her departure, which follows that of her deputy, could leave the White House with a vacuum of long-term experience on Iraq policy, and it comes as Bush and the Democratic-controlled Congress prepare for a showdown over withdrawing U.S. troops.
O'Sullivan, 37, known for her 100-hour work weeks and steady optimism over the eventual outcome in Iraq, said in an interview that with the completion of months-long reviews of policy in Iraq and Afghanistan - which she also oversees - she felt it was the right time for a change.
Future Punditry
There will come a time, perhaps around a year from now, when the drumbeat will start to sound. All kinds of insiders will talk about how it would be in poor taste to tie the Republican nominee to George Bush, the most disliked person in America, that no matter what the polls say the people just want to move on, blabbity blah.
don't listen!
don't listen!
Serious
Digby writes:
It's long been frustrating how very serious people in Washington have, for years, believed that being seen as strong leaders on national security issues meant lining up behind George Bush and say "yes, sir." Leadership requires... leading.
People hate George Bush and hate the war. The public would be behind literally any possible course of action the Democrats choose to take to get out of there.
I would suggest that it was when the Democrats finally took the issue of Iraq seriously that the country began to take them seriously. And it wasn't because it was a "daddy issue." It was because it was the most important issue on the table. It still is.
It's long been frustrating how very serious people in Washington have, for years, believed that being seen as strong leaders on national security issues meant lining up behind George Bush and say "yes, sir." Leadership requires... leading.
People hate George Bush and hate the war. The public would be behind literally any possible course of action the Democrats choose to take to get out of there.
Beaten by the Mittster
This fundraising stuff is generally mostly boring but I am rather fascinated by who Republicans are giving money to. Saint McCain was outraised by Clinton, presumably Obama, Edwards, the Mittster, and Saint Rudy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)