Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« OooooooooKinawa! | Main | The Apprearance Of Impropriety »

June 18, 2006

Comments

lurker

EmptyWheel put forth her opinion of why and how the dems could win the house.

Carol Herman

Frank Rich writes well. And, he's written an autobiography, detailing his parents divorce. And, then his mom's remarriage to a very loud guy whom Rich hated. Dysfunctional families, like Tolstoy said,all have different stories. They make no sense to outsiders. But the pain's familiar. I'd guess Rich was bullied. He also lived on the less desirable side of DC's elites.

I'm not surprised to hear how others react to our President. Rich will never ever like our President. It's been a long, long time since Ike was in the White House. And, Americans came together to support our ONE President. Reagan got across-the-board positive responses. But not from Rich.

As a matter of fact, everything Rich has touched has died. Broadway is no longer the place where new talent and great stories come to the fore. Hollywood? Seems they've screwed up, too. It's not just the MSM.

And, Rich is left. You see new blood?

Does it matter? He's talented. But his message is wrong. Ditto, happened to H.L.Mencken. And, ya know what? It's a free country. I could care less that he gets paychecks from pinch. There's were ya go if you want to see how nepotism destroys, because pinch has no talent at all.

gm

Somalia you could make some good defeatist remarks about but Afghanistan? We've scythed a pretty good crop of Jihadi's there. I think they are stacking 'em up pretty good.

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/05/afghanistan_embed_updates.php

Now, an Afghanistan update:


Recent activity in Southeastern Afghanistan. Click to Enlarge.

Coalition forces continue to maintain the offensive against the Taliban in Southeast Afghanistan. A joint task force of Afghan and Coalition security forces encountered "organized armed opposition" from the Taliban during a joint operation near the town of Azizi in Uruzgan province. Twenty Taliban were confirmed killed, with up to 80 suspected killed after a combined ground and air assault on Taliban positions. This would put the number of Taliban killed in action over the past week between 220 to 280. In a separate raid, Mullah Mohibullah, the Taliban commander for Helmand province, was captured in a bazaar in Uruzgan province.

also see

http://billroggio.com/archives/2006/03/springtime_in_afghan.php


Too bad there isn't anybody at a major paper like the New York Times who can really, truthfully analyze military matters. But that would probably require some objectivity and not hating the US Military.

Other Tom

The man is a theatre critic. Now he (along with the ditzy Maureen Dowd) is one of the principal voices of the once-proud "paper of record" on the matter of US foreign policy.

Pofarmer

Nobodies forgot about Afghanistan but the MSM. Centcom sure ain't.

paul

The gravest wound is yet to fall.

If Lieberman runs as an independent the following will transpire:

He will win. The dems will be working for majority from 43, as opposed to 44.

Moderate dems jump ship.

The DNC will never be able to run on 'strong national defense'.

Dean will have to explain how his outreach to state parties, is nullified by a national net endorsement.

Evry 08 contender who fails to plug Lieberman, looks beholden to the fringe*.

Fringe can be defined by the actual % who vote for Lamont in the general election. 15-19%?

Kos can claim a political victory. 1-20...nice when the '1' is a democratic Senator with a 60% approval rating in his state and whose loss will have a large ripple effect. Even funnier when the '1' is the only guy who had a chnace of victory for his own party.

Wellstone is spinning in his grave.

crosspatch

The problem with "Together, American can do better" is that what it really says is "So far, we suck".

MayBee

The implied first part of their motto: "(If Democrats ever get our act)[t]ogether, America can do better"

Action4Justice

Why all the secrecy Mr. Bush? Are you making some secret deals with the puppet IRAQUI government you don't want the American People to know about? We know the war is about you, your friends, and your business interests. Come on, bring our soldiers home. You are wrong in going there, being there, and going back in Secret. There is nothing in IRAQ except poor helpless people caught in the middle of the Oil War. Is Iran next on the list?

topsecretk9

Action4Justice - eyeroll

JorgXMckie

ts, if my eyes rolled any further (after reading Action4Justice) I'd be staring at the inside of the back of my skull.

I like the apparent Democratic idea that America can only come together on the Dems terms. After all, they've shown no sign of coming together with any current policy.

crosspatch

A4J fails to place responsibility where it belongs. He forgets that there would have been no war, no invasion, no al Qaida in Iraq, none of this had Saddam allowed complete and unfettered inspections. He would still be in charge, sanctions would probably have been lifted by now, and he would still be free to round up Shiites and slaughter them at will had he just allowed the doggone inspections.

To say this is somehow about oil is to completely ignore that Saddam was given a peaceful way out of this entire thing and chose war because France, Germany, and Russia told him we were bluffing and wouldn't go through with it. Place the blame where it belongs. We gave Saddam a way out without war. HE chose war, not us.

crosspatch

But I guess we should forgive A4J, he was probably still in diapers when things started heating up in late 2002.

Bob

Has anyone ever noticed how liberal groups and liberals in general, take on names that nebulous at best... WTF does Action4Justice really mean. What action... they just have workshops to talk about how bad everyones been. And Justice... justice for who?

It's like when a developer comes into town and builds 300 homes on an old 100 acre farm, and then calls it "Green Meadows". There's such a disconnect.

These moonbats had no problem with Clinton's idea of justice...
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Clinton_bombing_of_Iraq_far_exceeded_Bushs_in_runup_to_war__Bush_spikes_of_activity_que_0705.html>Clinton bombing of Iraq

Extraneus

Actually, I think the "action" part, normally called direct action, is a pretty common anarchist term, big with the George Soros types.

Jane

Action4Justice,

There is no "U" in "Iraqi".

Dwilkers

The problem with "Together, American can do better" is that what it really says is "So far, we suck".

Yep.

The Dems never seem to be able to communicate about the US in a positive way.

Lurker

Yanno, our congressmen and senators are supposed to work for the people.

"We the people".

"By the people, for the people, ..."

Their opposition to the repeal of the death tax is NOT for the people.

Their strong desire to pull the troops out on a specific time is NOT for the people (aka protection of our country and its freedom).

Their arguments against The Patriot Act is NOT for the people.

Their arguments over tax cuts favoring the top two percent was never for the people.

Need I say more?

noah

You have to admit the Dems are in a hell of a quandary. To say anything rational that A4J types would approve of is damn near impossible.

The only people stealing Iraqi oil are Iraqi criminals but its still all about oil!

The only people standing in the way of a functioning Iraqi government are Iraqi religious fanatics/anarchists/Saddamist thugs! (But they are "freedom fighters" don't you know?)

At home the Dems have a laundry list of social welfare programs they would like to implement but the price tag makes Republicans look like tightwads so the only option is to gut the military again! But they can't come out and say that because they have also complained that Bush is not spending enough on the military!! (Except for wasting money in Iraq)

Plus they oppose strong border enforcement which is heavily favored by VOTERS!

If they are honest they lose big in Nov. Lying is their only hope.

Lurker

Check Flopping Aces for the growing evidence showing more and more of the Saddam connections to AQ AND having WMDs:

The Real Connection

"Perhaps I never really paid attention to the run-up to war. But when the case for war was made by President Bush, I wasn’t under the impression that Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11; yet from the Left, I often hear the talking point, “Saddam never had anything to do with 9/11″. And that there were no connections between Al-Qaeda and Iraq."

Think about this when the dems submit their resolution Wednesday to request a specific timeline to pull the troops out. Think they are for the people?

Saddam & Nukes Translated yesterday.

He also has a post on Liberalism.

The Limit of L

Ah, I see Jeff Gannon's back...talking about more of the KOS corruption:

Florence Schmieg

Other Tom: I agree and have been saying that on a number of posts over the last two years. Frank Rich, Dowd, Krugman, and Herbert have no more credibility on foreign policy than my mailman does. In fact, my mailman's opinions are better since he doesn't suffer from BDS.

Ron Hardin

There's nothing grammatically wrong with ``Together, America can do better.''

It's stupid, and it says that the Democrats think you're stupid, but its grammar is fine.

The function of the word is to imply a disharmony is possible in America.

Where that fails to be possible, you get a semantic mistake, not a grammatical one.

Mister Snitch!

"Actually, though, the Democrats did have some plans... The biggest was the hope that they could be propelled into power by their opponents' implosions."

Exactly how is hoping for a break an actual plan?

ryan

"Last week the president was still invoking 9/11 to justify the war in Iraq, which he again conflated with the war on Islamic jihadism"

That would be like saying of WWII: "Last week the president was still invoking Pearl Harbor to justify the war in Europe"

Gary Maxwell

I heard the Democrats are still tinkering with the slogan. It just did not flow quite right. Newest version has a bite however:

"Your Betters can Do American ( and you ) Together".

brenda taylor

THE DEMS LIKE THEIR JUSTICE THROUGH CRIMINALIZING POLTICS.

ajacksonian

Losing in Afghanistan? Perhaps he should read Strategypage which has recent updates and much more of interest going on there. It seems that Coalition and Afghan forces knocked out a Taliban offensive before it even started and are now forcing them to act piecemeal. The Taliban wanted to try and retake a couple of border provinces and are, instead, serving as targets to get the Afghan military and police seasoned to combat. Working out pretty well, too, from all accounts of people who are actually in-country and non-MSM associated. Actually, I can't remember anyone in the MSM actually reported from there...

As to Iran, well, Gateway Pundit has been showing us the daily rioting and such going on with the mullahs using their *elite* and *special* guards and police to beat, imprison, torture and kill those staging protests. Iran doesn't need the US to fall apart, its doing pretty well on its own. Too bad the MSM isn't telling us about this EITHER, as it might give one an entirely different picture of the Middle East.

As to the Democrats... their solutions are pablum for children. Joe Lieberman is the last adult in that party and he is fighting to get past a primary and may go independent. And so the 60's takeover of the Democratic Party will be complete, and it will be the party of Jackson... Jesse Jackson. As they have decided to edit Andrew and 'Scoop' out of its realm of ideas, starting with the 1974 Congress that Rep. Murtha was so proud to be a part of...

And having no party, what is a Jacksonian to do but form his own?

The Party of One.

Each and every one of us.

We the People.

richard mcenroe

Mister Snitch — "Perhaps if we taunt the rabbit, it will become angry and make a mistake..."

"Like what?"

"Well..."

sbw

With signifying endorsement from me, Hugh Hewitt is precise with his T-Shirt:

Win the war,
Confirm the judges.
Cut the taxes.
Control the spending.
Secure the borders.
If it could be expressed concisely, what would a Democratic T-Shirt say?

And what *should* a sensible Democratic T-shirt say?

JM Hanes

Speaking of slogans...

I think we should strive to ensure that "The Okinawa Plan" officially enters the political lexicon at the top of the list of campaign rhetoric '06. May it proliferate wildly!

Cecil Turner

There's nothing grammatically wrong with "Together, America can do better."

Isn't there? Seems to me the referent for "together" is a singular ("America"), which doesn't really work. An analogy would be "together, I can do better" (as opposed to "together, we can do better"). I'm not sure if that's grammar, usage, or style; but whatever it is, it isn't quite right.

And what *should* a sensible Democratic T-shirt say?

"We can't agree on a plan, but we all think theirs really sucks"?

richard mcenroe

"And what *should* a sensible Democratic T-shirt say?"

Fuck Bush! of course. What else have they ever said?

Mark Jaeger

My All-American sense of fair play would normally preclude me from kicking A4J while he's down and in the fetal position, but, in this case, I'll make an exception.

Yeah, A4J, everything you said is true. And now that you're on to us, we're coming for you. Shucks buddy, you can run, but you can't hide.

You'll be happy to know I've already sent in my application to join the Young Republican SS. Better yet, I left a voicemail in Reichsfuehrer Karl Rove's answering machine requesting I be assigned as your personal concentration camp guard. The good news is that I like warm climates, so I expect you'll be "shoveling Scheisse" in Louisiana. I'm tough, but I'm fair: as long as you keep supplying me with smokes, I promise I'll give you a five-minute rest break every hour.

Now is that a deal or what?

Carol Herman

Perhaps, because I have one, I took your tee-shirt to mean that men like to fuck women.

Of course, the "bush" word gets connected to Moses' burning bush, too. Not that sexually transmitted diseases don't cause burns, too.

Anyway, it doesn't matter.

It really is nice to have a two-party system. We're better off than those with the nuts in parliament, who stay and wait around to deal themselves great hands, because their seats, while only a few, attached to a forming government, provides tha majority. And, then you pay! Politicians in those boats are all extortionists.

So, we have a left that can run naked in San Francisco's streets. Pedal their bicylces. And, Mark Steyn writes about the visual treats.

As long as the donks are in the minority, I hope they keep collecting their wing nuts. So attracted they're less likely to pee in the majority's pool.

And, Frank Rich writes well. Here, again, I'd rather have choices, if I'm going to read someone's work, to at least be entertained by talent. I don't have to agree with everything I read. Heck, I can be just as disagreeable as the next folk. Agreements don't come easy to me.

The wonder for us, now, is that we have a President, just like Lincoln, who doesn't want to compromise on the big issue of fighting terror.

You want to nitpick? Lincoln didn't rush in and join the Abolishionists, ya know? He let events overtake the slavery issue. And, even when the fighting was hard and ugly, and consumed years and years ... He fought without compromise. And, then he got one of America's best generals! You didn't know that? Grant was considered sublime. When he fought he could strategize better than anyone else. That's how you win. For Chess Masters, it's the same.

Yes, we're taught that Lee was the "best" man fighting. Not true. Grant was that fella. While Jefferson Davis, in the end, wore a dress to run away. Lincoln never would have worn a dress, ya know?

Neither will this President!

We've got the best man because, just like data mining, we're big enough, that when we vote en masse, the pattern that emerges is a wise one. Whether it was your choice. Or not.

Personally, I think it's the donk's bigger mistake, not to get behind republican presidents. Had they done so, their own survivability wouldn't be hanging on by a thread.

Soon they will be gone.

So? Well, we're still a two-party system. There will be break-aways. The Blacks will fight to keep the donkey name. Where they now own most of the franchise, anyway. (Not good for wommen. There, they tend to be called ho's and bitches.) You mean you never peek into your own chrystal balls? No curiosity? Unlike our Civil War, which ened without ripping this country apart; the donks are headed for splitsville.

JM Hanes

To be grammatically correct, the slogan should read: "Together, Americans can do better." However, since we should also be saying the United States are one nation, I'm not sure we're in a position to be picking nits.

sbw

Doh!

My previous post should have read:
****WithOUT signifying endorsement from me****

toot

Hey, as a Christian nation we can deal with the Trinity.

The Unbeliever

And what *should* a sensible Democratic T-shirt say?

Easy. Front:

"Our plan, which we swear actually exists but which is not yet ready for public release, is (rest assured) much better..."

Back:

"...than anything Bush or the Rethuglicans have come up with, but unfortunately it is too long and nuanced to fit on a mere shir--"

Wrap the whole thing around a picture of John Kerry in an imitation of the Che t-shirt pose, throw it on a bright red shirt made from 100% hemp, and charge $30 for it.

megapotamus

``Together, America can do better.''
Yet we know from hard and long experience that the Dems will brook no such thing as compromise. No, sirree. With this ostentatious wish for togetherness we are informed that the Dems at large do not feel included in today's controversies and this is quite a valid notion. They are NOT included because they have excluded themselves. It's Not in Our Name, dontcha know? Well, the lessons of the last six-odd years are many and diverse but here's the most important for our Democrats. It is that, as currently constituted, we do not need Democrats for ANYthing. We do not need them to fight two fairly large scale wars at once, we do not need them to run the economy, we do not need them to fight poverty, we do not need them for their reasoned criticisms (as they are no such thing). We do not need them, Sam I Am. We COULD use a responsible opposition to ride herd on fraud, cronyism, pork and corruption; unfortunately the Dems are even MORE addicted to these perversions than the Reps, God save us all!

crosspatch

To be grammatically correct, the slogan should read: "Together, Americans can do better." However, since we should also be saying the United States are one nation, I'm not sure we're in a position to be picking nits.

I still say that it reads like "So far, we suck". Not exactly a warm fuzzy message. Sounds Jimmy Carter-ish to me.

JM Hanes

Sounds like the product of a http://hotair.com/archives/top-picks/2006/06/11/infiltrating-yearly-kos-a-response-to-george-lakoff/>George Lakoff focus group to me.

richard mcenroe

"Together, we can do better."

Not "do well," not even "do good." Sound like their Carteresque "national malaise" is back...

Underachievers and proud of it, man!

Jim Miller

What interests me most about Frank Rich is how badly he writes. Whenever I read one of his columns, I find myself correcting him, rather than trying to figure out his point -- assuming he has one.

Take the paragraphs quoted above. How do you highlight a debacle with a mudfight? Or, how do plans "capsize"? Is every plan a boat?

And those mistakes are typical, as you can see
here, here, and here. Rich is, as I said in my letter to the Times -- which was not published -- especially bad with metaphors.

Now I am not surprised to find that the Times employs people who don't understand basic math. As the first public editor, Daniel Okrent, admitted, journalists are often bad at math. Nor am I suprised to find that the Times employs people who don't know basic facts about politics (or other subjects). Reporters have to cover so many fields that it is only natural that they sometimes have to write on subjects about which they know little.

But I am surprised to see the Times give plum jobs to a man who can not (or will not) write well. And I would bet that there are copy editors at the Times who find his writing just as appalling as I do.

ajacksonian

What would the new Democratic Party t-shirt say? Strangely enough I looked at that while looking for a missing political party or two. And the bonus is the t-shirt is already made and available!!

clarice

Jim, Maybe in the era of new media where articles are discussed online by people who do have expertise in everything, media should rethink how they hire and assign journos. Perhaps instead of hiring know nothings and assigning them to a wide range of stories, they should hire people knowledgeable in science, law, math, sconomics, foreign affiars, military matters and give them specific assignments. OTOH that would give us less to laugh at.

Tom Maguire

"Our plan, which we swear actually exists but which is not yet ready for public release, is (rest assured) much better..."

Maybe they should leak the plan to TruthOut.

Action4Justice

AFJ wants to be the independent non partisan new spirit of 1776 political party!

clarice

I love Lileks:
"The Democrats have many mantras and slogans: "grim milestone," "hopeless quagmire," "culture of corruption" and "Karl Rove's dingo ate my baby." But for a while they've had one big overall slogan, dripping with gusto: "Together, America Can Do Better."

Not will, or should, or must, but "can." It's like saying, "Together, Frenchmen can win a hot-dog speed eating contest." Doesn't mean it's going to happen, or that you'd want to watch. But it's typical of modern politics -- vague and patriotic, but not so patriotic it would unnerve a Dixie Chick. Together, America Should Be Greater! Together, America Might Go Further! Together, Democrats Can Win Elections! Providing the Republicans stay home"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1653214/posts

Jim Miller

Clarice - I don't see any general solution to the problem, though I have suggested -- in all seriousness -- that those who hire journalists treat a journalism degree as a serous defect on a resume. And I am coming to the conclusion that it would be best, in general, simply to close journalism schools.

The problem with getting those who know more to cover the news is that someone -- who doesn't know the material -- still has to pick those people. And that isn't easy.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Traffic

Wilson/Plame