ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Monday, November 14, 2005

Nudging the Left over the cliff since 2000....

On behalf of the Rovian Cabal, I'd just like to offer a little nudge to the Dems. Read Captains Quarters Blog story on the idiocy of the attacks on pre-war intelligence. Here is his final assessment:

How empty are the Democrats of ideas and long-term plans for national security? Three years later, they're still lying about their own statements on national TV to smear George Bush -- even though he can't run for election again! Rockefeller shows how lame this meme has become. It should embarrass every Democrat in the country and start a demand for new party leadership. Unfortunately, it won't, but it may finally convince the rational moderates that the Democrats have led the party over a cliff.
Go ahead and keep undermining the troops... you're a disgrace to America.

And speaking of disgrace, it seems the Kossacks aren't too pleased with the WaPo editorial staff (or Joe Lieberman for that matter). Armando sees Tailgunner Joe behind every word:
WaPo's Ed Board Editor Practices The New McCarthyism
by Armando
Sun Nov 13, 2005 at 09:26:14 PM PDT

Cementing his place as a Bush media lackey of the first order, Fred Hiatt, the Editorial Page Editor of the Washington Post, reaches a new low - stooping to the New McCarthyism:
. . . Congress . . . pours most of its Iraq-related energy into allegations of manipulated intelligence before the war. "Those aren't irrelevant questions," says Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.). "But the more they dominate the public debate, the harder it is to sustain public support for the war."

What Lieberman doesn't say is that many Democrats would view such an outcome as an advantage. Their focus on 2002 is a way to further undercut President Bush, and Bush's war, without taking the risk of offering an alternative strategy -- to satisfy their withdraw-now constituents without being accountable for a withdraw-now position.

Many of them understand that dwindling public support could force the United States into a self-defeating position, and that defeat in Iraq would be disastrous for the United States as well as for Mahdi and his countrymen. But the taste of political blood as Bush weakens, combined with their embarrassment at having supported the war in the first place, seems to override that understanding.
You no good SOB Hiatt. You have been irresponsible, grossly negligent, ingenuous and a Bush lackey on Iraq for 4 years now and you have the gall to write those words. You despicable McCarthyite cretin.

We're not supposed to say this anymore - but eff you. How dare you question the patriotism of people who are doing what YOU have failed to do - hold the Bush Administration to account? How dare you?

Your editorial page has always "clapped louder" at the behest of the Bush Administration. Now you dare to SMEAR Dems at the whistle of the worst President in history? How dare you sir?
Fred Hiatt should immediately resign his position. He has no credibility to comment on any issue.

Update [2005-11-14 0:1:36 by Armando]: In my opinion, Joe Lieberman should personally and loudly condemn this column. I suggest that we urge him to do so.

The language highlighted in bold is a McCarthyite attack in the eyes of Armando. Unfortunately, there is little evidence he can point to which would undermine such a claim. The Dems are clearing attacking Bush on pre-war intelligence precisely because they see political advantage in it.

Ironically, Armando is the one pursuing the McCarthyite tactic of calling for Fred Hiatt to resign and calls on a US Senator to condemn the editorial. It seems that some dissent (at least if it's against the Dem Party line) is not tolerated.

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: St Wendeler