How best to attack Bush now?

[Stig]

I voted "Other". A clusterbomb or Cruise missile seems more appropriate.

And for the FBI, I don't actually have either of these things, so don't come hose my house down with machine guns at 5 in the morning.

Stig

(oh I thought the thread said "what should we attack Bush with )

 

[Tricky]

There is quite a wide variety in the Democratic field, from enraged liberal (Dean) to soldier-diplomat (Clark) to damn-nearly-Republican (Lieberman). Certainly you can find things to complain about for each of these and certainly people will, but you cannot argue that they are no good.

Besides, Shrub has shown that Repbulicans really do not care about qualifications anyway. Maybe it is the Democrats fault that they seem to be hung up on qualifications.

 

[shemp]

How could you leave out "All of the above"?

But please don't ship him to Planet X, we don't want him.

Maybe we'll get lucky and Gov. Schwarznegger will stage a coup d'etat.

 

[arcticpenguin]

Edit to add comment about civil liberties. Nope, that won't work either. It's cynical, but I think people will only care about this issue if it hits them, they really don't care if some guy with a foriegn sounding name is locked up in jail for month w/o a reason. Sad, but, I'm afraid, true

Don't discount the civil liberties issue jsut yet. The mayof of Philadelphia does not have a foreign-sounding name. True, he was not actually locked up in jail, but the FBI has admitted bugging his office phone.

Legislation intended to handle terrorism is being used against non-terrorists.

 

[rikzilla]

You forgot the old "Dig up some bimbos from his past" option.

Find a nice lady who's; "a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty." from GWB's past....find his Anita Hill. Or hey, check out his drinking buddies, one of 'em's sure to remember that GWB said something nice about Hitler's dog or something!!!

Absent any of that juicy stuff you guys could just practise striking a loser's dignified pose...like your hero ex-Gov. Davis.

-z

 

[Random]

You forgot the old "Dig up some bimbos from his past" option.

Find a nice lady who's; "a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty." from GWB's past....find his Anita Hill. Or hey, check out his drinking buddies, one of 'em's sure to remember that GWB said something nice about Hitler's dog or something!!!

Absent any of that juicy stuff you guys could just practise striking a loser's dignified pose...like your hero ex-Gov. Davis.

-z

There is more than enough material out there to go after him, but the so-called “Liberal Media” fought tooth and nail to keep any mention of it away from the public during the 2000 election. I don’t see why they would change their behavior now. Try this site:

Bush Jr.'s Skeleton Closet

Some of the stuff is left-wing puffery, but there is still a lot more here than in some failed Arkansas land deal.

 

[specious_reasons]

You forgot the old "Dig up some bimbos from his past" option.

Find a nice lady who's; "a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty." from GWB's past....find his Anita Hill. Or hey, check out his drinking buddies, one of 'em's sure to remember that GWB said something nice about Hitler's dog or something!!!

Absent any of that juicy stuff you guys could just practise striking a loser's dignified pose...like your hero ex-Gov. Davis.

-z

A little comment: Wasn't Davis disliked even by other Democrats? He's certainly not my "hero". Using harsh partisan language like this is unbecoming for you, Rik, because I know you can do better.

GWB had lots of negative personal attacks, but he was able to brush them off, because he "was saved" when he was 40. I think that effectively gave him a pass on scandals that may have occured when Bush was a young man.

I don't know much about the candidates, but I think a Dean/Clark ticket might be the way to go. I like the balance of a compassionate liberal with a moderate, epsecially because Clark would address the stereotype that Democrats don't know how to fight wars.

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

You forgot the old "Dig up some bimbos from his past" option.

Find a nice lady who's; "a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty." from GWB's past....find his Anita Hill. Or hey, check out his drinking buddies, one of 'em's sure to remember that GWB said something nice about Hitler's dog or something!!!

Absent any of that juicy stuff you guys could just practise striking a loser's dignified pose...like your hero ex-Gov. Davis.

-z

I have a novel idea, why don't we take Pres.Bush to task for all the factual screwups for which he's responsible?

Let's start with economy

Let's continue with the 2 wars we have fought, thier reasons for being fought and the aftermath..

Let's continue with the policy ( or lack thereof for 2 years ) in re the middle east that has caused what appears to be irreparable harm to a possible peace, and caused a huge loss of life?

Let's examine the "new and improved " environmental policies he has initiated and the promisees he broke.

Shall we examine the make-up of the people that he has surrounded himself with and thier attachment to the industries they are charged with overseeing or the fact that these people sprung forth from the very boardrooms (and or Daddy's cabinet ) that are most involved with both fraud and new commerce ( in the guise of rebuilding Iraq) ?

Oop new wrinkle on the horizon...Pres.Bush may invoke executive privilage in regards to the CIA agent who was outed ...Man I know that music.

Forgot to mention the VP's fight with the congress in Re to the "guest list" of the energy task force who crafted Pres.Bush's energy policy, o but thats the VP and he's not answerable to anyone ,,uhh except the Pres. and the congress

The reason I ask these questions and not given an explanation is because I am reticent to type reams of factual information if the interchange as usual will be the weak rejoinder that somehow Pres.Clinton is responsible (after being out of office for two years) and that all these things are a sour grapes effort to tarnish poor G.Bush's reputation due to partisan politics. The fact is if You believe these things can be explained to be unrelated events, not indicative of the character of the administration, and in thier nature innocuous, I will go forward and argue point by point all the sins I have listed as individual fook ups and not flaws of character.....either way you look at it is an indictment of this presidents competence. He is either a boob or a marionette.

And remember kids....hypocrits come in all political stripes

 

[American]

With the presidential election coming up next year, there are many things that the Democrats (and others) could bash Bush on in an attempt to win the White House. What do you think would be the most advantageous to begin the attack with now?

The question you should be asking, and middle America knows you don't care to, is what do liberals have to offer that's better than where Bush has taken us. Nothing but failed policy and flawed principles. Nothing else.

 

[Zep]

Absurd. This is praying for catastrophe. It's like saying Bush is so bad someone should nuke Houston to make him look bad.

Perhaps I was over the top, but I still contend that what Bush REALLY needs is a good solid dose of face-to-face personal reality with the results of his and his team's decisions. "Gettin' yer facts lerned" is, I think, the term. It seems incredible to us here that those people in their DC bunker decided the fate of two countries on the other side of the world, sent US troops to do a dirty job they didn't really need to go for, and stirred up a whole potload of trouble right around the globe. On an emotional pretext for no visible gain. They really need to get out more.

And your reasoning is wrong, such a thing will "harden resolve".

Yes, but just not where they expected. There have already been two bombings just in Indonesia alone as a result of Bush's actions, with 88 Australians killed and hundreds more others as well. Does he intend to harden his resolve until he is the only one left standing?

I know life long liberals in New York City who are pro-war, if not quite pro-Bush due to the 9-11 massacre. I know no one who has gone the other way, though many "anti-war" types have "hardened resolve" also.

I can't quote any specific obverse comments, except to indicate the feeling here that while the Middle Eastern excursion of this year did NOT enjoy popular support, there WAS strong support for our troops and the US troops too. I suppose it is because generally we have a far greater loathing of the results of war, and a strong propensity to rush in with aid instead.

What exactly is wrong with my suggestion of the Democrats coming up with someone really good? It's certainly possible in principle. Is it maybe not possible in practise?

Has the Democratic party become the party of Kool-Aid drinkers? I certainly hope not. I really would like to vote for one.

How about it, fellas? Give me a candidate who offers something beyond being the un-Bush.

I fully agree with this view - kicking Bush out is not a solution, it's just a result.