Democrats & Liberals Archives

Republican Architect Boosts Democrats

After the 2004 election, President George W. Bush credited his victory to the political operative known as the “Architect,” Karl Rove. And it’s true: his detailed plan for winning, plus his underhanded tehniques, machinations and smears brought a majority to Bush. And then Rove set out to make the Republican Party the permanent majority party. He succeeded in producing a majority party - not the Republican Party but the Democratic Party.

Thanks a lot, Karl.

The L.A. Times reports the good news for Democrats:

The survey, by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for People and the Press, found a "dramatic shift" in political party identification since 2002, when Republicans and Democrats were at rough parity. Now, half of those surveyed identified with or leaned toward Democrats, while only 35% aligned with Republicans.

Wow! 50% to 35%, in favor of Democrats. Only a short time ago, in 2002, it was tied at 43% to 43%.

If you look at the report you will see that the public has also been adopting more liberal values than they have in the past. It's a great day for Democrats. And as the conservative Andrew Sullivan says:

I spent part of last night absorbing the latest comprehensive Pew report on trends in public opinion over the last decade. It's a devastating indictment of the Bush-Rove strategy for conservatism and the Republican party. They may have created the most loyally Democratic generation since the New Deal with the under 25s....... It turns out that Karl Rove has gone a long way toward securing a permanent majority in American politics ... for liberals and Democrats. The collapse of a coherent, freedom-loving, reality-based conservatism is surely part of the reason.

How did Bush and Rove do it? Very simple: they made their highest priority politics, not governance. The politics was and is everywhere. They kept up a barrage of attacks on Democrats, calling them atheists, wimps, traitors and assorted other names. They governed in secrecy and belligerently. Instead of getting all the people together to fight the "war on terror" Bush used it as a political tool with which to smack Democrats. He did nothing for Katrina victims, except make speeches about what he was going to do. Bush, no doubt with the advice of Rove, spent many months trying to trash the Social Security system. Recently Rove was involved in the firing of prosecutors in the Justice Department because they did not pursue the Rove Agenda faithfully enough... The list is endless.

Karl, you did a great job, or as your boss would say, "a heckuva job." You know, you could do more for us Democrats by staying in your job and doing what you have always done. Your architectural skills may make it easier for the Democrats to take over the presidency and the Congress in 2008!

Posted by Paul Siegel at March 23, 2007 5:54 PM
Comments
Comment #213398

Good catch on that poll, Paul. I live in heavily right-leaning San Diego and I’ve noticed that all my Republican friends are calling themselves “conservatives” or independents now.

It’s getting hard to find someone who’ll admit they’re a Republican without attaching some kind of disclaimer to it, like: Reagan Republican or Old-School Republican.

Posted by: American Pundit at March 23, 2007 6:35 PM
Comment #213408

Paul,

It’s far too soon to label the GOP with RIP! They did the same to us.

At this point in time no politician should smile or even grin. The bipartisan BS is hurting everyone.

The Republican Party won again today. We Democrats screwed the pooch on this new war appropriation bill. Junk is junk, and this bill is total junk.

The time spent on this should have been spent on impeaching the POTUS. Once the CinC changes, war policy changes.

Posted by: KansasDem at March 23, 2007 7:37 PM
Comment #213417

Kansas Dem:
“We Democrats screwed the pooch on this new war appropriation bill. Junk is junk, and this bill is total junk.”

I can’t agree that it’s junk, KD. At least we finally have a timetable, and there are much needed funds in there to help our returning vets, and those who are still fighting. I put this video link up in AP’s thread below, but I’ll put it up again because I want you to hear what the bill could provide for our troops:
Murtha speech on Iraq bill.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 23, 2007 8:31 PM
Comment #213419

Paul, Do you think Rove gets all the credit for this turnaround? The failed neocon policies, the incompetence of Bush/Cheny and their political appointees surely has to be given some of the well deserved credit.
The sad thing about it is there has been a lot of damage done by these guys.

Posted by: j2t2 at March 23, 2007 8:42 PM
Comment #213425

“At least we finally have a timetable”

Adrienne,

And pigs can fly! This turkey is DOA in the Senate. I’m disgusted with this so-called bill.

What this bill proved was we Democrats are willing to use the same kind of corrupt pork-laden BS tactics to accomplish NOTHING as the Republican’ts were. This is not only a turkey, it’s a big fat TOM turkey that’s so fat it’ll never get off the ground.

I’m smart enough to know that we have three weeks to do something right, even if it’s only funding the war effort for three to four months at a time. We’ve sent our message to Bush. Both he and the Iraqi government get it by now! Our patience is worn thin.

Like it or not this bill helped no one and ultimately harmed our party. That’s fact.

Posted by: KansasDem at March 23, 2007 8:58 PM
Comment #213444

KansasDem,
I understand why you dislike the bill, but I disagree. Pelosi did a great job passing a difficult piece of legislation through the House. It is not perfect, it required compromises, but it does establish an endpoint, and it gives Republicans a year and a half to achieve their goals. If it turns out Republicans really do not have a successful strategy in place after all, a strategy on which they are betting the lives of American troops, then so much for Iraq. Bush will not be allowed to run out the clock, and pass on his horrendous mistake to another administration.

Will it pass the Senate? If it comes to a vote, I think it has a better chance than many people suspect. A lot of Republican Senators will be under tremendous pressure. Few want to go into the 2008 elections with the noose of Iraq around the neck of their election hopes.

A filibuster could kill it, of course. But if that happens, or if Bush casts a veto, then the Dems need to hang tough, and refuse to give in. No bill, no $. Period. And that will be the ugly end of an ugly, stupid war.

Posted by: phx8 at March 24, 2007 12:48 AM
Comment #213445

That Pew poll is interesting because it also says that “The proportion expressing a positive view of Democrats has declined since January 2001 by six points.” And this has happened at the same time that support of policies associated with Bush has declined.

Don’t forget that Bush will not be running again, so this is not exactly good news for Democrats who are running against Republicans not named George Bush.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at March 24, 2007 12:52 AM
Comment #213446

Why did it take 17 tries?

Posted by: Dawn at March 24, 2007 12:58 AM
Comment #213457

KansasDem

If it is too soon to label the GOP with “RIP,” then how about FIA—Fascism in America?

Posted by: Kim-Sue at March 24, 2007 9:36 AM
Comment #213469

Kansas Dem,
I’m in complete agreement with phx8. And I’m so damn glad that we are finally seeing the light at the end of the long dark tunnel that is this screwed up war! No bill in the Senate? No money, honey! No matter which way this goes, we’re seated firmly in the drivers seat now.
Seriously, think about it.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 24, 2007 12:47 PM
Comment #213472

SHADES OF VIET NAM. Cut funding? You liberals don’t give a crap for our troops. What are you guys going to do spit on them when they come home like you did to the Viet Nam Vets?

Posted by: KAP at March 24, 2007 1:30 PM
Comment #213474

Considering all the factions in American politics today, it’s virtually impossible for any party to control both the Congress and the White House for six years and maintain a very high level of popularity.

Also, just as we in the more libertarian wing of the Republican have long maintained, there is something fundamentally wrong with concentrating power in the hands of government. When one party controls all the levers, it’s a huge temptation to start over-reaching.

The good news for the Republicans from a political point of view, as this bill that just came out of house demonstrates, the Democrats are going to be increasingly held responsible for those dissatisfied with government—which includes just about everybody, in one way or another.

Whose popurlarity is even worse than Bush’s? That of Congress. Which is now a Democratic-run institution.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at March 24, 2007 1:32 PM
Comment #213478

KAP:
“SHADES OF VIET NAM.”

Yes, the Iraq War has indeed been shades of Vietnam right from the beginning.

“Cut funding?”

No. Instead, they could pass the bill.

“You liberals don’t give a crap for our troops.”

Of course we do. Look at the bill — it’s all about helping our troops.

“What are you guys going to do spit on them when they come home like you did to the Viet Nam Vets?”

No, and the vast majority of us didn’t do so then either.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 24, 2007 1:48 PM
Comment #213481

Adrienne
As you wrote in your previous post NO MONEY HONEY. Is that really supporting our troops. No matter how unpopular this war is, even I don’t think we should be there, we should at least give them the funds needed to finish what was started. Don’t make it like the Viet Nam finish.

Posted by: KAP at March 24, 2007 2:15 PM
Comment #213482

adrienne

“Senate. I’m disgusted with this so-called bill.”

“What this bill proved was we Democrats are willing to use the same kind of corrupt pork-laden BS tactics to accomplish NOTHING as the Republican’ts were. This is not only a turkey, it’s a big fat TOM turkey that’s so fat it’ll never get off the ground.”

gotta side with kansasdem on this one. the other part of this bill that stinks, is the time table. weather you agree with the war our not, the funding of our troops should not be tied to this poison pill. the dems know that bush will never sign this because of the time table, thus giving them the opportunity to say the pres. refused to fund the troops. this isn’t about the troops it’s pure politics at the expense of the troops. the time table should be debated on its own merrit, and not tied to this bill.

Posted by: dbs at March 24, 2007 2:38 PM
Comment #213483

“As you wrote in your previous post NO MONEY HONEY. Is that really supporting our troops.”

Yes, because if they want the money, they can simply pass the bill. But with it’s passage they also get a timeline. We’ve had no stategy for this war, and thus, we’ve been needing to impose a timeline — otherwise the president will just keep them there in the middle of that civil war until his term runs out. Our troops have been like sitting ducks out there for too long — the target of violence from every faction in the country, and that’s bullshit. Let the Iraqi’s now step up, and let us start bringing our troops home.

“we should at least give them the funds needed to finish what was started.”

Wake up. There is no good, victorious end that is going to come out of this war that had no planning, no strategy beyond “shock and awe”, and not enough troops and equipment from the beginning.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 24, 2007 2:38 PM
Comment #213484

This is an interesting post, and has links that should be read, one of them, “the bill”. I’d like for some of you, any of you, just one of you who oppose it so strongly, to find and point out what you consider to be a piece of pork funding. Would it be the agricultural assistance following the weather-related destruction, loss of livestock and “table” meat for the same reason, or the spinach industry destroyed by e-coli….
And speaking of food, there is new information coming out that our troops are literally starving to death from having to largely rely on the MRE’s…..reports of 20, 30 and 40 pounds lost due to the poor nutritional value. Bottom line is we gotta get these troops home SOON!!!!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-burnett/pelosis-triumph_b_44145.html

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 24, 2007 2:46 PM
Comment #213485

It’s the time table. You can’t fight a war on time tables. WE were in Nam for over 10 years and we lost that one because of stupid politics. Politics does not belong in a war. We are lossing this one because of stupid politics.

Posted by: KAP at March 24, 2007 2:51 PM
Comment #213487

sandra

” what you consider to be a piece of pork funding. Would it be the agricultural assistance following the weather-related destruction, loss of livestock and “table” meat for the same reason, or the spinach industry destroyed by e-coli….”

this is pork. what does it have to do with the funding of our troops? these are add-ons given in order to garner votes. it’s that simple. these people should vote to fund these troops without being bribed.

Posted by: dbs at March 24, 2007 3:16 PM
Comment #213488

KAP:
“It’s the time table.”

Yes, and high time it is.

“You can’t fight a war on time tables.”

This war should have never begun in the first place. But once it had started, our troops did everything that was asked of them. Saddam is dead, and there were no WMD’s. Therefore, it should have been over for us long ago, because they completed their job. It’s a civil war now —one the president allowed to happen because the administration never had any plans to secure the peace, but one our troops now have no business fighting. It is the Iraqi’s war now, not ours.

“WE were in Nam for over 10 years and we lost that one because of stupid politics. Politics does not belong in a war. We are lossing this one because of stupid politics.”

No it wasn’t stupid politics that lost us the war in Vietnam, it was stupid policies and stupid presidents, and not enough people demanding that it not begin in the first place, and not enough people demanding that it come to an end when it was clear that we were allowing our troops to be killed for no good reason.
The exact same things are true of Iraq: stupid policies and a stupid administration, and not enough people demanding we not go to war pre-emptively on obviously flimsy intelligence in the first place, and not enough people demanding an end to what is total madness. It’s been four years, and now finally, the Democratic Congress agrees that enough is enough.
Look at the polls: the American people agree.

Sandra,
Great article link!!!

Posted by: Adrienne at March 24, 2007 3:21 PM
Comment #213493

Yea stupid presidents (Democrats)

Posted by: KAP at March 24, 2007 3:49 PM
Comment #213496

KAP,

Whose stupid politics are we talking about? The Republicans have been in charge of the White House and Congress for virtually the entire duration of the war. If that’s who you mean, I have to agree!

Posted by: Woody Mena at March 24, 2007 4:18 PM
Comment #213497
these people should vote to fund these troops without being bribed.

Posted by: dbs at March 24, 2007 03:16 PM

.
Well said and with key figures to back that up…ie: Duke Cunningham, (of course, who wouldn’t love a boat lke that) and the master of paying for votes, Tom DeLay…….now you’re talking bribery!!
Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 24, 2007 4:21 PM
Comment #213498

W.M
Stupid politics of both parties. Dems have control of both houses now but I don’t see much in the way of change yet.

Posted by: KAP at March 24, 2007 4:22 PM
Comment #213499

KAP:
“Yea stupid presidents (Democrats)”

Please. In Vietnam we saw stupidity from both Democrats and Republicans. But you’re right, the Vietnam War was started by the Democrats — very stupid.
In Iraq, it’s as Woody just said: stupidity from this Republican president, and his entire adminstration and the Republican Congress.
Democrats will now be changing the direction away from this ongoing stupidity — which is exactly the reason they were elected.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 24, 2007 4:30 PM
Comment #213500

Changing direction WHERE? All I see is same crap different party.

Posted by: KAP at March 24, 2007 4:52 PM
Comment #213503

KAP:
“Changing direction WHERE?”

Uh, out of Iraq. Maybe then we can put all of our efforts toward not losing in Afghanistan — you know the place where Al Qaeda and the Taliban are once more gaining control. Better to win one than lose two, don’t you think?

“All I see is same crap different party.”

Then I believe you’re not looking closely enough.

Posted by: Adrienne at March 24, 2007 5:02 PM
Comment #213504

By putting a time table on our exit all you are doing is telling the enemy just sit back and wait we’ll be gone by such and such a day, as other poster have wrote, then what? Iraq will be under another dictator maybe much worse than Sadam.

Posted by: KAP at March 24, 2007 5:12 PM
Comment #213505

One other thing a pullout will produce before we get the job done is that if one of our allies get into problems can they put their trust in us to help them or do they have thoughts that if the going gets rough will the U.S. leave us high and dry?

Posted by: KAP at March 24, 2007 5:18 PM
Comment #213506

Dbs,
Please name an example of pork from the bill. Remember, this was an supplemental bill for emergency spending. It is not the fault of Democrats that conservatives used this method to fund Iraq, basically as a way of not counting the cost of Iraq in the budget, & pretending the federal budgtet deficits were smaller than they really were. For example, in this bill, over $3 billion went to fund Katrina victims & rebuilding. As was already mentioned, other funds were allocated for the spinach industry, and for farmers hit by drought. These are perfectly appropriate cases to include in an emergency spending supplemental bill.

KAP,
If this bill convinces “the enemy,” aka Iraqis, to “just sit back,” that would be ABSOLUTELY EXCELLENT! That would give the Iraqi government a year and a half to establish legitimacy in relative calm.

As for whether Iraq ultimately becomes a dictatorship, or fundamentalist theocratic democracy like Iran, well, the war supporters should have thought of that before the invasion. People like myself remember the First Gulf War & Bush #41. Saddam Hussein was left in power as part of the condition for Arab states participating in the coalition. Why? Because no one wanted Iraq to become a fundamentalist state.

In any event, it is not our country. The future of Iraq is up to the Iraqis.

Anyone who does not believe we are following a winning strategy which can succeed in the next year and a half has NO BUSINESS backing a surge, or keeping troops in the country. Anyone who lacks confidence in the prospects for success in the next 18 months should be ashamed for resisting a deadline.

Posted by: phx8 at March 24, 2007 5:32 PM
Comment #213508

After reading the latest post in the green section. Now I understand why the big push for a pullout.Especially Sept. 2008.

Posted by: KAP at March 24, 2007 5:42 PM
Comment #213512

Check it out:
Murtha On Bush: “He’s Going To Have To Deal With Us”

Posted by: Adrienne at March 24, 2007 6:28 PM
Comment #213513

Great replies, phx8!!!

Posted by: Adrienne at March 24, 2007 6:29 PM
Comment #213515

I agree….that is way too long….screw Bushco..bring’em all home now !! Whaddaya got to say about that???

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 24, 2007 6:36 PM
Comment #213540

sandra

“Well said and with key figures to back that up…ie: Duke Cunningham, (of course, who wouldn’t love a boat lke that) and the master of paying for votes, Tom DeLay…….now you’re talking bribery!!”

what does this have to do with playing politics with the troop funding? if we go back we can find plenty of corruption on both sides of the aisle. this is nothing more than your guys are more crooked than my guys. it has no place the debate.

Posted by: dbs at March 24, 2007 8:28 PM
Comment #213545

Sandra
Gotta side with dbs. Both sides are corrupt, trying to prove the other is more corrupt is rather childish. While we’re screwing Bushco lets just screw most of our career politicians too.

“Remember, this was an supplemental bill for emergency spending. It is not the fault of Democrats that conservatives used this method to fund Iraq, basically as a way of not counting the cost of Iraq in the budget…”

So you’re admitting that dems are doing the same things reps used to do?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m no fan of Bush or republicans. I just have no great love for liberal democrats either, and when people try to demonize one and make the other out to be near perfect I have very serious disagreements.

Kudos to Pelosi on getting Dems to stick together on the bill…I’m not a fan of the bill itself but getting the spectrum of dems to vote together must have taken some work. Unfortunately if she tries stiff-arming the less liberal members of her party into siding with her she becomes a lot like Denny Hastert. Honestly I don’t expect her (or any other career politician) to put ethics above politics.

Posted by: Silima at March 24, 2007 9:02 PM
Comment #213547

It has everything to do with the “debate”….you cited your opinion that this bill was being used as a tool laced with bribery to get our way. I merely pointed out right off the top of my head, that the Republicans have gotten many things with bribery that haven’t gone to help ANYONE or ANY PROJECT. Funny how the rules aren’t consistant when they don’t support your opinions.
This bill is loaded with troop funding, in fact, it had more put into it than was originally asked for.
The additional items,IMO, would not be a negative for anyone. It seems to give a helping hand to farmers, ranchers and still-going-without hurricane victims. We may be able to limit the produce we import from other places and hurricane victims should be self explanatory.
And by the way, you have your next to the last sentence twisted……;)

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 24, 2007 9:03 PM
Comment #213550

Silima…no thanks on your suggestion. I couldn’t think of anyone as deserving as Shrub..and…. I actually didn’t say this, it was in one of phx8’s posts, and you only re-cited a part of it.

“Remember, this was an supplemental bill for emergency spending. It is not the fault of Democrats that conservatives used this method to fund Iraq, basically as a way of not counting the cost of Iraq in the budget…”

Keeping the thought intact makes it more sensical.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 24, 2007 9:13 PM
Comment #213566

lol…..that should have been, more sensible.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 24, 2007 10:35 PM
Comment #213593

sandra

“you cited your opinion that this bill was being used as a tool laced with bribery to get our way.”

i singled out niether party. i’m sure there was coaxing of memebers on both sides of the aisle. why so deffensive?

Posted by: dbs at March 25, 2007 12:30 AM
Comment #213605

Sandra
Sorry if I quoted you when it was phx8. Either way, its still acknowledging that dems are using the same tactics reps used to use.

Posted by: Silima at March 25, 2007 1:31 AM
Comment #213626

Silima, it’s okay….being confused with phx8 isn’t a bad thing.. ;)
Tactics is a legitimate, but not negative way to identify the method used to push a bill. And there are trailers attached to this bill, but it isn’t a “bad” bill. I have always thought of pork as being frivolous, narrowly targeted, special interest funding given to those who have worked themselves into the better butt-kissing positions.
The targets in this one certainly don’t qualify for that. And of course, there will be some representatives who will receive kudos from their constituents, but that isn’t “bad” either.
We have just reached the point where somebody, in some way has got to move to stop the obsessions of this tyranical idiot.
For some of us, we may not live long enough to ever see this wonderful country of ours reclaim its’ position in the world, and THAT is bad !!!
What is the worst, is the the thousands of lives sacrificed and permanently altered to carry out this mission. Hope you don’t ever have a peace-filled night again George.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at March 25, 2007 12:51 PM
Comment #213731

Mullah Cimoc say ameriki people republican party now waking and the fog remove of the brain.

How bush destroy usa too much. destroy mental and emotional of amriki people.

but usa media so control (google: mighty wurltizer +cia) never to asking how bush becoming president.

this called the media coverup. bush family long time so corruption with intel community. am him bush jr. real republican? who these eviling people making him the president?

This make the cure for republican freedom people making majority. love the god, and love the family and working so hard every day.

but controlling hims of republican not this kind good person. him the wicked and loving the power and the torturing people, children of god, this too wicked. hims also loving the LBT (low back tattoo) and the killing the baby of abortion and ameriki woman becoming the slut for taking all the man.

stop1984now@yahoo.com

Posted by: mullah cimoc at March 25, 2007 10:35 PM
Comment #213732

Mullah Cimoc say ameriki people republican party now waking and the fog remove of the brain.

How bush destroy usa too much. destroy mental and emotional of amriki people.

but usa media so control (google: mighty wurltizer +cia) never to asking how bush becoming president.

this called the media coverup. bush family long time so corruption with intel community. am him bush jr. real republican? who these eviling people making him the president?

This make the cure for republican freedom people making majority. love the god, and love the family and working so hard every day.

but controlling hims of republican not this kind good person. him the wicked and loving the power and the torturing people, children of god, this too wicked. hims also loving the LBT (low back tattoo) and the killing the baby of abortion and ameriki woman becoming the slut for taking all the man.

stop1984now@yahoo.com

Posted by: mullah cimoc at March 25, 2007 10:36 PM
Comment #214259

Hmm, Paul, you say that Karl Rove masterminded the downfall of the Republican Party and the Democratic takeover of the Congress by giving poor advice to the President on critical issues.
Gee, then I guess you could also conclude that Hillary Clinton masterminded the downfall of the Democratic Party, and the takeover by Republicans of the House and Senate in ‘95 with her ignorant health care scams, bi-Presidency, etc.! I guess that makes Hillary the equivalent of Rove, right? And now she is the front-runner of the Democratic Party. Wow, the libs must be digging from the bottom of the barrel this time around!

JD

Posted by: JD at March 29, 2007 1:48 AM
Comment #214265

Gotta say, if we don’t impeach Bush and jail Cheney, people like KAP will continue to believe that this administration was just operating in a lawful and constitutional manner, and that would be very bad for the future of this country. After being handed breathtakingly broad powers to execute the campaign against terrorism, this administration abused those powers and arrogated others in an attempt to consolidate their political position and destroy their political opponents, to fatten the purses of their supporters and themselves, and to shift the burden of government away from the wealthy and more toward the shrinking and impoverishing middle class. They have criminally misspent funds for the Iraq war, an illegal war that they lied to seduce the American people into tepidly supporting, and in some cases have supported with those funds the very factions they should be fighting.

In addition to their criminality, this administration has made incompetence in governing part of their policy. The uncountably infinite ways in which they have run the train of government off the rails appear daily in the newspapers, and their loyal minions shrug and can’t remember what happened and try to reassure themselves with the mantra that Bush and Cheney are interested in “getting the terrorists” and addressing their needs rather than advancing a decayed conservative agenda and lining their pockets.

The party is over. Time to turn out the lights.

Posted by: Mental Wimp at March 29, 2007 2:49 AM
Post a comment