Skip to main content

The NYT is reporting that Bush and the Republicans are going to run against, get this, the Clinton years:

"The Democrats have made their position clear," Mr. Bush said. "I want you to remember the last time they had control of the United States Congress back in 1993, they passed a massive tax increase."

Yep. Those 1990s were an economic disaster weren't they? 25 million jobs. Record budget surpluses. No military debacles. Who would want that?

Or, as the The Onion so succinctly put it for posterity:

Bush: "Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over"

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:26 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  It they want... (4+ / 0-)

    If the Republicans want to run on the economy... bring it on!

    •  Yeah. I heard from Ariana Huffington (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      vigilant meerkat, Crisitunity

      that running on the economy is a bad idea.

    •  Off course the republicant's (5+ / 0-)

      want to run on the economy. They can't stand the thought of ordinary people having some disposable income. That money should all belong to them,dammit. Thats why they want people working for WalMart or in shitty non union mines. So they barely make enough to get by on and know to keep their place. All that Clinton prosperity nauseated them. It meant their greed glands wern't being satisfied to the absolute maximum amounts possible--and that means everything, except the pennies the working masses need to turn over to the IRS to subsidize the lifestyle the whole group of oxygen theiving parasites think they are entitled to.

      it tastes like burning...

      by eastvan on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:58:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly, (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mightymouse, sherlyle, sessal, offgrid

          I do believe that,deep down,Republicant's yearn for a return to simpler the simpler lifestyle of '50's---the 1550's. Keep the masses too poor and meek to cause any problems. Imprison them in dual chains of poverty and ignorance.

          it tastes like burning...

          by eastvan on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:08:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I call them "regressives" (5+ / 0-)

            The opposite of progressives.

            They want to take use back to at least the 1890's, before Teddy R's trust-busting policies, unions, and women's right to vote.

            Of maybe the 1840's, before the end of slavery.

            Or maybe you're right. The 1550's before the Age of Enlightenment, and when the serfs could be kept in line without much effort (like having silly elections and all that)

            "Like the mirror told me this morning, it's all done with people" - Wavy Gravy

            by offgrid on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:16:45 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The Age of (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sessal, katied

              Kings. All the power concentrated at the top--exept for the damn Magna Carta.

              it tastes like burning...

              by eastvan on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:22:08 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Magna Carta (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Coherent Viewpoint, sessal, katied

                Ah yes...1215...that might be far back enough for the regressives.

                But the Roman Empire might really be the goal.

                Come to think of it, they really probably want to go back to the time of the Old Testament, since Jesus was a communist. Notice how the "Christian" Fundies quote the OT more then the NT?

                "Like the mirror told me this morning, it's all done with people" - Wavy Gravy

                by offgrid on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:42:18 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Didn't (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  they feed Christians to the lions then? I would like to see Dobson in the ring running away from a hungry (big)cat. Now that would make a good pootie pic.

                  it tastes like burning...

                  by eastvan on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:46:35 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  make that the Roman Empire (0+ / 0-)

                  under Nero, Caligula, or any of the other incompetent / insane emperors whose names lives on to this day.

                  The Roman Empire wasn't that bad on the average compared to the political entities that preceded it, people within thousands of miles of Rome who were not descendants of Romans and never expected to see the place took pride in saying "I am a Roman citizen."

                  At the time, democracy simply couldn't scale upwards far enough to administer a political entity that size. Transportation and communication available at the time just wasn't up to the drill.

                  Of course, the big difference between then and now. . . the time of empires has come and gone. Trying to build an empire is only a paying proposition for crony capitalists attached to the regime, all it gets the taxpaying public is whopping tax bills and our kids coming home in boxes.

                  Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                  by alizard on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 02:28:08 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  "regressives' (0+ / 0-)

              is a very good name for these people. Keep using it, and I'll try to spread the word, too.

              Also sounds good with GOP and Republican, too.

              "The Republican regressives in Congress today. . ."

              Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

              by alizard on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 02:20:36 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  well, they can't go back to the 1950s. . . (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Coherent Viewpoint

            the "Leave it to Beaver" era was in large part, due to an extremely well-funded government which got their money from an extremely high tax rate.

            Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

            by alizard on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:16:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Fair taxes could be a Democratic narrative. (0+ / 0-)

        Democrats could be pushing the story of "fair taxes" for all citizens. Fair taxes are those that pay for those things used and needed by the middle class and the average American, and are not used to line the pockets of the rich and influential, like tax subsidies to the oil companies who are showing record profits. Why should our tax money be going into the pockets of the rich and the insiders?

        Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should be changed regularly and for the same reason. -- Gerry Brooks (Toronto Globe & Mail)

        by dewtx on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:18:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  a poster idea to make this point (0+ / 0-)

          How about a poster with Paris Hilton's face on it over her current net worth with a caption:

          We're going to raise Paris Hilton's taxes, not yours.
          (unless you've got as much money as she's got)

          One could use Bill Gates and any other wealthy and disliked American in her place, or what's wrong with several poster images?

          This could also be worked up as TV commercials.

          Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

          by alizard on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 07:44:11 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Maybe not Gates (0+ / 0-)

            I've disliked Microsoft and Bill Gates for a long long time. However, he's been doing a lot to (at least partially) redeem himself over the last few years.

            The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has spent millions and pledged to spend billions on things like global disease prevention (especially AIDS research) and helping developing countries. (n.b. I've heard that part of the help to developing countries is Windows licenses, which is kind of scummy if true. But the rest of what they do is pretty damn noble.)

            His father is a strong proponent of the estate tax, and I've never heard of Gates III opposing Gates II on it. I swear he supports it himself, but I can't find an article to back that up.

            He plans to leave each of his children only about 1-2% of his wealth when he dies. Sure, that's still tens of millions of dollars, and they'll never want for anyting. But he's giving the rest to charity and could have chosen to leave it all to his kids.

            I think people like the Hilton sisters or other irresponsible trust fund babies would be much better for your idea than Gates.

          •  Or ... (0+ / 0-)

            "Do you want YOUR tax money to support Paris Hilton?" (or insert whatever name is appropriate). Or "How much of YOUR taxes should support Paris Hilton?"

            My only concern is that when some people see the phrase "raise ___'s taxes", their eyes reflexively glaze over and they think you could be talking about their taxes too. I think phrasing it as who do your taxes unreasonably support, rather than in terms of raising someone else's taxes, will generate more light and less heat. But that's just my opinion.

            Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should be changed regularly and for the same reason. -- Gerry Brooks (Toronto Globe & Mail)

            by dewtx on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 01:44:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Bush needs the tools to protect us... (0+ / 0-)

    from Congress, apparently.

    After all, there's nothing the president can do if the Congress tells him he has to do something he doesn't like, right?

    So apparently, we have to "fight the terrorists over there" so we don't have to use our pens over here.

  •  That Onion article (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mbguenth, vigilant meerkat

    comes to mind quite frequently.

  •  It was a nightmare, the 90s... (12+ / 0-)

    20% returns on investments, dreamy discussions of "peace dividends", booming technology and..the worst of all...low unemployment for everyone, especially minorities.   Think of what would've happened had Al Gore won and things kept going as they were!

    "A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government (Edward Abbey)" (-5.13; -7.54)

    by Alabama Bill on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:30:30 PM PDT

  •  FYI (9+ / 0-)

    Here's an annotated version of that prescient Onion article.

    We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace -6.63, -6.97

    by amRadioHed on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:30:47 PM PDT

  •  Bring it... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    amRadioHed, Mz Kleen, speckitis

    It's about time we debunk the national pathology of the tax-and-spend-Democrat boogey man.

    "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

    by Five of Diamonds on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:30:53 PM PDT

    •  Attempting to revise history. (3+ / 0-)

      Rove has read Nietzche's "On Truth and Lying in the Extramoral Sense."

      He lives it.

      If they succeed in this election by running against Clinton, we now this country and the world is in big trouble.

      The neocons are also changing history.

      For instance, the reclassification of all those documents from the 40s-80s.  If historians can't get access to information, lies like this lie are possible.

      And, soon, there will be no one around to remember that they are lies.

      Our children will be spoonfed lies rather than truth.

  •  I remember that Onion article. Freakin' PROPHETS. (26+ / 0-)

    On January 17th of 2001, they said:

    Bush swore to do "everything in [his] power" to undo the damage wrought by Clinton's two terms in office, including selling off the national parks to developers, going into massive debt to develop expensive and impractical weapons technologies, and passing sweeping budget cuts that drive the mentally ill out of hospitals and onto the street.

    During the 40-minute speech, Bush also promised to bring an end to the severe war drought that plagued the nation under Clinton, assuring citizens that the U.S. will engage in at least one Gulf War-level armed conflict in the next four years.

    Beat that, Nostradumbass...and thank God that that is in the public record. No one can say something bad wasn't expected by his (s)election into the White House. We all knew a shitstorm was coming; but even I am shocked that Bush could so completely break through the floor of my low expectations.

    "Think. It ain't illegal yet." - George Clinton

    by jbeach on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:30:53 PM PDT

  •  I'm surprised they didn't go all out (4+ / 0-)

    and try to demonize Jimmy Carter.


    Having trouble finding stuff on Daily Kos? This page has some handy hints and tricks.

    by dmsilev on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:30:55 PM PDT

  •  And by god, I bet they can pull it off (8+ / 0-)

    Given there apparent success in convincing people that up is down and that Iraq was involved in the attack on the WTC (48% believe this still), why wouldn't they believe they can reconstruct the historical truth on this?

    It's no disgrace not to be able to run a country nowadays, but it is a disgrace to keep on trying when you know you can't. ~ Will Rogers

    by vigilant meerkat on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:31:14 PM PDT

  •  Lately the Onion (5+ / 0-)

    Is sounding more and more not like a parody, but one of the few accurate descriptions of what's going on.

    Also, haha at Bush dragging the ghost of Clinton out to scare the base some more. When will they get over that man?

    "Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth." -- JFK

    by Tryptophan on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:31:20 PM PDT

  •  Let Newt Gingrich Argue for us... (5+ / 0-)

    An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy. (Woodrow Wilson)

    by Alter Ego Manifesto on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:31:24 PM PDT

  •  The only thing dumber... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maggiemae, aerdrie faenya, mango

    than the Democrats running on the economy is the Republicans running on the economy. :)

    I would guess that such a forced anti-tax angle represents a GOP strategy to hold ground, rather than advance territory.

    They're playing not to lose.

    That's encouraging.

    Against Beltway Dems playing not to win.

    Uh...not so great. But we've got a fantastic bunch of new players waiting to move to the starting line-up.

    Should be a great game. :)

    We are composed mostly of tears.

    by cskendrick on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:31:31 PM PDT

  •  taxes (4+ / 0-)

    Second time I've heard from the Republicans about Democrats raising taxes in the last couple of days.

    Must be the new talking point. Democrats will raise taxes. Do the voters need to hear much else? Probably not. It will probably work. Maybe they will add that we're going to pay for abortions with the new tax money. Landslide. Okay, I'm not in a good mood today.

    Say no to hate, bigotry, and the author of the Fed. Marriage Amendment, Marilyn Musgrave. Please donate to Angie Paccione.

    by OLinda on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:32:02 PM PDT

  •  How in the world (4+ / 0-)

    can we enjoy End Times death and destruction with all those pesky democrats trying to bog us down in peace and prosperity??

  •  ah yes the 90's (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mz Kleen, Alabama Bill, VoicelessInDC

    I still remember the record overtime in the auto industry.  I paid a lot more taxes in those years because I made a helluva lot more money!!  Hellish years for the middle class indeed!

    "Facts are stupid things"-- Ronald Reagan 1988

    by dougymi on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:33:50 PM PDT

  •  Best years (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    This approach must be geared towards the well to do that had to pay their fair share in the 90's.  The neocons have painted tax increases as bad and they have done a good job of it.  Lets give another tax break to the wealthy, make the middle class pay more to the point there is no longer a middle class so as to disenfranchise them even more.  Then we can guarantee that only the wealthy will vote thus keeping this cycle of neocon power complete.  Bush and Cheney-men of the corporation!

  •  Some job statistics (7+ / 0-)

    Every Democratic President of the last 80 years had jobs created at a higher average percentage increase than every Republican President.

    In 8 years, Clinton was +22.7 million
    In 5 2/3 years, Bush is +3 million

    For statistics by Presidential term, see here:

    There is also the related page of Debt / GDP by term:

  •  Now, if the Dems would only respond to it as (2+ / 0-)

    clearly and succinctly as you.

    The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity." - Harlan Ellison

    by dkmich on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:35:13 PM PDT

  •  I'd show them.... (4+ / 0-)

    ...a photo of a gas station sign in, say, 1998.  

    85.9 cents per gallon for regular unleaded in February 1998.  

    Add $2, and you have gasoline under Bush this summer.

    9-11 changed everything? Well, Katrina changed it back.

    by varro on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:35:48 PM PDT

    •  Gas prices aren't a winning issue right now (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bree, LihTox

      All Joe 6 pack careas about is that they just got a lot cheaper.

      •  Not True (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bree, alizard, Coherent Viewpoint

        People are very concerned about the wild fluctuations.  Maybe its 1.96 now but will it be 2.30 in a week.  The price can just 50 cents in a day.

        No one believes these lower prices are stable.

        No other product jumps around like this.

        Some are very worried about the winter.  In the east I guess you guys use oil for some unknown reason while other places use natural case.  Will natural gas double or triple like it did last year?

        People may feel relief but no security.

        •  Yeah, but (0+ / 0-)

          will they blame the insecurity on the Republicans or the Democrats?  The answer remains to be seen.

          When y'ain't got nothin', ya got nothin' to lose.

          by aerdrie faenya on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:00:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Why would they blame Democrats? (0+ / 0-)

            Democrat dont control anything.

            President Bush said today that his position on torture is that we dont do it, we've never done it, and we're going to stop doing it -Jay Leno

            by jj32 on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:15:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Maybe I should reword (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              It remains to be seen whether the Republicans will be held accountable at all.

              When y'ain't got nothin', ya got nothin' to lose.

              by aerdrie faenya on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:22:34 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  perhaps Democrats don't control anything. . . (0+ / 0-)

              but if they had no influence, why would corporations bother buying their votes? Perhaps our Senators who represented the financial industry instead of us during the bankruptcy vote should show up here and explain this to us.

              Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

              by alizard on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 02:37:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  The Bush effect (0+ / 0-)

          I don't think it an unreasonable prediction that gas prices will keep dropping now until November, to make the Republicans look good.  Exxon/Mobil sure has enough money right now to take a hit for the next couple of months.

          If we make gas prices THE issue (rather than just an issue), then double the odds of this happening.

        •  NG prices will go up (0+ / 0-)

          It's a "clean" fuel. As clean air regs make coal based energy more difficult to sell, NG is supposed to take its place. There is a lot of demand for NG in the pipeline.

          Note that burning NG creates C02:

           CH4 + 2 O2 -> CO2 + 2 H20

          You can't burn a hydrocarbon without producing CO2.

      •  Agreed (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        and "boot production is up 15%."  Doesn't matter to Joe Sixpack that it's up 15% from its down of 30% last month.

        Gosh, not only The Onion, but Orwell is becoming so prescient nowadays!

        When y'ain't got nothin', ya got nothin' to lose.

        by aerdrie faenya on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:58:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Excellant Diary! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mz Kleen

    Democrats have to get out front on this issue and correct the GOP distortions and make it clear to people:

    "We're for the people, they're for the powerful"

    Their Tax policies prove that.

    There is no escape for the GOP.
    The Democrats just need to talk about it:

    D-1993 = Fairer Tax code = Balanced budgets = Peace & Prosperity = lower poverty rates = higher salaries = low unemployment = real National Security!

  •  Bush has it right (10+ / 0-)

    Fundamentalist religions are based on pain and suffering as pennance for sin. Good economies, happininess and security go against this belief system. People vote for Republicans because Republicans repeatedly punish you for being bad. Shitty economy, no job, war, death- lots of pain and suffering on a sub conscious level. An authoritarian figure telling you you werent worthy enough, so now you must be punished. Too many felt guilty about being prosperous in the Clinton years-prosperity came way too easy, and people couldnt process it against their core belief of you should be suffering and have to work hard.  People who believe in this concept of pain and suffering as pennance will always vote for people that give this to them. Low self esteem in the voting masses allows this to continue... Until the average American realizes that the secret to life is happiness and not pain and suffering, we will continue to elect officials that give us what we are subsciously want.

  •  He's going to remind us of '93? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I hope not! I hated being 13 years younger. And peace time, who needs it? And torture was something other countries did. Things are fine as they are!

    It is simply an insult to those who came before us and sacrificed so much on our behalf to imply that we have more to be fearful of than they did. -Al Gore

    by kitebro on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:42:14 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, in the words of Br'er Rabbit (0+ / 0-)

    "Please don't throw me in the briar patch."

    "Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed." General Buck Turgidson

    by muledriver on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:43:07 PM PDT

  •  Can we go back to 1979 ? One long party ! (0+ / 0-)

    I mean now that was a good year

    •  I vote for 1969 (0+ / 0-)

      I had just turned legal. 18 years old and living in N'orleans. :)

      fact does not require fiction for balance

      by mollyd on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:51:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Let's make that 1968 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Then we can keep Nixon from getting in there and hiring Rumsfeld and Cheney, the two who put their flunkies in place, (Bush I and Bush II). And knowing what we know now, maybe we can stop MLK and Robert from getting killed while we're at it.

        I'd like to think that the last thing that went through the warden's mind, besides that bullet, was how did Andy get the best of him. The Shawshank Redemption

        by William Domingo on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 04:11:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The problem is (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Coherent Viewpoint

    that in our national collective memory all most people remember about the Clinton years is the salacious Monica Lewinsky saga.  They have forgotten all about peace and prosperity; although many of the ordinary people who had good jobs and whose kids had a better education system than now could look forward to a happy and worry free retirement.  They all forgot it was the Democratic Party that brought them those things.  Yup, all they remember is a blue dress.

    It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness - Eleanor Roosevelt

    by oibme on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:45:52 PM PDT

  •  but (3+ / 0-)

    the good ole days of the 90's were to good to last at last the gopers come along and tell us that it is not good to be so independant and happy with a surpluse in the bank. we must have war and pestilence, we must invade somebody, anybody to show the world how great we are. and here we are 5 pluse years later and everybody in the world hates us, who who'da thought. thanks gwb for the memories, NOT.  peace the only way.

  •  Clinton did not run up the credit card (0+ / 0-)

    and as we all know someone has to pay for the follies of children who think that money grows on trees, especially when the taxpayers are the owners of the Bush child's credit card.

  •  Oh, no! Not the comfy chair! (4+ / 0-)

    Please!! Anything but that...

  •  Maybe they'll run against his penis. n/t (0+ / 0-)

    "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

    by Five of Diamonds on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:51:52 PM PDT

  •  The Onion piece (0+ / 0-)

    Is priceless, not to mention prescient.  Thanks for pointing it out.

  •  And from Atrios... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Five of Diamonds

    Fox News Fun

    Well, I hear that Clinton had his interview with Chris Wallace, which will be aired on Sunday. Apparently Wallace had promised that the first half of the interview would be about the Clinton Global Initiative, but he broke that promise and for his second question he said something along the lines of "what my viewers want to know most is why you didn't do more about terrorism and Osama Bin Laden."

    I've been told Clinton responded with a massive smackdown, putting Wallace in his place with a defense of Democrats and his administration's record.

    On the other hand...

    Since they know we'll give up on a fight... why shouldn't they just keep on lying?

    Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime. -- Ernest Hemingway

    by spread the word IRAQ NAM on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 02:52:45 PM PDT

  •  Top Ten Rethug Rip-Offs (0+ / 0-)

    Click on the link and see the REAL Republican economic legacy from the Bushy/Rethugs.

  •  Hahahahahaha... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    alizard, atdnext

    they're going to actively remind people of the Clinton years?

    People remember that they were happy, and well-paid, and the money was a-flowing and everyone felt so safe that we could nitpick about whether Clinton held up air traffic to get a haircut or not.  Tax increase?  I don't remember a tax increase, because money and job security weren't an issue for me.  My company loved me and I was getting 5% raises every year plus bonuses.

    The Republicans' utter inability to recognize how popular Clinton was never ceases to amaze me.  If Clinton could have run for a third term, he would have been re-elected.

    By all means, go right ahead and run against people's last happy memories and the last popular president we had in the White House.

    •  Hehe : ) (0+ / 0-)

      Yes, let them make this election about Clinton...
      Then perhaps enough people will come to vote to bring our country "back to the future"! : )

      I'm keeping California blue... How about you?

      by atdnext on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:03:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Remember Baghdad Bob? (0+ / 0-)

    He was the Press guy who was telling the media of the great military victories of the Iraq army as the bombs were going off in the background?  

    He offered quite a lesson for the Bush Administration: no matter what the conditions on the ground, no matter what the evidence to the contrary, not matter how absurd your position, stick to the talking points.

    Move away from the talking points and you have to think.  Or worse yet, you have to engage the real world.

    I don't really fault Bush for taking this approach.  I suspect that he believes what he says (scary, huh) It got him into the White House--what would motivate him to change now?

    I DO fault the media.  They let the administration say these completely assinine things and print them as though there is some shred of credibility.  

  •  Who's going to pay for this? (0+ / 0-)

    More Drug-Resistant TB Seen in U.S.

    The worst forms of the killer tuberculosis bug have been gaining ground in the United States, alarming public health officials over imported drug-resistant strains of a disease that is mostly under control in this country.

    Although the number of drug-resistant TB cases in the U.S. is small compared to developing nations, health officials here warn that visitors from other countries who are unaware of their infections are bringing over the deadliest mutations.

    With heckuva-job-people in positions of authority, where are we headed with these new TB strains?  Who's going to pay for what?

    Heckuva-job-people will shrug and say "It's only a few people."  By the time they wake up to problems, all they are concerned with is ass-covers.

    We need a new direction, yes that's right.  And .... WE NEED A NEW RUDDER TO STEER THE SHIP OF STATE.


  •  Welcome to Bush's Bizarro World (0+ / 0-)

    Like the backwards planet in the old Superman comics, Bush's world is the antithesis of all that human beings find desirable. Bush speak is also remarkably similar to that of the Superman rejects who inhabited the strange planet and who looked and sounded like the Frankenstein monster. Like these intellectually challenged beings Bush is puzzled by the human desires for peace, happiness, and prosperity. He sees conflict, massive debt, and misery as our true ideals.

    •  no, Bush sees (0+ / 0-)

      massive amounts of unearned wealth for his circle of friends as an ideal. Everything else is collateral damage to objects that normal humans call "real people".

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 02:45:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yeah, because... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    NOTHING is worse than a tax increase.  Not even TORTURE!  Not even SPYING!  Not even ELECTION FRAUD!  

    I could go on....

  •  Acid, Amnesty And Abortion From the Seventies... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dochackenbush, wakemeup7nov06

    has turned into the two T's of the 21st century. Taxes and Terrorists. The Republicans are counting that more than 50% of the electorate will not be able to think things through. Will see. I think George and Karl might have a tough time. I can't believe that they are going to let Mr. 40% approval lead this argument over the next few weeks. Every time he hit the trail to sell his SS privatization plan last year, his numbers sank. Maybe it will work better for him now. It's simple. The two T's. The reason we have a moron for a President is because he is a Republican. You see, it really doesn't take much to pitch GOP policy. The public doesn't expect much thought from a Republican either. Democratic policies have to be explained. You can translate the words of anyone who wonders, "What is the  Democratic message?" to "Do you have anything dumbed down enough for someone with a limited attention span to understand?"

    Good Government. Traffic Lights Aren't All That Weird. Vote Democratic!

    by HL Mungo on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:25:56 PM PDT

    •  About the Democratic message (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HL Mungo

      While the MSM might be convinced that everything has to be dumbed down to a 10-second sound bite, I'm not convinced the people are that way. This attention span thing might be true in peace time, like it was in the 90s during the Clinton presidency, but Iraq has made everything very serious. Of course we'll see what people think on November 7th, but my feeling is that the oversimplification that the Republicans depend on will fail this time, the stakes have changed.

      That's it. I've had it with these @%#& Republicans in the @%#& House and the @%#& Senate.

      by wakemeup7nov06 on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 04:27:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Is everyone as sick of all this as I am? (0+ / 0-)

    Why do we have to be ashamed of our country and our so-called leaders  - and I count both parties?  Maybe as Shakespeare said,

    "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
    But in ourselves, that we are underlings."

    Maybe the fault is us, the American people. It's who we elect that reflects maybe who we are.

    That great document begins "We, the people" We have shirked our duties as citizens, we have given away our freedoms, our rights, for comfort, for illusions of security and safety, for bread and circuses, for TV and consumption.

    Who has done anything hard, who has suffered, who is in prision? Not us Kossacks, that's for damn sure.

    My father was a labor organizer in the oil fields, I remember as a young child a car driving by and a shotgun blast through our front window.

    Do we today have the guts, the gumption to do more than blog, make funny Leiberman floats, and make fun of Tweety Bird and others?

    So far our great success has been to take down another Democrat (arguably not a great Democrat but surely no DeLay).

    We have lost touch that we are a nation born of treason and revolution.

    by victor lazlo on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:25:59 PM PDT

  •  The people are more responsible than the (0+ / 0-)

    government. We can only hope they run on this agenda. The average person has gotten next to nothing out of these tax cuts other than a mortgage on their children's future. The only reason we had a balanced budget is because 20% of the electorate voted for Perot in 1992. People want fiscal responsibility. It's not like we have to look far back to see the benefits of a fairer tax code.

    If evolution is outlawed, only outlaws will evolve.

    by jhecht on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:26:51 PM PDT

  •  Lou Dobbs Lie (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Did you just watch Lou Dobbs.  His segment on Democrats  irony on War on the Middle Class and yet is angling for Guest Worker Program which hurts the middle class,  thus not really working for the middle class.  

    Can you believe that--Linking Democrats with the Guest worker program  aying  that Dems only are the one asking for it.

    We should remind Lou Dobbs,  it is the Republicans who want guest worker program.  Democrats however are for legalizing workers alreaddy here and working for a long time illegally because it is just fair.  Because we all know we cannot deport them because their services are needed.  Democrats however are against the Guest Worker Program for new workers  and are for border security and enforcement for employers hiring illegals.

    netroots-middleclass wing of Dem party?

    by timber on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:44:29 PM PDT

  •  The Clinton years (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Contary to what ABC's "mocu-mentory" said about 9/11 being all Bill Clinton's fault, I wonder the Republicans will mention this when they talk about "The Clinton years"?

    President wants Senate to hurry with new anti-terrorism laws,  July 30, 1996

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton urged Congress Tuesday to act swiftly in developing anti-terrorism legislation before its August recess.

    But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.


    I'd like to think that the last thing that went through the warden's mind, besides that bullet, was how did Andy get the best of him. The Shawshank Redemption

    by William Domingo on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 04:00:32 PM PDT

  •  What a pathetic scare tactic. (0+ / 0-)

    But Bush is stuck with it. Tax cuts are good, no matter who gets them and at what expense.

  •  It makes perfect sense... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    katied, Valahan run against Bill Clinton.  'Cause if they tried to run against Woodrow Wilson, they'd just look silly.

    "...the big trouble with dumb bastards is that they are too dumb to believe there is such a thing as being smart." -- Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

    by Roddy McCorley on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 04:27:33 PM PDT

  •  Perfect Sense (0+ / 0-)

    What makes perfect sense to me is Karl Rove and his October surprise. I cant help but think that Osama is going to be found in October.

    How will the dems fight back against that? What will they do? They cant even stick together on the other issues how will they stick together if Osama is found?

    You know I am really worried about this election coming up. I cant help but think that the dems are going to blow a great opportunity.

  •  Why they are running against Clinton. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    In part, they are trying to rally the base. They are also trying to reframe the debate.

    Right-wingers HATE Clinton. They hate him for so many reasons, none of the valid or relavent.

    They hate him for raising taxes.
    They hate him for letting gays in the military. (Remember, "don't ask, don't tell" was considered liberal in 1993.)
    They hate him for the assault weapons ban.
    They hate him for the Brady Law.
    They hate him for "dodging the draft", even though he didn't. (He used his deferrments, then entered the draft. However, he drew 311 in the lottery.)
    They hate his triangulation.
    They hate him for getting re-elected.
    They hate him for doing things they didn't like.
    They hate him for taking credit for the things they did like.
    They hate him for getting a blowjob in the oval office.
    They hate him for lying about said blowjob.

    We see this as a foolish move, but it is not. We see Clinton as a good President, or at least a competent one. However, they are reframing the debate to one of "character". The message will be something like "We may not be perfect, but we're people like you and you can trust us." This is an emotional strategy and the Democrats are probably going to be blindsided by it again.

    The Democrats will throw numbers back and the Republicans will go back to the emotional appeals. Guess who will win that game.

    So far, the Democrats STILL have not had the courage or the nerve to go for America's gut. That is where elections are won and lost.

    •  Sadly, I think you're right, wayward. (0+ / 0-)

      The Democratic party is tragically inept at grasping the importance of emotion when it comes to casting votes and winning elections.  They continually make the mistake of thinking that if they spout statistics and logic, voters will correctly identify which party is better for them.  Republicans chuck that and go for the gut.  Plus, why bother with facts when you can lie convincingly?  I've observed that the main difference between the two parties is that Republicans constantly assume voters are dumber and lazier than they actually are.  Democrats constantly assume voters are smarter and more inquisitive than they actually are.  Unfortunately, the bigger blunder is in overestimating voters and doggedly repeating your logical mantra.  At the end of the day, Americans want to have a drink, not think.  Democrats ask them to think while Republicans smack 'em in the shoulder and say, "let's go get drunk and shoot some pool."  I so wish this party would slap some quarters down and start callin' shots. :(

    •  also remember that (0+ / 0-)

      the wingnut base was largely left out of the Clinton-era economic boom, because they lacked education, skills, and to be blunt, brains.

      What they got was a side effect of an improved economy, i.e. even the warm-body jobs were paying better because of labor market pressure, the people with brains and skills or people HR departments desperately hoped had brains and skills were being picked up, leaving behind job openings for low-income people dumb enough to be Republicans.

      Yes, this is oversimplified, but I think it's a start towards a useful analysis.

      The possible opportunities for Democrats are if the GOP are stupid enough to try to. . . in effect, run Bush against Clinton in the places which did benefit during the 1990s.

      IF our Beltway friends and the DLC network of high-paid consultants are smart enough to exploit it.

      I'm not all that optimistic.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 02:58:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Unfortunately, GOP not that stupid (0+ / 0-)

        The GOP is very good at targeting their audience.

        They talk about "values" to the Church goer, guns to the hunter, taxes to the middle class, and "terrorism" to, well, those who can't locate the Middle East on a map.

        This excellent targeting, combined with the wonkish and often unfocused efforts of the Democrats, is why Republicans win elections.

        This targeting is why Republicans hold power (Governor, a Senate Seat, or a chamber of the legislature) in 49 states and were about 200 votes away from adding Washington and making it 50. Someone like Ahnold does not run the same campaign as someone like Jim DeMint and for good reason.

        As dirty as Ohio was, if Kerry had won Ohio, he still would not have lost the popular vote. The Republicans still would control both the House and the Senate.

        Republicans are good at winning elections, and Democrats are good at losing them.


    George Bush’s $3 trillion dollar tax giveaway to the rich has been a disaster for average Americans. Supply-side (trickle-down) economics is a bogus theory promoted by those who benefit from it. In a mature capitalist system, supply side never rules, it’s always the demand side of the equation that governs growth and well-being. Think about the 1930s Depression, General Motors had plenty of supply, but demand evaporated.

    Previous U.S. recessions have been cured with only $200 billion in tax cuts targeted to the middle class, because the consumer (the great middle class) spends that tax cut and primes the economic pump. But George Bush has raised the debt that your children and grandchildren will have to pay from almost $6 trillion to almost $9 trillion for this current recovery, which is uniquely without wage gains, and which has shrunk the middle class that makes America strong and great.

    Corporations (the supply side) are now loaded with cash, but there’s no place to spend it because they don’t see any demand. So many corporations are using that cash to buy back their stock  -- WOW, isn’t supply side wonderful in how it fulfills America’s needs? As the rich-poor divide increases, we’re headed toward previous shining examples of trickle-down economics: South America of the recent past and feudalism in the Middle Ages (South America and feudalism also had no wage gains). This is such good evil by our compassionate conservative, Christian President and his myriad of engorged friends.

  •  And remeber that Republican congress that thought (0+ / 0-)

    it was better to shut down the government than fund it.  The same incompetent bunch is there today.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site