Many have questioned why we see a perceived lack of outrage from Democrats with regards to the administration incompetence. I read a piece in the NY Times today and one paragraph struck me as telling.
The silence of many prominent Democrats in publicly criticizing Mr. Bush for his handling of the crisis reflects their conclusion that the president is on treacherous political ground and that attacking him would permit the White House to dismiss the criticism as partisan politics-as-usual, a senior Democratic aide said.
I am not debating the above rationale, it is obviously smart politically. The administration actions are clear and stark, with the American people painfully aware of the incompetence. You could argue that by displaying overt outrage, Democrats allow Republicans the opportunity to distract from the glaring truths.
However, on this profound issue that strikes to the core, should political consideration matter? I guess what I am saying is that legislators have become so hyper political that they can't articulate from the gut. If we say this, then x or y will happen. How will x or y shape public sentiment and our future electoral fortunes? On this issue, I say who cares.
Im sure there are members of the Democratic caucus as fundamentally outraged as we hear on the blogs, yet relative silence. Why has no one demanded resignations? Why has no one pointed out how Bush was AWOL when we needed action? I get it, let Bush sink in his own mess. But this issue is irrelevant politically, it is about a moral necessity to hold accountable, right here, right now.
Maybe it is a function of the times, that every word is chosen carefully, every move studied. Some would argue it shows sophistication, but given how this event has stripped the human dignity and brought the "evolved" society to its knees, can we not ask for apolitical approaches. Let it go Democrats, shoot from the hip and fuck the polls- tell it like it needs to be stated, in naked language.
