A new way to challenge the notion that Republicans will keep you safe

[Silvermint]

Time and time again, Republicans love to throw around the meme that they are the Party of Protection, that they will do everything in their power to make sure you're safe. We Democrats are merely sissies who lack the conviction to do what's necessary. Now, the botched response to Katrina helped shatter this image somewhat, but nevertheless, the cause for that event was natural and the blame for the aftermath was at least somewhat diffuse. Besides, hurricane-related political critiques don't really speak to the centrists and the so-called value voters in the same way that family issues can. As such, if we really want to dispel the mass-illusion that Republicans can keep you safe, I believe the Democrats should, in their attempt to nationalize this election, run on the following message:

"If we can't trust congressional Republicans to protect the children under their care, how can we trust America to be protected on their watch?"

Tie that statement in with the recently released NIE report revealing that the war in Iraq has made Americans less safe, and you've got a one-two punch that can't be ignored (not to mention one hell of a 30 second TV spot). Then, go on to remind voters that while Republicans talk about protecting families, Democrats have always done more than just talk (by providing health insurance, better education, a more tolerant society, and so forth). Proceed to re-emphasize the fact that congressional Republicans waited to act until the scandal became public, and then ask voters how comfortable they are with a leadership that only acts on threats once they know they can't bury the story any longer... how comfortable they are with a leadership that only acts after the damage is already done. Close with something memorable, like: "Use your vote this election to tell congress not to play politics with our protection." Fin.

[Acryliccalico]

1. The congress is bought and paid for by

monolithic corporations not the people of this country. :kick:

[ProgressiveEconomist]

2. I like the idea of piggy-backing other issue messages on Predatorgate

If Foley's "overfriendly" "naughty" emails didn't set off any alarm bells for Hastert, why would "bin Laden determined to strike inside the US" move Condi to warn the FAA or "shake the trees" at the FBI?

To keep us safe, our leaders need to know how to "connect the dots", need to be curious, need to ask lots of smart questions, and need to be ready to change course when there may be an iceberg ahead.

Dubya's Republican crew were too busy looting Social Security and plotting to acquire Iraqi oil reserves to pay attention to real threats like Foley and bin Laden.

[Demeter]

3. It Is the Meme--Our Welfare Queen Story

and it has the advantage of being true and relevent to all arguments about why GOP is not the way to go.

[exlrrp]

4. What about 9/11??

They sure didn't keep us safe from that, did they?
They also said they have kept us safe since then--what was 9/111?? A freebie? A do-over?? A Mulligan???

[yurbud]

6. on 9/11, they let their Saudi friends fund al Qaeda unmolested

so al Qaeda could molest us.

[Demit]

5. Call the "Party of Protection" what it is: a protection racket.

"Nice lil country ya got here, shame if sumpin happened to it..."

[yurbud]

8. I wish the Sopranos had followed through on that storyline more

When Tony gets involved with a councilman in the esplanade project.

That would have been a good civics lesson for America.

As is, politics to the lowest levels works the way Tony and his friends divide up a construction job: elected officials throw contracts to their donors and only negotiate how much they can pad (if even that) like Tony talking about how many no shows and no works they can have at each job.

[yurbud]

7. should we do six degrees of pedophile the way Bush does with 9/11?

Except with him it's more like two degrees of 9/11: "We got to peal hairtense tax ur al Kaidy's won."

[DarkTirade]

9. How about the old way...

just pointing out that the biggest terrorist attack on this country happened with Bush in office. And we still have yet to catch the guy responsible.

[Silvermint]

10. Wait a second...

... I thought that was Clinton's fault!

But yes, seriously, I also miss the good old days when clear evidence of significant and systematic failures was a pretty darned good reason to lose an election.

[DarkTirade]

11. That's something I really just didn't get about people who voted Bush

for the second term. You had two options. A decorated war veteran, or a man who not only dodged out of the war, and very well may have even dodged what little service he signed up for, but also PROVED that he could not protect this country. Yet people voted for him because they thought he could defend the country better. I just don't get it.