Any time a Dem gets on TV to talk about the Rove scandal, we should be "framing" this to show
Republicans are weak on national security. This is our big chance to explode the myth about Republicans being "strong" in this area. (It's also our
duty to explode this myth - unless we want to keep letting the Republicans destroy our national security with their little misguided wars and their little politically motivated leaks.)
"Republicans are weak on national security." It's a simple message, just six words, and we should be saying it over and over and over again. (
"Republicans put politics about national security" is a nice variation, also just 6 simple words.)
Any Dem who's too stupid or too wimpy to stay on this message shouldn't be on the air - and eventually should be voted out of office. (I'm looking at you, Dianne Feinstein.)
Dianne said that Rove should probably have his security clearance revoked for the time being and that the White House had the means and the motive to leak Plame's name. Well, doesn't that just blow the lid off this thing? As if we don't know that the White House was involved ferchristsake. She wasn't well prepared, as usual.
She and all the Democrats should be trying to tie these guys up in knots with the obvious contradiction that the tough-guy national security Republicans have been caught red-handed being loosy-goosy with classified information for political reasons. They should always bring up the President. This isn't too difficult to do.
Imagine if Feinstein had said in reponse to Wolf's question about revoking Rove's security clearance,
"Well, Wolf, it is well established already that Karl Rove was involved in leaking Valerie Plame's identity to the press. His lawyer admitted just this week that he was one of Robert Novak's two sources. I have every faith that the special prosecutor will find out if there is evidence that he or anyone else broke the law by doing this. But I think that even Pat here would have to admit that regardless of whether it was legal or illegal, Karl Rove and others in the White House have showed an appalling lack of judgment. As the man in charge, the president has a responsibility for the actions of his staff. He should have called Karl Rove into his office and demanded an explanation and withdrawn his security clearance the minute it was found that he was involved in this. Breaking the law isn't the issue here, Wolf. This is about national security. We're at war. The president shouldn't be playing politics with this stuff."It would be helpful to show Bush as being either impotent to deal with Karl Rove, or covering for him, because it is imperative for Democrats over the long haul to begin to show the Republicans as being unable to deal responsibly with national security. If you look at what Roberts was saying it was basically, "Joe Wilson is a liar and his wife worked in Washington and anyway everybody leaks." Hardly the stuff of a macho "never complain, never explain" warrior, is it?
This is an opportunity for Democrats to change the long-standing narrative that the Republicans have built up about their national security prowess. If the Commander in Chief can't even call his own staff on the carpet when they screw up, then how tough is he? This is the second time in 25 years that we've had a two-term GOP president who has to be portrayed as dumb, distanced and out-of-it in order to cover for his staff running amuck. They're always out of the loop, aren't they? Never quite in charge when the bad shit happens, only the good.
It's time for the Democrats to start tying this into a bigger narrative about national security. These tough guys, these people who are going to keep us safe, seem to continually elect Presidents who are clueless about what's going on around them. Or, at least, that's what they are always forced to use as an excuse when they fuck up.
It takes time to build new storylines. Even if this one isn't very good, we really need get started on something. And that means that Democrats have to agree among themselves on a basic framework of criticism for Republican national security policy and practice. They need to internalize it so that when a guy like Roberts starts blathering, they can respond with vigor and authority without having to think too much about it.
Vague, off-point pablum like Feinstein's is exacerbating our problem. We look weak because we won't confront a blowhard like Roberts. And we are weak because we refuse to take every opportunity to show the American people that the Republicans are screw-ups on national security. That last should actually be pretty easy, because it patently true. --
Digby at Hullabaloo, 25 July 205
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(801 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
