Bush Sr. in Kennedy's speech - once again, Sr. damns Jr.'s policy

[Woodstock]

In their joint memoir, "A World Transformed," President George H.W. Bush and his National Security Adviser, Brent Scowcroft, reflected on their own experiences with Iraq and the Gulf War in 1991. They had been criticized in some quarters for halting that war after their dramatic victory in Kuwait, instead of going on to Baghdad to depose Saddam Hussein.

Here is what they wrote: "Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in 'mission creep,' and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible...We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, there was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see...Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome."

They were right...

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1016-15.htm

[mhr]

1. But Does It Matter

Here is my Email to Mike Malloy last Friday.
------
Hi Mike,

In listening to the show this evening I hear all of the repeated wishful
thinking that democrats desperately cling to.

Democrats want to believe so badly that things can change they act like
vultures arguing over table scraps.

There are two differences between the republicans and democrats - fire
in the belly and high-level organization.

The democrats do not show the zeal and willingness to win, and the
democrats do not speak with one voice.

When we see rabid attack dog democrats sent out to eviscerate the
president daily then we will know that there is some fire.

When we see democratic talking points disseminated every day then we
will know that the party is organized and focused.

Sadly, when we have only Robert Byrd and Ted Kennedy willing to speak
out, this is not sufficient nor disciplined enough to make a dent.

When all Senators and Representatives speak with one voice publicly we
will finally begin to see an effective party with effective results.

[Woodstock]

3. I found this link from May - nothing has changed

http://www.crisispapers.org/Editorials/missing-in-action.htm

Missing in Action: The Democratic Party
By Ernest Partridge
Co-Editor, "The Crisis Papers."
May 12, 2003


Never in the history of American politics has so little been done with so much.

The Democratic party has at its disposal a devastating array of issues, foreign and domestic, moral and economic, and yet there it sits, at best dumb-frozen and impotent, and at worst complicit in the crimes and outrages of the Bush Administration.

{a nice summary of rotten things W has done}...

Nor is this the end of it. But you know all that by now. And therein is the final outrage: none of this is secret. All these atrocities, these betrayals of our democracy, are known or knowable to all who bother to examine the condition of our politics and economy today.

Meanwhile, the Democrats, the "opposition party," refuse to oppose, in the apparent belief that their winning strategy is to adopt the pose of a pale and reluctant caricature of the Republican party. Still worse, their tactics are poor imitation of those of the GOP, as DNC Chairman, Terry McAuliffe desperately seeks out corporate fat-cats for the party to sell out to. This is plain stupid: the Democrats will never win by playing on GOP turf with GOP rules...

[mhr]

5. Good Find Woodstock

Many of us can see the problem but are powerless to do anything.

Reminds me of being self aware as you drown or burn to death until all consciousness is lost.

The democratic party is close to unconsciousness.

Sadly, I wish it were not so.

[ewagner]

7. Right on MHR

You also hit on a key point which I have been harping about for some time. The subject: ORGANIZATION

I worked for Republican candidates in my youth. The biggest difference between the two parties is organization. Republicans are organized (stratified) from the National Party right down to "block captains" in every city and county.

In my later years, as a Democrat, I successfully employed the repub organization strategy to be elected to public office twice.

The problem seems to be that our party is very suspicious of leadership and organization. We believe so much in equality and the right of every voice to be heard that we cannot bring ourselves to impose discipline in the form of leadership.

In our party the National leadership is similar to what I described above. They seem uncomfortable with building an organizational structure and operating a coordinated campaign within that structure.

Good post...we need to be talking about this more often and in greater detail.

[aquart]

9. Speak with one voice? Before the primaries?

Why not do away with primaries and decide it all in the back rooms like the good old days?

Hell, do away with elections. They're divisive.

Speak with one voice? Nice totalitarian message.

Why not try something new and different: let the DEMOCRATIC VOTERS decide what voice we want to speak for us.

Or hadn't that entered your mind?

[ewagner]

12. Sorry for the late post

In my mind, the primary process can take place just as it has now, the only difference being that the party organizational structure should be put in place to support the eventualy nominee. I don't see one as exclusive of the other.

Even if the primaries determine who will fill the organizational structure, the framework should be in place.

[Noordam]

2. But all that changed when Saddam tried to killl Whistle-Ass's Father

IMHO, that was one of the main reasons we attacked Saddam, and the PNAC members only feed it.

[aquart]

10. Wasn't a teensy bit of doubt that ever happened?

[VeniceBeat]

4. Ted Just Received GHWB's Award for Best Legislator

or something like that.

Anyone have a link?

Quite a slap at Junior!

[mhr]

6. Laurels and Wreaths For The Condemned

Make your enemy feel good as send him to the gallows.

Standard operating procedure for tyrants and kings.

I suggest reading Machiavelli and others to retune our collective understanding.

[VeniceBeat]

11. Not a Slap at Junior?

Not a signal to GHWD's CIA buddies that Jr. is "fair game," that "the Crazies" have gone too far and need to be reigned in?

[Woodstock]

8. I just found this

Thanks for the heads up, I wasn't aware of that.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20031006-101700-4181r.htm

Heavens, the civility of it all. Exactly one month from today, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy will square his shoulders and step out on a stage at Texas A&M University to receive a significant honor.

The Massachusetts Democrat has been selected to receive the 2003 George Bush Award for Excellence in Public Service on Nov. 7, directly from the hands of former President George H.W. Bush himself.

Mr. Kennedy will be the first American to receive the award, which has gone to former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl in recent years.

The senator has been lauded as a man who "consistently and courageously fought for his principles ... his commitment to excellence in public policy and his devotion to public service serve as an inspiration to all Americans." ...