Although things are looking worse for GWB, he's won every fight.

[kansasblue]

Name one thing he's wanted and hasn't got.

Social Security? He still working that one.

Bolton? No final decision yet.

[JDPriestly]

1. That's why we have to win elections.

I take it you are from Kansas. What's the plan for winning there?

[kansasblue]

3. Dean's first stop was in Kansas.

We have a Dem Gov up for re-election.

[JDPriestly]

50. Great.

Wish there were a way for us in blue states to do more to help Democrats in red states. Any suggestions?

[Imagevision]

28. Bush also got the news mwdia not to cover Dead Troops returning

coverage -- Bush got Newsweek to retact their story about the Koran and Gitmo, although the story ended up being accurate as even the Pentagon admitted there were instances of Koran kicking weeks later.

Bush got corporate media to not cover voter irregularities in Ohio, so you're pretty right what hasn't Bush got? Maybe, yes just maybe when this DSM gets some legs Bush may get something he doesn't want.

[noamnety]

2. Kerik?

That didn't go so well.

[kansasblue]

4. Who/what is Kerik?

[babylonsister]

7. Kerik is/was Guiliani's pal who had been selected for

Director of Homeland Security until his ugly past was exposed.

[saltpoint]

8. Bernard Kerik, business associate of Rudy Giuliani

whom Dubya appointed to follow Ridge at Homeland Security, without apprently checking Kerik's file very closely.

Kerik had used one of the relief apartments near ground zero to boink some woman who was not his wife, and there are serious questions of financial mishandling still pending.

Homeland Security should not be a deparmtment a man like that should be considered for, let alone appointed to.

[SpiralHawk]

18. Boinking?

Those Republicans just don't let up on the illicit sex, do they. Wonder if they can spell C L I N I C A L L Y R E P R E S S E D

[carpetbagger]

20. It's better.

If I remember, Kerik was cheating on his mistress in that one as well as his wife.

I actually think it's not the worst epitath to describe him. I like this one better...

The Saudis deported him for not respecting privacy rights.

[saltpoint]

24. I think you're right on both the mistress/wife deal & the Saudis, too.

That Bernie Kerik was a class act, wasn't he?!

[Imagevision]

49. Bush? Bush will have DSM problems -- count on it.

[Demit]

5. Always a first time. And he's due. He's OVERdue.

[saltpoint]

6. He hasn't won the fight with the historians yet.

They get their last ups before the game is over.

And they have a very powerful lineup with major staying power.

I would argue that Dubya's administration is not victorious in the traditional way presidents are evaluated. His Social Security proposals are dead in the water despite vigorous campaign appearances to shove it down people's throats; our allies regard us, and rightly so, as aggressive and foolhardy; the BEST the little turd has done is aorund 56% and his usual approval ratings fall at 50 or lower; the Iraq assault has become increasingly unpopular; the economy is under serious strain and its spending priorities under Bush et al are totally wacko; he's perceived as a little jerk playing cowboy with the big boys instead of a thoughtful statesman-level visionary; and not least, he's anti-science -- a field of endeavor that tends to outlast political impediments.

D-minus, tops.

[GreenArrow]

23. D Minus?

You are much more generous than I am. I'd give him a big fat ZERO. He's done NOTHING of value.

[saltpoint]

25. Hi, GreenArrow.

I'd go with your grade without question except that he did build that ball diamond on the White House lawn for kids to play baseball.

Other than that, I honestly can't think of anything he's done that wasn't self-serving and/or disatrous.

(But you're right -- a big fat zero is probably the fairer mark!)

[bunkerbuster1]

47. Ok, ok... the off-road diesels emission standards.

I'll give him that, too. I'm sure it was a bone for then-EPA chief, not-crazy-person Christie Todd Whitman, but it counts.

[fujiyama]

26. Bush doesn't care how history will judge him

Remember what he said, "We'll be dead".

All that matters to him and the rest of the pukes is ramming through their fascist agenda in the time they have.

[saltpoint]

34. Hi, fujiyama. You're right -- Dubya has dismissed history.

But it outlives him and will be the final judge of his disatrous, failed presidency.

I suppose I'll be long dead as well, but I leave the historians to their work.

Dubya has enjoyed some far-right gains, that's so. But I'm guessing they are polarizing in the present and will be condemning of him in the future.

[LisaM]

9. Because he's a freaking spoiled bully

He gets whatever he wants, always has, thanks to a scurvy group of enablers.

[Spectral]

10. They have sewed up every branch of government as well as the M$M

They have no overt opposition that means anything

[Ikonoklast]

11. Remember one thing, though

even if you win every skirmish that you get into, if you lose the last battle, in the end you still lose. This has not been played out yet; the American people are just now starting to see just what a mean-spirited lying bunch of thieves they elected.

[Sir Jeffrey]

12. Not true...

He still hasn't signed the energy bill he's wanted for five years.

He lost the nuclear option fight.

He did not want to go to the UN prior to Iraq, but he was forced to...and that made a big difference in that he had to stand in front of the world and lie his ass off.

I'm sure there are many others...but you need to remember that he essentially owns the other branches of govt. It's real easy to pass shit when you have no opposition worth a damn.

[KoKo]

13. Yes...he has...and when Dems want to change the dialog they are trashed.

Why has Bush won every fight? Because he has the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" supporting him...and so far...we've not been able to dent it..although there are "cracks" in the Texas investigations of Abramof linking to the Vast Conspiracy of Norquist who get's funding from every RW Source/Think Tank/RW Fundies Church/YOU NAME it that he can get to fund him...and his sources have unlimited pocketbooks and mucho influence with K-Street (Corporatists) in league with the sincerely devout Christians in the House and Senate who do "Bed and Breakfast" in their favorite haunts where the "prayer breakfasts" and "other treats" are in abundance in the "Corporate/Religious Capital of the US-- Washington, DC!"

[Fire Walk With Me]

14. You're right. They've presented a new definition of selfishness and greed.

It's going to require everyone to stand up and be heard, in order to change this. The worse it gets, the more likely this is to happen.

[moondust]

15. But what do you expect?

His fellow gangsters control the entire federal government. My question is: why has he even come close to losing anything?

[LunaC]

16. But the TIMING is different now

Mid-June looks ripe for shit hitting the fan
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3794501#3802167

Conyers petition at 250,000+ signatures, Conyers holding hearings, Gold Star Families meeting with Congress......

Have courage, ye of little faith....This time it's DIFFERENT!

And Le Smirk is at the mercy of the Heavens.

[GetTheRightVote]

17. * is losing in the polls, his days are numbered now, soon evil will end

* is losing the hearts of the American people, he is finished.

:kick:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

19. American spy plane over China. First months.

He was getting his ass kicked before 7-11 +2.

[Spectral]

27. 7-11 + 2?

:donut:

[Hippo_Tron]

30. I think he means September 11th

[Spectral]

31. It made me hungry for some really bad nachos and a Big Gulp.

:)

[berni_mccoy]

21. That's why we need to do THIS:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1843183&mesg_id=1843183

[candy331]

22. Surely you know that the ultimate defeat is still waiting to be had for

him don't you? "Live by the sword die by the sword" and who has proved the master wrong?

[Hippo_Tron]

29. Federal Marriage Ammendment, The Republican Senate in 2001

The better question is: What has he lost post 9/11. The answer, nothing really significant.

God I miss those pre 9/11 days when we knew that he was a moron but it didn't matter because he was a lame duck anyway.

[jmcon007]

32. Watch him lose the war, though. He's going down hard.

[Imagevision]

33. 06 elections will play a big part on Bush's repuke senators backing

him -- already 50 of them are against his stance on stem cell research.

DSM gets some legs? could lose some repug seats in the senate. that's a given. When Bush goes down it'll be thru resignation, he keeps his checks that way.

[Spectral]

35. Let's hope so

It would be nice to see this guy get what is coming to him.

[Irreverend IX]

36. He hasn't gotten everything...

The neocons haven't been able to get rid of the filibuster, for one. They also thought they'd be able to take control of Iraq and secure a steady supply of oil. Instead it's turned into a bloody PR disaster and the oil pipelines are getting RPGed every other day. The release of the Abu Ghraib pictures and the revelation of Jeff Gannon were two more big hits to GWB.

[magnolia]

37. You're looking at the glass half empty.

Look at it half full.

Right now...today...Bush is losing on:

Social Security

Bolton

Stem Cell Research

[Justice]

38. Also, each issue is getting harder, messier

There isn't the lockstep coordination and the airtight administration. Things are messier, stuff is hanging out there. He cannot build momentum the way he did in his first term.

[magnolia]

39. He isn't winning in the polls.

His new low today 43%.

[deutsey]

40. But somehow that doesn't seem to translate into electoral results

Strange, huh?

[magnolia]

42. Strange...yes...but...

...I'm not convinced that the electoral results are accurate.

[deutsey]

43. Well, that's what I was implying in my dry, sarcastic way.

Maybe too dry. :hi:

[losdiablosgato]

41. One thing that scares me about GWB is

That he is not stupid. People think he is and they underestimate him. But to be frank he has been to luck, for it to be just luck. He is smart and that makes him even more dangerous.

[Spectral]

44. That stupid image is good cover. And it is continually reinforced

Do you remember in Farenheight 911 when young W was shown without his Texas accent?

[leesa]

45. Of course he has. He has the full weight of corporate Amerikkka

behind him. They stole the elections to install him and a GOP house. This is what is known as corporate fascism. It will still collapse on him because it's unsustainable.

[CWebster]

46. And here is why

Dean isn't the problem
DEMOCRATS ARE running against Howard Dean instead of George W. Bush and the GOP -- or, better yet, running for principles that matter to the country.It makes little sense, unless the intent is to destroy what's left of their shell of a political party.
Dean, the head of the Democratic National Committee, is under attack by fellow Democrats who are allegedly upset at his partisan rhetoric. Critics such as Senators Joseph Biden of Delaware and former senator John Edwards of North Carolina are taking their shots at Dean, just as if they were sitting next to him during a debate in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, or Manchester, N.H. They sound like they are positioning themselves for a future presidential campaign rather than working together to rebuild a party with a message for the future...

...If Democrats want to get outraged, why not get outraged over daily efforts by the Republican National Committee to marginalize Democratic opposition? The RNC dubbed Democrats ''the Party of No." The RNC is constantly spewing out press releases accusing Democrats of ''hypocritical and obstructionist" comments and ''baseless attacks." When liberal Democrats stand up to conservatives in Congress, they are derided as ''the Michael Moore branch of the Democratic Party."
...Congress is a place where voters expect partisanship to yield to compromise. And Congress is where the Democrats have failed to convey a sense of mission and purpose, probably because too many are running around the country running for president.

For Democrats, running for president in 2008 apparently means running against Dean in 2005. It is so much easier to run against the former Vermont governor than to fight for real principles. Bush meets with Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair, and the two are finally forced to address a 2002 memo written by a British official suggesting that the United States had ''fixed " intelligence to justify the impending invasion of Iraq. Both leaders deny that the memo accurately reflects events. Case closed? Where are the Democrats brave enough to press the president on that issue?

...If Democrats in Congress did their job, Dean would be the chorus. Now he's the whole act. Dean's fellow Democrats would rather boo him than themselves.




http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/06/09/dean_isnt_the_problem/

[Lexingtonian]

48. The Red Baron only lost once

and that was one time it mattered whether he won or lost.

The story is one of Bush's Party overwhelming ours, or more precisely: the people/group leading ours and their moderate policy approach, in 1999-2002.

It took until early 2004 to recoalesce Democrats around a different, nearly liberal, policy approach. It is successful in driving up opposition to the hardline conservative game, in slowly dislodging voter demographics from supporting Republican policies. We are now at the point where Democrats are agreed in opposition, have gotten Indies and nonpartisans to nearly full opposition, and moderate Republicans are now starting to become opposed too.

Now that Democrats and Indies have nearly decided that they hold common views, the time has come for Democrats to fully formulate and unite around a positive agenda, an alternative. There is still time (a few months) until Indies give up fully on the last Bush Administration policy they trust in somewhat, the one on Terrorism, but the pressure for Democrats to start writing an agenda for the country to consider- which they couldn't do last year, due to internal disagreements and lack of Indie expectations/interest- is starting to build. Indies are going to start demanding to see one; Democrats have been engrossed in squabbling and not getting down to business.

Unfortunately, this means the further shakeup and sortout of Democrats and the internal power structure of the Party. The losers of 1999-2003, the leaders of the centrist and conservative factions that ran things until that time within the Democratic Party, are still sore and not conceding. That's what the Dean fracas is about- Dean is their great defector, the militant moderate who has slipped over to the liberal wing halfway since he realized the meaning of the Kerry victory in the primaries, and so he's the inevitable lightning rod.

So the story in Bush's end is not that he might lose one or two. In the compromise-deficient politics of the present a side either wins all the ones that matter or loses them all. When Bush gets defeated in something big, that means a power balance shift has taken place to his opposition. Right now we're in a brief period where Republicans are weak enough to be overwhelmed, but Democrats are not united enough internally to do it. The result is a period of unsightly compromises that will be voided and broken once one side gains the upper hand.

Think of it as a battlefield. To defeat the enemy and drive him away, each of his units has to be held at bay and pushed back, if not defeated fully. Our side has not yet won the battle, but in clash of unit after unit we're achieving the minimal objectives of containment and continuing to fight in a determined organized fashion while Republicans are faring worse. They may be on the offensive, but they are sending in their reserves and previously undefeated units into battle one by one to insufficient gain- we're bending but not breaking, not running of men or morale or space and defenses, routing their attackers here and one there on occasion, even. This is attrition, is winning, despite not having ostentatious victory to show for it. It's wearing the other side down, bleeding its reserves and morale and trust in themselves and their leaders and their weaponry and their abilities.

Like the Civil War South in early 1865, the problem for the Other Side is that they are fully mobilized. They don't have much left in the way of resources and the war is slipping against them, but they are a society designed to wage war and can't stop themselves. Our problems are those of the Civil War North- we are a society designed for peacetime and extremely weary of this game we consider barbarism, but we have the just cause and future on our side as well as the capabilities and resources to win it when we decide to outmatch the other side's efficiency and brutality and initiative and smaller numbers.

So never mind the running tally. Watch the big picture.