REPORT: CPAC Speakers Run From Bush Record

[babylonsister]

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/04/cpac-and-bush/

REPORT: CPAC Speakers Run From Bush Record

At last week’s Conservative Political Action Conference, attendees gathered to hear partisan attacks against progressives from the likes of Ann Coulter and former Swift Boat Veterans For Truth.

All the mud-slinging from the right obscured the fact that rarely was the name of the current sitting president ever mentioned. Bush’s job approval rests at one of its lowest points — 29 percent. Moreover, his rating among conservatives has dropped 13 points since last fall. Now, 65 percent of his base says they approve of the way he is handling his job as president, compared with 78 percent last October.

A review of the prominent keynote speeches from speakers at the CPAC conference reveals that many of them view the Bush effect more as albatross than an advantage:

FORMER GOV. MITT ROMNEY: Mentions of Bush: 0. Mentions of Ronald Reagan: 2.

FORMER GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Mentions of Bush: 1. Mentions of Reagan: 0. In the sole reference, Huckabee said, “I supported the Bush tax cuts in 2001. I still support them today.”

SEN. SAM BROWNBACK: Mentions of Bush: 1. Mentions of Reagan: 2. The only reference Brownback made to Bush was when he said, “On Social Security — and President Bush, God bless him, started this debate and discussion personal Social Security accounts.”

REP. DUNCAN HUNTER: Mentions of Bush: 0. Mentions of Reagan: 5.

RUDY GIULIANI: Mentions of Bush: 4. Mentions of Reagan: 15. One of Guiliani’s few references to Bush’s record was the following statement: “You’re going to succeed at some things, fail at others.”

[Monkeyman]

1. Would you not run from Bush's record too

[MethuenProgressive]

2. How many times did Ann Couter mention Bush?

She is, after all, the voice of the true Republican

[Peace Patriot]

3. How about we distribute political discussion time on our public airwaves (and we

own all of them) on the basis of Bush/Cheney approval ratings? I think Cheney is around 15%. Bush about twice that (his only support at any time, if the truth were known). Average it out to 20%. Re-distribute the political news/commentary accordingly. Bushites get to foam at the mouth and spew hatred and tell big lies on our public airwaves only 20% of the time. Reasonable discussion on a real political spectrum, from say real "Goldwater" conservatism all the way to Castroite Communism--representing the entire real spectrum in the western hemisphere--with Socialism and Liberalism somewhere in the middle, for the remaining 80% of airtime.

A person can dream. In fact, that is one of the lessons of the highly successful democracy movement in South America:

1. Transparent vote counting.
2. Grass roots organization.
3. Think big.

How they overcame the U.S./Bush Junta-backed rightwing military coup in Venezuela in 2002 is that one million people poured into the streets and surrounded Miraflores Palace (the seat of government) to demand the return of their kidnapped President and of Constitutional government. All those people had to ignore the crap that was being broadcast by all the TV stations (all corporate owned)--total disinformation--and use word of mouth to get accurate news. But they shouldn't have had to do that. The public airwaves belong to all of us. And whether they are being used by the Corporate Rulers to directly foment a coup, as they did in Venezuela, or to cover up a coup, as they did here in 2004, the lack of alternative views, variety, and a broad spectrum of opinion very nearly kills democracy. It should not be merely a dream to have fairness in the use of our public airwaves for political purposes. It should be a given. It NEEDS to be a given. And when it isn't, our democracy is in very great peril--as now.