Though the USA scandal is big in Washington and in the blogosphere, I fear the average American is not all that impressed by the significance of what went on.
Why is that? For one thing, there's scandal fatigue. This administration has proven itself so unethical, that a revelation such as the USAs story is just another bucketful in a ocean of bullshit.
Another problem is that the default assumption for most Americans is that everything that goes on in DC is -- and by definition, should be -- "political." Not many Americans consider
any particular branch of the government "off limits" when it comes to political involvement.
Third, how many Americans even know what a US attorney is? Or does? Or who their boss is? Or how they get their jobs? Have you seen "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?" The average American adult could NOT pass a junior high school social studies exam today.
A key tactic for counteracting these impediments to the ultimate destruction of the Bush presidency is to discuss the scandal in terms that resonate with average Americans.
In other words, we'll get no further than we already have with this argument:
Karl Rove and Harriet Meiers should be forced to testify under oath because they encouraged the firing of some US attorneys for political reasons, including their failure to prosecute Democrats and their decisions to prosecute Republicans. Alberto Gonzales should resign for allowing the Justice Department to be used for these political goals and for falsely claiming in Congressional hearings that poor job performance was the reason for the firings.
That mode of discussion falls right into the aformentioned quicksand ponds, where the argument will die a quick, quiet death outside of the Beltway.
Instead, Democrats in Congress, left-of-center pundits in the puditsphere, and we in the blogosphere have to talk about the mess this way if we want it to have real impact outside of our circles of influence:
The White House and Republican senators were using the legal system to harass innocent people. They fired a bunch of prosecutors who refused to go along with their scheme, even though they were some of the best in the country at putting away bad guys. Alberto Gonzales's office participated in the scheme by falsely accusing the prosecutors of not doing their jobs.
The wording may not be perfect, but notice how much more obviously unacceptable the protagonists' actions are when you put it more this way.
Notice the framing of the key concepts:
The White House, instead of Karl Rove and Harriet Meiers. Despite their notoriety, they are still little more than 'people who work for Bush' in the minds of average Americans. To get the impact we're looking for, we need to make these guys
into Bush. Hence, "The White House."
Likewise, never mind mentioning Domenici by name. At this point, just about all that matters is that
Republican senators were involved in the scheme.
the legal system instead of US attorneys. Attorneys=lawyers=most-hated profession in America. Who cares if they get "used" for some underhanded machinations? That's what lawyers do. But "the legal system" belongs to everyone. How dare they abuse
our system.
innocent people is crucial to selling this thing. Iglesias was pressured to arrest alleged vote fraudsters despite the fact that his investgations did not support the fraud allegations. That would be, by definition, harassing innocent people. Who out there doesn't get worked-up at the thought of their government engaging in such an activity?
go along with their scheme: these brave prosecutors refused to do the wrong thing just to keep their jobs. They're not lawyers=the most-hated profession in America. They're heroes!
bad guys - Forget referencing Randy "Duke" Cunningham. Most folks don't know who you are talking about. And trying to explain who he is and what his story was puts you right back in the quicksand pond. He was one the bad guys. Period.
falsely accusing anybody of anything is even worse than harassing innocent people.
not doing their jobs: Don't get into unwinnable arguments about job performance, conviction rates, or the number of illegal immigration prosectutions brought. The bottom line is these people were falsely accused of being slackers. Everybody understands that concept, and nobody thinks it's OK.
Explained this way, Joe Sixpack will slam his beer down and curse the Bush White House and the next time there's a poll on impeachment, the figure will run without qualification into the upper-60's range. From there, we push forward with the rest of what needs to be done.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
