The Call to Kill Democracy

This should scare the living daylights out of every American. And it doesn't come from Osama bin Laden, either. It comes from another mouthpiece of the ruling right - The Weekly Standard.

I'd say you should move to Iraq if you want democracy, but since that's also run by Bush, well - forget about it. This is just sick. [Emphasis ours]

The Ruthless Party
From the February 7, 2005 issue: The media tolerate or even encourage Democratic rage. But the White House can't afford to.
by Fred Barnes, for the Editors

The talk among congressional Democrats is about the tactics Newt Gingrich used as House minority whip in 1993 and 1994. As they remember it, Gingrich opposed, blocked, attacked, zinged, or at least criticized everything President Clinton and Democratic leaders proposed. It was a scorched-earth approach, Democrats believe. And it worked, crippling Clinton and resulting in the 1994 election that gave Republicans control--lasting control, it turned out--of the House and Senate. Now Democrats, after losing three straight elections, hope brutal tactics will work for them.
_______

Senate Democrats have enough votes to block major Bush initiatives like Social Security reform and to reject Bush appointees, including Supreme Court nominees. They may be suicidal, but they could undermine the president's entire second term agenda. At his news conference last week, Bush reacted calmly to their vitriolic attacks, suggesting only a few Democrats are involved. Stronger countermeasures will be needed, including an unequivocal White House response to obstructionism, curbs on filibusters, and a clear delineation of what's permissible and what's out of bounds in dissent on Iraq. Too much is at stake to wait for another Democratic defeat in 2006.

Barnes also trashes Harry Reid, Howard Dean, Mark Dayton, Barbara Boxer - and more importantly, the Constitution of the United States of America.

This is what it's come to, Americans. The ruling party wants to change the rules so that no voice of opposition can be heard. No dissent will be tolerated. No questioning of our "popular" leader will be allowed.

In other words - totalitarianism has arrived in the United States of America. It starts here.

Yes. Be angry. Yes. Be afraid. No. Don't sit still and keep your mouth shut. We need more Kennedys, more Boxers, more Daytons...and a lot more YOU. We need all of you as big as we can get you. If your local rep doesn't refute and marginalize what Barnes says here, they're agreeing with this plan.

See? Absolutism works both ways. The entire article follows.

The Ruthless Party
From the February 7, 2005 issue: The media tolerate or even encourage Democratic rage. But the White House can't afford to.
by Fred Barnes, for the Editors
02/07/2005, Volume 010, Issue 20

ON THE EVE of the election in Iraq, Democratic senator Edward Kennedy called President Bush's Iraq policy "a catastrophic failure." He demanded that American troops immediately begin to withdraw. "We have no choice," he declared, "but to make the best we can of the disaster we have created in Iraq." Kennedy said the retreat of American forces should be completed "as early as possible in 2006," and suggested that, in Iraq, American troops are a bigger problem than terrorists.

Though appalling, Kennedy's statement was not out of character for Democrats these days. "I don't like to impugn anyone's integrity," said Democratic senator Mark Dayton, before impugning the integrity of Condoleezza Rice. "But I really don't like being lied to, repeatedly, flagrantly, intentionally. It is wrong, it is undemocratic, it is un-American, and it is dangerous." After Rice took exception to being called untruthful by Democratic senator Barbara Boxer, Boxer complained on TV: "She turned and attacked me."

This is madness, but there is method in it. The talk among congressional Democrats is about the tactics Newt Gingrich used as House minority whip in 1993 and 1994. As they remember it, Gingrich opposed, blocked, attacked, zinged, or at least criticized everything President Clinton and Democratic leaders proposed. It was a scorched-earth approach, Democrats believe. And it worked, crippling Clinton and resulting in the 1994 election that gave Republicans control--lasting control, it turned out--of the House and Senate. Now Democrats, after losing three straight elections, hope brutal tactics will work for them.

So they ganged up on Rice, accusing her of lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, though they had relied on the same faulty intelligence about WMD. They blamed Alberto Gonzales, as chief White House counsel, of fostering the torture of captured terrorists. All he had done, however, was render a legal opinion on the status of terrorists under the Geneva Convention. As most experts agree, terrorists aren't covered. Kennedy threw the word "quagmire" around like confetti. And so on. What was the initial response of Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid to the president's idea of reforming Social Security? Bush wants to "destroy" the system, Reid insisted.

Yet Democrats act as if they're taking the moral high ground. Listen to Howard Dean, who's favored to become the next Democratic national chairman. Asked in an un-aired interview with Fox News to list his supporters for chairman, Dean said: "It's not likely I'm gonna make an announcement like that on Fox . . . because Fox is the propaganda outlet of the Republican party . . . . I have to weigh the legitimacy that it gives you."

Dean is delusional. He and other Democrats cannot confer or deny legitimacy. Nor do they really understand the lessons of the Gingrich era. True, Newt used rough tactics to tear down Democratic proposals and challenge Democratic leaders. He was relentless. But he was also an idea factory of conservative concepts and initiatives. His goal was to attract conservative voters who weren't Republicans. And he succeeded.

The 1994 breakthrough "was the culmination of a long process in which voters' ideology finally got in line with their partisanship," columnist David Brooks explained recently in the New York Times. "The Democrats today . . . have all the liberals. What they lack is support from middle-class white families in fast-growing suburbs. But by copying the Gingrich tactics--or what they think of as Gingrich tactics--of hyperpartisanship and ruthless oppositionalism, they will only alienate those voters even more."

Brooks is correct. Democrats misunderstand their situation. Their view is that Republicans have been mean and bruising while they've been too nice and forgiving. That's right. They think former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle, who was plainly obsessed with obstructing Bush at every turn, was too kindly. The lesson of the 2004 election for Democrats, then, is that they need to play rough. The real lesson, of course, is that blatant obstructionism is a failed strategy. It's what caused Daschle to lose his seat.

The media tolerate or even encourage Democratic rage. But the White House can't afford to. Senate Democrats have enough votes to block major Bush initiatives like Social Security reform and to reject Bush appointees, including Supreme Court nominees. They may be suicidal, but they could undermine the president's entire second term agenda. At his news conference last week, Bush reacted calmly to their vitriolic attacks, suggesting only a few Democrats are involved. Stronger countermeasures will be needed, including an unequivocal White House response to obstructionism, curbs on filibusters, and a clear delineation of what's permissible and what's out of bounds in dissent on Iraq. Too much is at stake to wait for another Democratic defeat in 2006.

--Fred Barnes, for the Editors

Comments

[merl]

What do they mean by 3 straight elections? email the answer please if you can help.

[Hoffmania!]

I think he means four straight elections (including mid-terms). The freak can't even add.

[Daughter of Viet Vet]

I have noticed a dramatic increase in "essays" such as these; alarmist garbage written by some neocon puke warning the GOP faithful that The Big Bad Democrats Are Going To Ruin Merka!

It is very telling. In their hearts, they do realize that what they are doing is very, very wrong...they just simply don't care. When they are faced with having the power they so crave taken away from them, the alarmist calls to arms begin.

There are more of us than there are more of them. What's more, more of us are getting angrier and angrier with each passing day. Shrubya and Co. needn't think ANYTHING is going to get done on his "agenda." This term ain't gonna be the cakewalk the first one was. How long can you milk 9/11, anyway?

[anonymous coward]

Considering the Editor of The Weekly Standard is also the Chairman of the PNAC www.newamericancentury.org this tripe should be expected. The problem is that this Theo-Con crap propaganda is considered news.

[Bando Bling]

Welcome to the world of 'Taliban Republicans'!

[Dan K.]

"The freak can't even add."

Barnes also can't tell a joke, not even in writing. From a Slate dialogue with James Fallows in 11/99:

Our debate reminds me of that old story about Winston Churchill or George Bernard Shaw or whoever the Brit was who asks a woman if she'd sleep with him for one million pounds. She is outraged [sic]. "How about for 10 pence?" he asks. "Just who do you think I am, sir?" "We've already established that," he says. "Now we're just haggling over price."

[Ron]

Welcome to the New order of the United states of the Reich Reglious Republicans! These Fox Nazi's tell the truth of lies and hide behind a cross instead of being men of god and standing in front of the Swastika. They not only kill people, looted the Corporations and made monopolies and destroyed the economic lives of millions! Now their are looted the treasury of this country! Now , I will now be investigated under the patriot act! Loose what ever job I could get because I am on a list that I can not view! What next permission to used the Air and water? Oh, I only pay for water so far! So, these people are moral and fair and balanced! Hitler and Stalin must smile and say I knew they would like the way we handled the problem of a strong Government for the people run by the few! What are a few people worth when we can bring stability to the world!

[Steve Gardner]

a clear delineation of what's permissible and what's out of bounds in dissent on Iraq.

This is a howl. This neocon clown thinks he can tell the American people what is out of bounds on dissent. How pretentious! Who does he think he is? Listen Fred! No one cares what you and your neocon coneheads in your think tanks want. Your influence is waning. Not that it matters because, in the final analysis, it doesn't matter what our electorate thinks about Iraq. We're in way over our heads on this one. The military is stretched way too thin and everyone in that part of the world knows it. (In fact, everyone except the American people seem to know it.) The control over this situation doesn't reside in Washington let alone Wall Street or in a Neocon conehead think tank. This poor bastard's fate is being written as we speak in the streets of Baghdad! (When America loses somebody has to pay and the Neocons are that someone!) The silent majority is about to speak on his fate. That majority, by the way, lives in Iraq and they are called shiites. The spokesman for the religious list in the recent Iraqi elections, Abdel Aziz El Hakim just made it clear what the new stakes are: "No one welcomes the foreign troops in Iraq. We believe in the ability of Iraqis to run their own issues, including the security issue. Of course this issue could be brought up by the new government.". In other words: "Thanks for getting rid of that loser Saddam now leave." ;-) The shiites patiently bided their time with the election. They showed amazing discipline in the face of Sunni provocations. They will not be denied and they will not tolerate the PNAC plan for American hegemony in Iraq. They survived Saddam. There's no way on god's green earth that they are afraid of our pansy asses. It's just that simple. The Neocon plan for American/Israeli dominance (in the mind of most Middle East residents the two powers are indistinguishable) in the Middle East is failing. We are seeing the first seeds of its utter destruction pushing up like little bean sprouts. Aren't they beautiful! ;-) Maybe after the neocons go down in flames we can get back to solving our own problems in this country like we should. These stupid and expensive attempts to remake the world in our image are unaffordable and unworkable. Besides, who are we to tell others how they must live their lives? That isn't appreciated in Baghdad any more than it would be in Peoria. Why the American people can't see that is beyond me.

I have a prediction: Iraq is going to do to Bush what Vietnam did to Johnson. The only difference is that Johnson had his early success with civil rights legislation to salvage his place in history. Bush has zip, nada, nothing to show except Iraq. He is toast in the history books. Toast. If he didn't have such a wealthy and powerful family he would end up back on the bottle, in a gutter back in Midland, cradling a jug of rot-gut wine. Pardon me while I savor that delicious image. ;-)

And Bush's descent into darkness is going to be entertaining too. He reacts very poorly to stress and having his "authority" questioned. He has ruled through coercion and very strict message discipline. When that starts to fall apart his personality will too. I think we can all look forward to that.

[c. lindy]

Everytime the Dems. get fired up, we see articles like this from radical neocons. The articles are full of half-truths,innuendos and out of context commentary. Jesse Helms worked this kind of BS like Play Dough. Now he is still trying to be disruptive in his retirement, by taking pot shots at former President Clinton being asked to oversee UN help in the Tsunami areas.

[Jane Hawes]

The radical right-wingers have to advocate shutting down dissent. They can't stand it; it scares them too badly, and they're cowards to start with. Look at their leader, after all....

[Barry Champlain]

Hey. it's their world. It's their society. We're just consuming in it.

[Leslie]

My father and my best friend, both died recently. I think they are the lucky ones, to not have to live through any more of this bushit. I thought Newt and his crew were horrible - and they were. But this group of thugs truly ought to be feared and to be stopped.

[beachgirl]

The most disturbing element to the ramp-up to fascism and the most obvious sign - for those who are paying attention - is the radical right's demonization of the left. I swear they sound like Nazis talking about the jews. What's really frightening is that they are encouraging violence. I was listenting to Hannity and Limpballs for a minute today and it was brutal. I'm sure it won't be long before some deranged wingnut takes a baseball bat to his/her "librul" neighbor. I am scared, very, very scared.

[David]

What?? Howard Dean called Fox News the propaganda organ of the Republicans? How dare he? What a lunatic!

I agree with some of the fear expressed here. I have been reading What's the Matter with Kansas, which is a brilliant book, because the author got down in the trenches with his rightwingers and gave us a peek inside their heads. And something hit me, too. The hate word today that corresponds to "Jew" isn't gay, or black. It's Liberal. And there's been more, far more, hate-propaganda against "liberals" in the last tend years than there probably was against Jews in the ten years before Hitler seized power.
The Republicans have the same attitude towards process and dissent that the SDS had in the late sixties. It is, alas, a disease of the Boom generation. It may be younger folk who eventually have to get the country back on an even keel.

[Jim Grosfield]

Barry's on point.

They control all four branches of gov't, and the mainstream press. Their PR experts are brilliant in their promoting the neocon agenda. The recent general election was close enough to allow them to steal it. The Democrats in congress are, with a few honorable exceptios, too weak kneed to speak up against the right wing steamroller. To paraphrase Mark Twain; they have half the idiots in town on their side, and isn't that a big enough majority in any town?

I have argued for years against a constitutional convention. It puts all the chips on the table. The last 25 years, however, have seen the Constitution eroded to the extent that it barely serves to wipe the behinds of those inclined to so use it. It's time to have that convention, to see just where we think we stand. I think the rest of the world would be appalled at the results. We'll probably just cluck our collective tongue, and go on consuming.

The rest of the world needs to understand that they are either with us or against us. We are currently the premier "rogue nation" on the planet. Ours is a nation which can no longer be trusted to have, let alone deploy, a military force. We have the "big stick", and rest assured we will use it.

In twelve years we will be well into Jeb's second term, It will be interesting to see where we are then. I'm not optimistic.

[Tulanzuya]

The Neocon tactic of speaking for "middle America" is growing mighty thin. In reality their hardcore garbage only holds hypnotic magic for the aggressive and sociopathic among us, unfortunately giving them a falsely-inflated voice and falsely-overblown head count by way of criminal election tabulations, with constant reinforcement by a Neocon-cowed, self-serving media. I think it's time to look these liars in the eye and drag the filth out into the light wherever we find it.

[Jane White]

The relationship of the Neo Cons to Naziism is much too close for comfort. I live in California, and the coincidence of Enron in the gutting of California's economy which resulted in the electorate replacing Democrat Gray Davis with Arnold Schwarzenegger, and now the move to amend the Constitution to allow non-native born Americans to be President is terrifying to me. Do not forget that Arnold's father was a Nazi in Austria. Paranoia? Perhaps yes -- perhaps no.

[whadjaexpect?]

Barnes's worries about the Democrats disrupting Bush"s second term agenda are,
lamentably, probably overblown. After all, Senate Dems have just consented to the nominations of two lying frauds to Bush's cabinet. Approval of Gonzalez, in particular, makes it clear that W doesn't have much to worry about from the Democrats, who are evidently more afraid of Karl Rove than they are of world opinion.
If they had the guts of a true oppositon party, they'd filibuster every initiative from this White House, or at least let every thing that passes be passed without a single Democratic vote.
That would make it easy in '06 to make clear to the voters just who's responsible for mucking everything up. Then they'd declare that they'll no longer accept ANY corporate campaign bribes, making doubly clear which party represents the People's interests.
But the Democratic Party that would take those steps exists only in a fantasy world. In reality, the Dems -- the DLC Dems, anyway-- are only a little less corpo-fascist than the GOP. I almost wish they'd throw Dean out of the party, so he could start his own.

[whadjaexpect?]

Barnes's worries about the Democrats disrupting Bush"s second term agenda are,
lamentably, probably overblown. After all, Senate Dems have just consented to the nominations of two lying frauds to Bush's cabinet. Approval of Gonzalez, in particular, makes it clear that W doesn't have much to worry about from the Democrats, who are evidently more afraid of Karl Rove than they are of world opinion.
If they had the guts of a true oppositon party, they'd filibuster every initiative from this White House, or at least let every thing that passes be passed without a single Democratic vote.
That would make it easy in '06 to make clear to the voters just who's responsible for mucking everything up. Then they'd declare that they'll no longer accept ANY corporate campaign bribes, making doubly clear which party represents the People's interests.
But the Democratic Party that would take those steps exists only in a fantasy world. In reality, the Dems -- the DLC Dems, anyway-- are only a little less corpo-fascist than the GOP. I almost wish they'd throw Dean out of the party, so he could start his own.

[whadjaexpect?]

Barnes's worries about the Democrats disrupting Bush"s second term agenda are,
lamentably, probably overblown. After all, Senate Dems have just consented to the nominations of two lying frauds to Bush's cabinet. Approval of Gonzalez, in particular, makes it clear that W doesn't have much to worry about from the Democrats, who are evidently more afraid of Karl Rove than they are of world opinion.
If they had the guts of a true oppositon party, they'd filibuster every initiative from this White House, or at least let every thing that passes be passed without a single Democratic vote.
That would make it easy in '06 to make clear to the voters just who's responsible for mucking everything up. Then they'd declare that they'll no longer accept ANY corporate campaign bribes, making doubly clear which party represents the People's interests.
But the Democratic Party that would take those steps exists only in a fantasy world. In reality, the Dems -- the DLC Dems, anyway-- are only a little less corpo-fascist than the GOP. I almost wish they'd throw Dean out of the party, so he could start his own.

[whadjaexpect?]

Barnes's worries about the Democrats disrupting Bush"s second term agenda are,
lamentably, probably overblown. After all, Senate Dems have just consented to the nominations of two lying frauds to Bush's cabinet. Approval of Gonzalez, in particular, makes it clear that W doesn't have much to worry about from the Democrats, who are evidently more afraid of Karl Rove than they are of world opinion.
If they had the guts of a true oppositon party, they'd filibuster every initiative from this White House, or at least let every thing that passes be passed without a single Democratic vote.
That would make it easy in '06 to make clear to the voters just who's responsible for mucking everything up. Then they'd declare that they'll no longer accept ANY corporate campaign bribes, making doubly clear which party represents the People's interests.
But the Democratic Party that would take those steps exists only in a fantasy world. In reality, the Dems -- the DLC Dems, anyway-- are only a little less corpo-fascist than the GOP. I almost wish they'd throw Dean out of the party, so he could start his own.