Politics: Second Chances and Double-Standards

[Q]

- The Bushies don't seem to believe in second chances...at least for anyone outside of their 'special' circle of friends and business associates. For decades we've suffered the double-standards of the Right...who seem to believe their mistakes and sins are easily forgiven while we must pay for ours until the day we die.

- Examples of these double-standards cover a wide range of topics:

Whitewater versus Harken Energy:

- Whitewater was a land deal in which the Clinton's participated and actually LOST money. Bush* sat on the board of directors of Harken Energy and used that knowledge to dump his stocks before a crash.

Clinton/Gore versus GWB on the draft and military service:

- Clinton didn't want to serve in Vietnam and said so. His 'number' was never called. Gore had a background in journalism, pursued that career in the military and went to Vietnam. Although RWingers will tell you that he was given an 'easy' tour of duty...many Vietnam Vets will tell you there was no such thing as a safe place in that country. Bush* was allowed in the Texas Air Guard because of family connections. He scored very low (26?) on the pilot exam and was given placement in the Guard ahead of others better qualified and who had near perfect scores. He was later grounded from flying because he failed to show up for a required physical exam. His service records and testimony from his commanding officer suggest that he was AWOL for at least his last year of service. Yet...Bush's* military service has never been used against him by a media anxious to use that issue against Democrats.

The issue of Morality and Honesty in American politics:

- Republicans abused the power of their office for eight long years...saying it was their duty to investigate and 'punish' the immoral and dishonest Clinton. Yet during the course of the investigations we found that many on the Right were guilty of the same 'crimes' and immorality they accused Clinton of as their own adultery and shady business deals were leaked in the media. Bush* now enjoys complete immunity and scrutiny from a media that once prided itself on investigative journalism in the 90s and 'breaking' the story of a president having 'sex' in the White House.

- The point is that Republican politicians are rarely held accountable by the media for their past mistakes, corruption and dishonesty. I could give you countless examples of this...but time and space are limited.

- Suffice it to say that Bush* is known as a honest and sincere man...a great CIC and God-fearing 'Christian'...only because the American media has never held him to the same standards they held for Clinton and Gore. Where Clinton and Gore's real or imagined past was used against them to smear and discredit...Bush's* past and present remains off bounds to a media that suddenly seems disinterested in investigative journalism or government accountability.

- Democrats must strive to put an end to this double-standard in American politics. All politicians should be held to the same standard of conduct. If it's politically correct to use a Democrat's lack of military service against them in a campaign...it should be just as acceptable to use Bush's* military service in a comparative manner. If morality and honesty is an issue in a campaign...then Democrats should be able to use Bush's* past and present lies and shady business dealings against him.

- Democrats can easily put an end to these double-standards by turning the tables on Republicans and using the same issues against them that they bring against us.

[Racenut20]

1. Since I 100% agree with the above...

Are there DUers that have experience or expertise in setting up an issues PAC to help do what the media is not doing? I have been thinking about such a vehicle in Florida for the past two years and have not actually been put to work on it. Contact me direct if you fit the above description and are interested.

[ithacan]

2. yes but the media is the key

the media really are the ones who are guilty here.

They are not doing their job; rather, they have become lap dogs to the RNC, either out of ideological goals of the owners, or out of fear of the right wingers.

And of course Fox is nothing other than a propaganda outlet for the right wingers in the white house...

THAT's the real challenge: Media reform.

[Q]

3. Media can't be 'reformed' until the Democrats...

...stand up and demand reform.

- There also seems to be a lack of 'effort' on the part of Democrats to keep the pressure on the media to pursue important stories.

- An example: Gore, Kennedy and Byrd gave numerous speeches about Bush* using 9-11 for political advantage, phony and ineffective 'war on terrorism' and his lies that took this nation to war. But there was little or no followup.

- That's where the Republicans have an advantage. Once they get ahold (or make up) a story against their opponents...they repeat it time and again and never let go of it.

[Racenut20]

4. So wouldn't you like to see something like "Lies told to you"

As a half page ad in the Orlando Sentinel (key I=4 corridor newspaper) where Florida elections are won and lost? This area, TampaBay across to Daytona is the key to the State. Generally the Miami-Dade area except for Cubans are conceeded to Democrats, and for sure the northern part of the state is conceeded to Republicans.

[Q]

5. No...I'm suggesting using the same issues they use against us...

- When they accuse a Dem candidate of 'avoiding the draft or service'...that leaves it wide open to use the opponent's service record against him.

- We don't need to go 'fishing' for issues to use against Bush*. When he says Democrats are not interested in the security of the American people...we should come right back and show that his 'war' on terrorism has done nothing to protect America and is only breeding more terrorists.

- The national security issue...would also present an opportunity to bring up the relationship between Bush* and the Saudi/bin Laden families.

[DrBB]

6. Number one recommendation: We stop spreading GOP smears

...against our own candidates.

Many many many examples of that on DU, but for neutrality's sake, consider this LTTE in the NYTimes, from a self-professed "Democrat":

Paul Krugman (column, Jan. 2) thinks that Karl Rove and the Republican National Committee could attack a centrist Democrat just as easily as they could attack Howard Dean in this fall's presidential race. That makes no sense.

Dr. Dean is a Northeasterner from a small liberal state who avoided the draft; who wavers in his commitment to win the peace in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq; who continues to stand by the absurdity that we are no safer with Saddam Hussein in custody; and who wants to offer North Korea a sweeter, softer deal to come back into compliance with its denuclearization commitments.

Mr. Krugman is letting his disdain for President Bush cloud his political judgment.
MICHAEL O'HANLON
Washington, Jan. 2, 2004
The writer is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

How much better would our chances in November be, had this O'Hanlon item added the prestige of his Brookings Institution credentials to a DEFENSE of Dr Dean's statement?

As a centrist Democrat, I favor {Kerry/Gephardt/Lieberman}, but Dr Dean's statement that we are no safer with Saddam in custody is fully justified: not only has the administration failed to substantiate its claims that Saddam supported al Qaeda, had functional WMDs, or was anything but a toothless tiger vis a vis the United States, but the war in Iraq has exponentially compounded the hatred for the US in the Muslim world, acted as a recruitment boon for al Qaeda, and is getting hundreds of our young men and women killed and maimed. Not to mention we're on the highest alert status since 9/11 and planes are being grounded right and left. Feel safer?

MICHAEL O'HANLON
Washington, Jan. 2, 2004
The writer is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

See, this is what the Republicans do: instead of backing off and attacking their own, using the other side's arguments and even fleshing 'em out where necessary, feeding the GOP yet more ammunition ("Even a librul like O'Hanlon sez...."), they actually rally round and act like they're on the same fucking side, for god's sake.

And beyond this (I know this post is too long, but dammit), what's absolutely KEY here:

The way the slur machine works is that no one can (will) keep up with these things. They'll just keep repeating "Gore sez he Invented the Internet, har har har" and the NYTimes will say it too, ad infinitum, unless we get right on the stick and debunk debunk debunk and hound their ASSES off about it.

Because we are heading into a $200-million smear machine and dirty-tricks fest like the world has never seen. And we need to

pull together goddamit!

on edit: O'Hanlon's "Democratic" status: this info comes from another DU thread where O'Hanlon is discussed

[Q]

7. Agreed...we should offer counterpoints instead of helping...

...the opposition by spreading their smears and misinformation.

- It amazes me how the Republicans have been able to use the DRAFT and military service against Democrats when Bush* has an absolutely HORRIBLE service record.

- It's perfectly legitimate to throw these issues BACK at Bush* when they're used against Democrats.

[DrBB]

8. Clark gets it. On today's MTP

...Russert asked him if he thought Dean's lack of foreign policy expertise made Dean unfit to be president, and Clark gave the A1 prime excellent and most bodacious answer possible:

"If George Bush is fit to be president, then any of the Dems running is MORE fit."

Now that's what I'm talking about. Damn! A little more of that and we actually may start to have something Rove should be worried about.