April 9, 2004

SELF-REFUTATION:

Is Bush’s base beginning to crumble?: Issues threaten to shake his once-unquestionable foundation (Howard Fineman, April 07, 2004, Newsweek)

Can the unshakeable be shaken? Is it already shaking? These are relevant questions as Condi Rice testifies and Iraq turns ugly. Especially since 9/11, a key feature of the political landscape has been George W. Bush's granite-like Republican/conservative base. But fissures are appearing and the war may widen them. Facing a close race with Democrat John Kerry, the president can't afford to spend much time reassuring his friends. But he may have to. To be sure, Republicans and conservatives for the most part, on most issues, are with Bush and will remain there. They like his instincts, his religiosity, his love of traditional values, his willingness to use force, his tax cuts and much more.

So, in other words, "No."

Posted by Orrin Judd at April 9, 2004 8:17 AM
Comments

They like his instincts, etc... But not his unwillingness to acknowledge that Baby Assad and Ali Khamenei (or former president Rafsanjani, who seems to be the guy who is really in charge in Tehran) are now openly waging war against the US in Iraq.

The latest stunt is Bush's proconsul Bremer declaring a unilateral ceasefire long before the insurgency in Fallujah is defeated. Fortunately, the insurgents didn't want to take the offer.

You only declare a ceasefire after all these maniacs have stopped shooting because they're dead.

Posted by: Peter at April 9, 2004 8:38 AM

Peter:

You give Fineman too much credit. And you tremble at the pronouncements of Newsweek way too often. The major media are so one-sided that even if the networks could broadcast the 'war' in Fallujah live, they would probably refuse, knowing that it would only strengthen Bush's numbers.

I was concerned when I read about the halt in the Fallujah attack, but after reading what General Sanchez said, it was OK. Give them time to talk, but I don't doubt another 500-1000 Iraqi men will be dead by Sunday if they keep fighting.

Posted by: jim hamlen at April 9, 2004 8:56 AM

Peter:

Okay, name the war where we did that? It's not how democrats fight.

Posted by: oj at April 9, 2004 9:29 AM

Orrin,

I somehow don't remember the US of A leaving Imperial Japan alone after the Philipines were liberated.

I had the impression that Nazi Germany wasn't left alone after it had been pushed out of the last part of occupied territory in Western Europe.

I didn't say that all of the inhabitants of Fallujah should be killed. But I strongly doubt that all terrorists, rebels, Hezbollah freaks and assorted thugs and murderers in that city have been dealt with already. They proved so by continuing to shoot at US Marines anyway. Bremer should shut up and let the military commanders perform their jobs.

Jim,

I don't even read Newsweek. I'm not some anti-war pinko, I'm just saying that when you go to war, you have to go all the way. Bush seemed to be doing so during the first half of his term (he could have gone back to his ranch after the Taliban were toppled, but he didn't), but ever since he declared major combat to be over on May 1, 2003, he seems to believe that it will always remain that way. Iran and Syria obviously disagree. Make them pay for it.

Posted by: Peter at April 9, 2004 10:03 AM

Peter:

Okay, if all you mean is continue the police action that's exactly what's happening.

Posted by: oj at April 9, 2004 10:13 AM

Go check out one of Ben Domenech's latest posts where he says Bush hasn't done enough to satisfy the 4 million evangicals who sat on the sidelines in 2000 and so will sit on the sidelines again.

Posted by: AWW at April 9, 2004 3:03 PM

AWW:

But that's just silly. The big complaint is that there's not Senate passage of FBI, but Bush has done it all by executive order.

Posted by: oj at April 9, 2004 3:36 PM

A tedious article about Bush's base comes out every couple of weeks. Liberals seem to be substituting hope for reality.

Posted by: kevin whited at April 9, 2004 6:06 PM

Or "No", comma, "idiot" full stop.

Posted by: Amos at April 9, 2004 7:48 PM

Fineman is not a journalist. He is a member of the Kerry campaign staff. Just keep that in mind when yoread his bilge.

In an effort to galvanize the message Kerry wants to deliver in the time remaining, he convened a powerful roster of journalists and columnists in the New York City apartment of Al Franken last Thursday. The gathering could not properly be called a meeting or a luncheon. It was a trial. The journalists served as prosecuting attorneys, jury and judge. The crowd I joined in Franken’s living room was comprised of:
Al Franken and his wife Franni;
Rick Hertzberg, senior editor for the New Yorker;
David Remnick, editor for the New Yorker;
Jim Kelly, managing editor for Time Magazine;
Howard Fineman, chief political correspondent for Newsweek;
Jeff Greenfield, senior correspondent and analyst for CNN;
Frank Rich, columnist for the New York Times;
Eric Alterman, author and columnist for MSNBC and the Nation;
Art Spiegelman, Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist/author of ‘Maus’;
Richard Cohen, columnist for the Washington Post;
Fred Kaplan, columnist for Slate;
Jacob Weisberg, editor of Slate and author;
Jonathan Alter, senior editor and columnist for Newsweek;
Philip Gourevitch, columnist for the New Yorker;
Calvin Trillin, freelance writer and author;
Edward Jay Epstein, investigative reporter and author;
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., who needs no introduction.

We sat in a circle around Kerry and grilled him for two long hours.

http://truthout.org/docs_03/printer_121003A.shtml

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at April 11, 2004 11:37 PM
« MYSTERY INTACT: | Main | STRANGE BEDFELLOWS: »