Boy, was I wrong...

This is very simple. People have given up on the idea that the war criminals in the Republican Party will ever change their mind, including their so-called moderates. Therefore they don't even bother trying to change their mind.

They are disappointed that the Democrats lied to them about doing everything they could to stop them. In fact, even while the Democrats were mouthing the same lies they were busy refinancing this illegal war, a war that has raised the terrorism problem by 700%. Following their decision to refinance the war, the Democrats have continued to insist they are trying to stop it. Apparently lying comes just as easy to them as it does to the war criminals in the Republican Party.

Oh please. I don't know a living soul who doesn't think the Iraq war is anything but a monumental screw up. Nobody's paying attention to the "good news out of Iraq, Version 8.2007" anymore.

We're angry at the Democrats for not stating the obvious: the war isn't doing anybody any good and is a monumental waste of lives and resources.

How are these two points reconciled? If in fact Dems are having to "recalibrate" their message due to sudden renewed support for the war, why would they be punished by poor poll ratings for failing to end the war?

It is pretty clear that the MSM is getting ready to shake their pro-Iraq war pompoms once again, come September. Unfortunately, it also appears that the Democratic Party is more concerned about that, than they are about listening to the people who voted them into power. The gamble they are making, I suppose, is that we have no choice but to vote for them.

"It's hard to interpret that sharp decline in Democratic support as anything but disappointment over Congress' failure to bring about a sharp turn in Iraq policy."

That, and the failure to even consider impeachment as an option.

I'm sorry, BUSH IS GOING TO CALL IRAQ - VIETNAM TODAY and somehow the Democrats are wrong?

Read your column, it reaches two different diametrically opposed conclusions.

Your enabling of this war is disgusting.

Congress low approval rating has more to do with the republics' lockstep support of Bush and refusal to heed the electorate than it does with the Democratic Party.

The democrats are feckless, and despised for it. With an election won over Iraq, corruption, and civil liberties they have responded by caving on Iraq, passing new spying powers on to Bush without reading the bill, and Alberto Gonzales is still running justice. Leahy might put the White House on double secret probation though.

No wonder congress gets no love.

Bush is one of the most unpopular presidents in history. Who can respect people who fear him?

Glenn Greenwald agrees with Karen (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/08/21/congress/index.html). So do I. The very idea that Dems could be backpedaling from Mr. 30% on any topic is astonishing. But enough of them are that the repubs have cover in Beltway World.

However, as Greg VA noted: "I don't know a living soul who doesn't think the Iraq war is anything but a monumental screw up. Nobody's paying attention to the "good news out of Iraq, Version 8.2007" anymore." The public is WAY ahead of the beltway on this. And that gives me some hope that the msm media narrative is failing to drive public opinion as it once did. And some hope that Bush enablers in both parties are in for a rough time come 2008.

Speaking of media narrative, Atrios had an important comment the other day in the context of the soldier's op-ed on Iraq in the Times. You know, the story Joe Klein said everyone needed to read. The story the msm pretty roundly ignored. Atrios: "I think people often miss, there's the "news" and then there's the "talking about the news." The latter is how most people ultimately get their information, how conventional wisdom and subsequent coverage is generated, etc. No matter what the circulation of the New York Times, if an op-ed lands on its pages and Wolf Blitzer doesn't hear about it one cannot conclude that it made a sound."

Ari Fleischer is back on the scene? Talk about your soft bigotry of low expectations...

Karen,

Great job this week. This post is spot-on.

Ari Fleischer makes me sick.

I'm sure someone in the press will point out that the Republicans rejected the Vietnam analogy just a few months ago.

Everyone seems to forget that the Democrats have a razor thin majority majority in Congress and they NEED Republicans to do anything with regard to Iraq.

And the GOP has one thing that Democrats do not - discipline - they will not break with the President (something Democrats need to learn if they plan to actually lead any policy debate again)
So what could they do with Iraq?

Also all these investigations will come back to haunt them as I doubt the Supreme court will overturn any law passed by Congress even if it is unconstitutional (they will expect Congress to fix its own mess)

Again remember there will be a big show of some troups withdrawing next year just in time to help the GOP nominee, so this has only begun.

Democrats do not seem to see any of this coming.

The problem with Democrats (not just in Congress) is they cannot articulate what they stand for, and with a united front, fight for it. Love them or hate them the GOP can do this and that is why I predict a GOP president come Nov 2008

Once again, it's the public relations people (*cough* liars *cough*) and their media enablers (the polite term):

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/08/big_news_orgs_i.php

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/08/associated_pres_6.php

"This has been anything but a relaxing August vacation for Democratic leaders, and September may only get worse."

Another prediction, eh? Personally, given where the approval #s are, hard to imagine it could get worse.

But here's the clanger for me...

"It's hard to interpret that sharp decline in Democratic support as anything but disappointment over Congress' failure to bring about a sharp turn in Iraq policy."

No mention of the cave to Bush on wire-tapping? Let's just say this too has not helped the Democrats.

From the Greg Sargent piece:

****Digby accurately predicted yesterday that this would get little to no coverage, because Dems "don't seem to have any kind of apparatus" to "catapult the propaganda," so to speak. Of course, as Digby suggests, Dems themselves might consider doing some catapulting themselves right about now. Has any high-profile Dem issued a statement on this or pushed it in some other way? After all, every Republican from Dick Cheney on down waved the O'Hanlon-Pollack piece at every conceivable opportunity. Dems can do this kind of thing too, one imagines.

Nonetheless, even without the Dems pushing it, you'd think this would be seen by the big news orgs as an important story. Even if the administration didn't tell them that it was.***

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/08/big_news_orgs_i.php

It reminds you of the Walter Pincus interview during "Selling the War":

****WALTER PINCUS: More and more, in the media, become, I think, common carriers of administration statements, and critics of the administration. And we've sort of given up being independent on our own.

...

WALTER PINCUS: We used to do at the Post something called truth squading. --President would make a speech. We used to do it with Ronald Reagan the first five or six months because he would make so many-- factual errors, particularly in his press conference.
...

WALTER PINCUS: And after-- two or three weeks of it-- the public at large, would say, "Why don't you leave the man alone? He's trying to be honest. He makes mistakes. So what?" and we stopped doing it.

BILL MOYERS: You stopped being the truth squad.

WALTER PINCUS: We stopped truth squading every sort of press conference, or truth squading. And we left it then-- to the democrats. In other words, it's up to the democrats to catch people, not us.

BILL MOYERS: So if the democrats challenged-- a statement from the president, you could-- quote both sides.

WALTER PINCUS: We then quote-- both sides. Yeah.

BILL MOYERS: Now, that's called objectivity by many standards isn't it?

WALTER PINCUS: Well, that's-- objectivity if you think there are only two sides. and if you're not interested in-- the facts. And the facts are separate from, you know, what one side says about the other.****

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/transcript1.html

The votes on the 'Iraq War' and the FISA bill has shown no leadership in Congress by the DEMs.

I have two Blue Dogs and a Bushie. Why bother to write or e-mail? The polls showing what VOTERS think of Congress and confidence in the Petreaus report should be enough.

Speaking of the Petreaus Report, it is scheduled for 9-11. Play the 'terror card' along with the new Bush using Vietnam [wasn't he serving like Romney's Boyz, out campaigning?] scenario. Are Hannity and Barnes writing the songs now?

More Bush Bad History:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/22/63439/4797

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/21/215315/136

More here:
on Iraq
http://jeff-huber.dailykos.com/

and on FISA
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/22/92758/3966

As we come close to another sad anniversary of the biggest deception of our times ... Ms. Tumulty, care to make at least ONE, sincere, logical, informed and honest comment about this? - h t t p : //video dot google dot com/videoplay?docid=8797525979024486145 ... Anyone from the MSM?
THE TRUTH & LIES OF 9/11 2 hr 18 min

Authority is not the same as objectivity. Although, authority is easier to report on. Especially if you have well-connected, well-paid administration flacks and Brookings publicity dudes doing a media blitz and dropping stuff in your lap...

Karen: Want the real pulse of Americans? Poll them about their RESPECTIVE congressmen and senators.

Public approval polls of the legislature in general are useless, except as facile talking points. The country at large is not dissatisfied with the Democratic leaders, per se. Democrats, however, are. That withholding of support is anecdotal at best.

And I'm glad to see Ari Fleischer's name associated with the stop-loss movement. Finally, a millstone that will stay tied around his neck. "Keep sending your kids into a meatgrinder, because my kid died there"? Americans are smarter than that.

So Democrats are on the defensive because the war is supposedly going better and presumably the public support for it is going up?

But then the Democrats are also on the defensive because the war isn't going well and the public is mad that they haven't gotten us out of Iraq?

Only in DC could two completely conflicting viewpoints be strung together and passed off as "political analysis."

Sorry I don't buy this Karen. We take polls as a point of refernce instead of being sceptical. Both Republicans and Democrats are having a tough time. Iraq is bad for everyone. To turn everything into a Republican/Democrats win/lose is pretty superficial.

The American people have a great more common sense than the politicians, pundit and assorted commentators. This Ari Fleischer thing is another one of those articles which mislead and distort. Do you really think $25m is going to sway minds? Really? I remember Linda Chavez? How much did she actually spend? So has Ari got $25m to spend? If yes, how far will that get him?

Shoddy journalism should not be replaced by shoddy bloggism. And there has been a lot of the latter in Swampland. Don't feel the need to post just to keep things going. Better not post at all if this is all you can come up with.

One thing's for certain. People want change and the GOP is not the answer.

If money talks, the message has been sent to the GOP:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/21/14423/3262

Karen - I do not accept your take on this. I think you are mistaken about what is really happening.

But I appreciate what you have written because it is a preview of the media narrative that the GOP is going to be rolling out as we get closer to the White House Report and Patraeus' testimony.

The public is angry at Congress as a whole because nothing has changed since the election; the war still rages unabated, our civil liberties are still being sacrificed, and the United States Department of Justice is being run by an incompetent toady because the President is too corrupt to risk replacing him with a competent individual.

But the public is very satisfied with its specific Democratic Senators and Representatives if only because they are not Republicans. We are going to keep pressure on them which may appear to be disapproval but that is their problem - we wouldn't have to do this if they had acted appropriately when we asked nicely.

So the media narrative is going to be that Dems are the ones who are defensive because 'the war is going better' or 'the surge is working'. Those claims are specious at best. Nobody has ever claimed that, when given a military objective, our soldiers could not achieve success. But the big picture is not a military mission, it is an occupation. This will mean nothing without a political solution by the Iraqis. This is a case of whack-a-mole. Trying to turn a Democrat's statements about supporting the troops or being open to a bipartisan solution into some kind of support for the Bush war plan is ridiculous.

It is bad enough that the media made the false claim that Pollack and O'Hanlon were 'war critics' but now they must obey the GOP when they claim that the Dems are on the defensive?

Karen says: It's hard to interpret that sharp decline in Democratic support as anything but disappointment over Congress' failure to bring about a sharp turn in Iraq policy.

Thanks for calling a spade a spade Karen. Democrats who don't realize that it is their lack of opposition to this policy that is pushing their approval numbers into the doldrums simply should quit politics. Any who thinks that it is their weak opposition that is causing problems simply doesn't understand the dynamics of the nation at this point.

Good post Karen.

Karen - Commentor JJ has links to articles you should read:

Posted by JJ
August 22, 2007
Once again, it's the public relations people (*cough* liars *cough*) and their media enablers (the polite term):

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/08/big_news_orgs_i.php

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/08/associated_pres_6.php

I think the topic of your next post should be the media's role in manufacturing consent for Bush's tragic war.

You should already know this Karen -- the WaPo has lost almost all ability to do nuance.

Dems are on the defensive because they snuck out on summer recess with tails between legs, unable to make a principled stand on Iraq and other things. Voters in their district are indeed furious and the media perception of their "recalibration" of message only throws gas on the flame.

It is also unfortunate that Sen. Carl "Soon to be Irrelevant" Levin has all but ignored Sunday's NYT op-ed from soldiers on the ground in Iraq.

Nonetheless, Republicans have bigger problems to worry about. Ask Mitch McConnell, Ted Stevens or Susan Collin whether this recess has been "peachy".

Make that pig sit still while we apply the lipstick:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/08/22/voinovich-refuses-to-comment-on-iraq-trip/

FYI:

"Although, to be fair to McNerney and other Democrats quoted in the WaPo piece, Anne Kornblut is involved in this particular article – and, as Sommerby points out, her stenography has been…erm…less than accurate in the past."

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/08/22/shifting-with-the-winds/

FYI (Double Down):

"The Democratic Congress commands such little approval for one reason only -- because its own party is so disappointed with its performance.

...

If Democrats approved of their Congress even close to the rate that Republicans approve of Bush, then Congress' approval ratings would be at a fairly average level, even high. But not only is Congress' unpopularity due primarily to Democratic anger, the recent drops in Congressional popularity are due almost exclusively to growing Democratic and independent (but not Republican) frustration with the Congress: ...

Since Democrats took over Congress in January, there have been three major attributes characterizing their conduct: (1) a failure to stop or restrict the war in Iraq; (2) a general failure/unwillingness to stop Bush on much of anything else of significance (FISA, a failure to reverse any of the excesses of the GOP Congress, such as the Military Commissions Act, lack of limits on his ability to attack Iran, etc.); and (3) numerous investigations, sometimes flashly but thus far inconsequential. There is no rational way to argue that the numerous investigations (item (3)) are responsible for Congressional unpopularity given how overwhelmingly Americans want Congressional investigations of the administration.

Thus, the only rational conclusion is that Congress is so unpopular, particularly among Democrats, because of their ongoing capitulations to the Bush administration, their failure to place any limits on his Iraq policy, and their general inability/refusal to serve as a meaningful check on the administration. Democrats and independents overwhelmingly dislike the President. Thus, the weaker Congress is in defying the President, the more unpopular Congress becomes.

Contrary to the general impression created by the media when discussing this polling data, Congress' extremely low standing does not undermine or dilute the intense unpopularity of Bush and his party among Americans. To the contrary, it bolsters it and arises from it."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/08/21/congress/index.html

What I find most interesting is that Karen has already assimilated the Bush/GOP talking points.

Despite the fact that EVERY military commander, including Petraeus, has stated that there is no military solution to Iraq, only a political one, she entitled a post yesterday "Glass Half Full?", based up the fact that some military objectives of the surge are being accomplished.

THIS IS AN EMPTY GLASS.... virtually NO political progress has been made in Iraq, so where does Karen get the IDEA that the glass might be half full? The surge is a failure based on its stated purpose, but Karen is perfectly willing to entertain the idea that minor "military" success is a valid metric.

The democrats lack of success has more to do with the fact that although they are the majority, in the senate they are a bare majority and in the house not enough of a majority.

The republicans have continued to walk lock-step with their failure of a president. That is why the democrats can't get anywhere with defunding and ending this huge military blunder.

Now, the president is again trying to find another excuse for the war continuing and then selling it to his gullible supporters in both houses of congress, by comparing it to Vietnam. There will be no military victory for the U.S. in this war, it's the Iraqis country and the only solution is a politcal one. Something that the Iraqis seem to be ill-equipped to deal with. This so-called un-achievable victory is only so that Bush can save his image for history. How can anyone believe the military when they report to congress? Do you really think that they would ever admit that the war has been failure? The only thing that the democrats can be blamed for is supporting the war before it began. They should have stood up to the intimidation coming from the republicans and not voted for it.

I hate to say I told you so, but I did. The only contribution to progressive ideas the Democratic Party makes, is phony rhetoric.

If you are getting tired listening to their constant lies please join the Green Party, where progressives are the mainstream.

Boy, were you wrong. 15 soldiers killed today. Everything's just freaking great.

We will return to CRAP WHERE'S MY GAY CONGRESSIONAL PAGE after these Praise the Lord suggestions for Turning This Country into One Big Men's Room stall with lots of scary black guys outside come September...

1) Hand out Bibles, adult diapers and KY Jelly before NASCAR races.

2) Blame it on Hillary, that latest successful Democratic Senator of New York.. Whoops, too late!

3) Demand a federal increase in abstinence only sex ed even if it only encourages lots and lots of anal sex amongst teenagers.

4) Set up some prayer pews to pray away all our troubles and hurricanes too.

5) Harness the virtually unlimited air power of Ann Coulter's fat yapper. If that doesn't fly, say something droll about the Breck Girl, to at least keep the TV cameras running.

6) Demand a regime change, somewhere, start a war and then refuse to serve your country...its the conservative way.

7) Call Air Gupta, grab the first hairy guy I see and give him the blow job of his life.

08) Head to West Hollywood for another one of those male only GOP fundraisers only to find out that I'm really at a gay bath house....wait!, theres' not difference! Ok, you might find an actual real man at a gay bathhouse, you'll never find one at a GOP gathering.

9) Attribute it to Global Power Line Kicking.

10) Mandate all motorized butt plugs owned, sanctioned, invented, rented, cleaned, or used by David Vitter or College Republicans to be put in the Smithsonian immediately.

11) Sell all of New Jersey to Maine in exchange for a 'Cats' soundrack, 2 Jack Russell terriers 2 tickets to Kathy Griffin and a 'Queer as Folk' box set.

12) Suspect another Left Wing Conspiracy on CNN, then quietly sell all your blind trust fund shares of KY Jelly.

Barbara O'Brien has more on the distortions flying around the media:

http://www.mahablog.com/2007/08/22/selling-the-surge/

Kudos on being self-deprecating and admitting when you're wrong, Karen. If more of our national political media had more of a down-to-earth spirit, I think it would improve our discourse...

US Senate Membership

DEM = 49
Independents (caucus with DEMs) = 2
GOP = 49

The DEM caucus in the Senate claimed 51 members giving the committee chairmanships and the Majority Leader to the DEMs.

Sen. Johnson (D) is still 'out' following brain surgery.
Lieb (I-D) votes consistently with the GOP

The GOP almost always votes straight party line. DEMs have 'blue dogs' who frequently vote with the GOP.

The BEST case scenario is that Reid can control what bills get to the floor. [Frist was a master at this one]. If all of the Blue Dogs vote with the DEMs, the vote would be:

DEMS: 49
GOP: 50

49 is not a majority.

If the Democrats had any balls they could have kept sending the same bill back to Bush, watched him veto it, and watched the money run out. The not enough votes argument is just another excuse for doing nothing.

They make me sick.

>It's the Democrats who are being put on the defensive over the war.

Ms. Tumulty,
Please leave the concern trollerism to Mr. Klein.

In a future posting, please prove me wrong and show how the Republicans gain from supporting the war.

By the way Mr. Fleischer's '07 version of Swift Boat Vets is spending 90% of its money in markets where the congressional member is Republican:
http://www.americablog.com/2007/08/open-thank-you-letter-to-ari-fleischer.html

bartkid, look at the poll, or better yet, go look at Glenn Greenwald's analysis from yesterday. The Democrats are on the defensive from voters in their own party. The numbers state it pretty clearly.

Did someone say 'boy'? MMMmMMMMMMMM....boy. GURGLE GURGLE GURGLE.