We have a BIG BIG problem

[ShaneGR]

Today the President of the United States* was directed by Karl Rove to fly to Baghdad. In an unprecedented media event, the trip was kept secret from the media until the President landed in Baghdad (Yeah right). The image is clear, brave and cheerful President conducts daring trip behind enemy lines to visit the troops. Snap the pictures and take the video. Priceless. Machiavelli would be proud.

In exchange for the President's visit, his campaign just shored up his entire base of about 40 million voters. Any doubters probably swung back to him, and you can bet a lot of them are going to be fanatical about it. The media is still fairly hands off his administration, despite all of the intrigue and scandal. He also managed to make a good amount of swing voters think about whether or not he's really such a bad guy.

But we continue to haggle over trivial questions like Howard Dean being from a small state (Bill Clinton's from a small state) or Clarks position on Kerry's military career (Or vica versa). It's kind of comical actually. And when someone points it out, there's even more flaming.

Bush has already raised 102 million dollars for 2004. He will probably have 150 million for a primary where he faces no opponent. On March 3rd, the day after Super Tuesday when the Democratic Nominee will probably be known, the Bush campaign will start buying up massive amounts of TV airtime, branding the Democrat before we even have our convention. Regardless of who the nominee is, we will be fighting an uphill battle, with far less money... from the start.

I know this is a dark picture. But unfortunately it is true. We need to keep our wits about us and start coming together or I think it's going to be four more years of Bush.

[Skwmom]

1. Their focus is going to be on national security

and unless we can put up a candidate with strong national security credentials we are toast. It's that simple.

[mikehiggins]

3. Clark's position on Kerry's military career?

What exactly is that?

[coralrf]

28. They dont have a candidate ...

strong on national security..so why do we need one?

Clark.
Kerry.

Bush has a better record than them?

[leesa]

40. EXACTLY. Their candidate is a loser as far as security is concerned

He has put our country into deep peril as far as national security is concerned. We have NEVER been in as much danger from so many countries as we are today.

This is so EASY to prove. Why do you go along with the mythology that they have an edge in national security? What they have done has been a disaster for national security. Not to even bring up the fact that the BS programs they created for internal national security have not been funded and are not functional.

STOP playing by their propaganda!

[Skwmom]

48. It is not propoganda. It is a fact. The Dems have ZERO

credibility on national defense and a candidate like Howard Dean isn't going to give us any (especially once his statement on a unilateral attack are repeated again, and again, and again).

[leesa]

36. But we HAVE NO national security. We are in Far, Far, far

greater danger than we have ever been before and we have massively INCREASED the number of terrorists. Why is this so hard to refute? How can American's be so blind???

[rumguy]

2. this trip may come back and bite him

just like the mission accomplished thing did...i remember how daring that seemed at the time...now it just looks stupid

the reality on the ground over there will be the deciding factor...if it keeps getting worse nothing will save Bush

[RummyTheDummy]

4. Good honest to the point post.....

Rove will play this for all its worth. It's been awhile since I've felt our prospects in 04, regardless of the nominee, were so dark.

And regardless of the negative spin that will come from this stunt on this board, we were handed our collective asses today on a platter with lemon garnish. Dark days.

On edit: I feel sorry for the troops he visited in many ways. They actually believes he cares about them. Sad.

[impeach the gop]

9. I wouldn't advise the smirk to get too cocky just now

Way too many fires burning wherever he goes. Spreading like wildfires CA style. This train will wreck. He wasn't elected President, and he never will. He will steal our votes if we allow him. It's really up to us to pound the shit out of his fuck ups and crimes.

[FubarFly]

10. I doubt if this will help him.

A photo-op is only effective if results follow. Saddam wasn't "toppled". The Berlin Wall hasn't crumbled. Iraq is still a mess. b*sh is still responsible. What really has changed? The next major negative incident that comes out of Iraq will erase the effects of this stunt.

[lancdem]

18. I'm afraid I have to agree with you

Whatever Bush's motivation, this appears to be a brilliant move engineered by Rove. For the moment, at least.

[coralrf]

21. Do me a favor...

and tell me just how you come to that conclusion? Bush let his fear of being harmed dominate this trip to Iraq. He hid from the world, including Americans on a national holiday. He ran into Iraq for a one night stand and then got his ass out of there before he might face a rocket or a protestor.

What pray tell do you see in this stunt? Given the fact that Bush has a reputation for running, aka 9/11 and pulling stunts that manipulate the military, sock crotch on an aircraft carrier, just how far do you think he will get with this?

Why do you folks promote this stunt with gloom and doom? Tell it like it is. Nuff said.

[RummyTheDummy]

34. Do me a favor...

And don't blow smoke up my ass. What happened today is what happens when a sitting president has a bully pulpit. He can stage events like this (or have them staged for him) which is roughly equivalent to playing against Michael Jordan in his prime. No matter what you do, Jordan was going to have his points aka pound of flesh.

We can debate the long term significance of this event, and I believe like you it probably wont resonate, but today was a victory for the Repukes and for today and today only I'm just going to sit back and take my medicine. Tommorow will be a new day.

[ramapo]

66. Eleven months is a long time

A lot can happen. Sure this will give Bush a big headline and poll boost. It'll be a great campaign ad assuming they're crass enough to us it (is there any question?).

This convinced me of one thing. Clark must be the nominee. Dean will be toasted by the Repubs ala Dukakis although I'm sure Dean won't roll over as easily.

I've said it many times. Barring a foreign policy disaster or terrorist attack, it's the economy. If it's up he wins, down he loses. The Repubs will do all they can to make things rosy.

A second term really will cement the Republican power base. It'll take a long time to crack it.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

70. Just tlaked to a bunch of Repugs who thought that Clark could beat Bush

I was pretty amazed. They then added that they thought that most likely Dean would win and would get beat though...

[Minstrel Boy]

5. But what do you expect early in the nomination season?

There should be infighting now. At this stage of the game, it indicates health, and that the prize will be hard won.

Less hand-wringing, please. People will pull together I'm sure when the time comes to unite. This isn't the time.

[carpe diem]

6. best argument yet for General Clark as nominee!!

I was just watching the President's "surprise" visit to the troops in Iraq. The reaction from the troops and the media coverage of it shows exactly where the battle for the White House is going to be fought next year. Those images are going to replace the "flight suit" photo-op as THE ad to be played over and over again throughout the campaign. It's not going to be about jobs, not health care, not the economy, not even medicare or prescription drugs (even though we have given them a big stick to beat us over the head with... and they will).

The war on terrorism and national security are going to be the battleground for this election and there is not one thing that we can do about it. It is not going to be possible, while the country is at war, and we have over 100,000 troops on the ground in a shooting gallery, to change or redefine the argument. "It's the economy, stupid" or some similar catchy phrase will not be able to withstand the kinds of images we just saw of George Bush in Iraq. And the media will co-operate fully in getting these images out there for the White House. This was perfectly played pr: slow news day, most Americans are at home watching t.v. This is going to be replayed HUNDREDS of times and all the pundits and talking heads are going to be harping about this for the next several days, weeks, possibly even longer. They will get much mileage out of this.

This is why we have to nominate someone like Wesley Clark. This is going to be an incredibly difficult election for the Democrats to win, I don't care who we nominate. However, unless we want to go ahead and concede the 2004 election and probably every congressional race for the next 4 yrs., we HAVE to put forward someone who can fight George Bush in the area where he is perceived to be the strongest. With all due respect to Howard Dean and the other folks running, they cannot go up against what we just saw on television and beat George Bush. You will see that video and others like it throughout the Republican convention in September of next year, anniversary of 9/11 and so on. A quarter of a billion dollars to fill the airwaves with those images in the weeks and months just before election day.

With Wes Clark, there is certainly no guarantee of anything. We could still lose the election "big time". But, if the democratic party cannot see that a four-star general w/ 34 yrs of military leadership under his belt under his belt, is THE BEST CHANCE we have to go up against an incumbent WARTIME president and have a real shot at winning, we deserve to lose and lose badly. We have to get over ourselves just a little and look at the bigger, longer-term picture beyond our particular pet issues and concerns. We need some order and discipline and a willingness to compromise and sacrifice a little bit here and there if we want to have a real chance at reclaiming the political landscape from those currently in power.

I am not someone who usually gets into politics and following campaigns beyond voting. But this year, not until General Clark got into the race did I think that we had a chance in hell of winning this election. I have donated money to a political campaign for the first time in my life. I follow this race like the future of the republic depends on it. And for the first time in my life, I truly believe that it does. What frustrates me most is that I can see this so clearly but I don't think that enough people who consider themselves Democrats see it to keep us from nominating someone who is going to get his ass handed to him in the general election. It's not going to be the specifics of a particular policy or the details of some issue paper. It's going to be who can make people feel safe and who can touch people's hearts. Even I was moved when I saw the coverage of Bush's visit, and I CANNOT STAND HIM!!

Some people thought General Clark's ad was kind of sappy, and I admit I was one, but that kind of stuff moves people and inspires them. That is what we need to be able to do if we are going to have any chance at winning this thing. I hope, if nothing else, the result of today's pr coup by the White House, is that the Democrats realize that we have to have a nominee who can actually go toe to toe against a wartime president and it is NOT Howard Dean or any of the others. If we blow the opportunity to put Wes Clark on the ballot this year, we deserve what we get.

[karlschneider]

31. Hi jg, welcome to DU. You make some excellent points. I've begun to

think there may be an unfortunate scenario building. Clark does indeed appear to me to have the gravitas to beat Shrub, but the problem is can he get the nomination? Of course I'll support whoever does, but I have a sinking feeling that Dean (who I like) will end up with it and have less of a chance. The ideal (for me) candidate would be one with Kuchinich's ideals, Clark's persona, Dean's egalitarianism, Sharpton's quick wit, Braun's velvet tongue, Kerry's disdain for convention, Gep's grasp of commerce and labor issues, Edwards' easy congeniality and the experience of dropped-out Bob Graham.

I can dream, can't I? ;-)

[shanti]

37. a shameless plug for clark

well, isn't that special...

[ShaneGR]

79. sighs

[Skwmom]

43. I felt the same way.

I also CANNOT stand Bush (just ask my husband, I'm constantly ranting about the man). However, I was also moved by the coverage of Bush's visit so I can just imagine how wavering Republicans must feel.

[Silverhair]

49. You are completely correct!!! n/t

[newyawker99]

78. Hi jg82567!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[blm]

7. Dems have to prepare to face a SUCCESSFUL Bush and not a failed one

because the MEDIA image will be that of a successful president. 87 billion dollars will buy Bush the appearance of success in Iraq. An election will be held in Iraq AFTER our nominee is chosen.

Most of the media is willingly complicit to pump up Bush, as we have seen already.

Dems have to be prepared to confront him at EVERY level and best him in every way. Put up the BEST man to beat that image in every way. The wrong man at the top of the ticket and the whole party will go down in 2004.

[Imajika]

19. blm

"Dems have to prepare to face a SUCCESSFUL Bush and not a failed one"

Exactly. I've been saying it for months now. Every scandal that comes along and half of DU seem to believe "Bush is toast" or "Bush is finished".

When Wilson-Plume broke there were even a number of posts swearing that the CIA was turning against Bush and that it would surely be his downfall.

Anyone heard much in the mainstream media about Wilson-Plume lately?

"because the MEDIA image will be that of a successful president. 87 billion dollars will buy Bush the appearance of success in Iraq. An election will be held in Iraq AFTER our nominee is chosen."

Agreed.

"The wrong man at the top of the ticket and the whole party will go down in 2004."

I am very afraid of this. The economy, at least on the surface, appears to be improving. Americans tend to default to tough, militaristic foreign policy over any "peace" platform - and with 9-11 so fresh in peoples minds, well I just suspect Bush is going to be a very powerful incumbent and extraordinarily difficult to beat.

I believe many people here on DU assume Bush will be considered a failed President by most Americans because they can't face the alternative - which is that Bush may indeed be considered successful by most of the US public.

We are going to need a positive, forward looking nominee whom talks optimism and about what a great country this is yet how much better it can be if Americans vote Democratic.

Imajika

[blm]

41. Thanks for keeping your wits about you.

I understand how people can get emotional about an election, but emotion is also a weakness in a battle this dead serious.

This IS a battle with the entire BFEE. I want to go into it armed with the smartest candidate we can produce with encyclopedic knowledge of the BFEE. We need the BEST we have. The BEST mind. The BEST ideas. The BEST resume. The BEST speaker. The BEST policies. The BEST presence. The BEST team against Bush's team.

One candidate may excel at beating other Dems while others will excel at beating Bush.

John Glenn couldn't beat Mondale but he had the numbers and the cache to beat Reagan in 84. Why do Dems get so damn stupid at the worst possible time?

[Skwmom]

56. If the Dems can't get their act together and put

up a viable candidate when our country is facing such a crisis, I think the Democrats are going to experience a mass exodus after the 2004 election.

[karlschneider]

61. Please do not take offense, none is intended, but if DUers can't remember

the name "Plame" (not "Plume"), it's unlikely that apolitical christmas-shopping idiots will, or care at all about it.

:eyes:

[Imajika]

63. Your right karlschneider

"but if DUers can't remember the name 'Plame' (not 'Plume'), it's unlikely that apolitical christmas-shopping idiots will, or care at all about it."

Yup, I have spelled the name wrong before as well. I noticed I had done it again but was simply to lazy to edit my error.

I don't take offense. Your right to call me out on it. I will make a point to spell it correctly next time.

Cheers,

Imajika

[Skwmom]

46. I think Rove and Co are raising so much money because they

intend to

1. Destroy the Democratic Party (not just the nominee).
2. Increase the number of Republicans in Congress so they can silence the opposition.

[T Bone]

71. yes skwmom

When I read PNAC plan for world domination militarily and realized who was on board with it, it was no stretch to see it would be applied domestically if they could do it. They will try.

[kentuck]

8. Well, the other photo-op wasn't going to work....

the one with the landing on aircraft carrier, so they had to get another good one. They will squeeze every ounce of political mileage out of it, you can bet.

[Postman]

13. Or the recent trip to Britain with all his fans in the streets....

Bush is an effing moran.

[cocoabeach]

11. Great post ....but unless there are

answers to the problems facing this country, we are seen as whiners to others that we need for a Democatic victory. All i ever hear is Doom and Gloom. "get out of Iraq" O.K. then what??? We are there and 2 candidates voted for it. We can not pull out....the people wnat this finished and behind us so that we don't get kicked in the ass with it later.

We need answers and ideas.

[rumguy]

14. ever notice that Bush is great at photo ops?

But fails at the larger goal? No Osoma, no Saddam, no WMDs, no peace in Iraq, peace falling apart in Afghanistan, no anthrax killer...the list goes on and on....

We need someone who is serious about the policy, and not just the politics of the policy.

[Malva Zebrina]

12. It was a most brilliant use of total photo oped play acting

it should be considered shameful by a population who is , indeed, educated and aware, but unfortunately, we do not have a population that is that concerned and he knows it.

Americans will see it as a wonderful thing their AWOL president has done on Thanksgiving for "the troops" even though it was only done in the Bagdhad airport and done for two and one half hours to a small group of "the troops" before he boarded his plane and took off for the pig farm--the prairie chapel again to meet with his pickles and spend some "quality time" with the frump celebrating thanksgiving--reportedly, Poppy and the hag , along with the everloving twins were to be there also. Whatever happened to that?

Nevermind--"the troops" were reportedly overwhelmed and in awe of this bold, courageous AWOL president who saw fit to put himself in harm's war, vulnerable to the "terrorists" in Iraq who keep up the guerilla resistance , who took off from Crawford to fly to serve them a turkey dinner on that most American of holidays. They were so grateful to see him and praise his efforts.

And these are the things that will stick in the minds of people.

I have not the slightest idea what to do about it. I do not think that the people of the US can see the idiot for what he is because his propagandists are so clever and so quick to fix it all and to use what is at their disposal to manufacture a man into a real president, and I grieve that the condition of the elections in this country is almost entirely dependant upon the amount of money, and the amount of "buying" of the media and the corporations, the candidate can do-on both sides.

It is very broken at this point, imo, when no one can, and no one is willing to expose an idiot and an imbecile such as the AWOL coward we have sitting in the white house, who had to deprive people of their votes in order to get there in the first place.

[coralrf]

25. Speak for yourself...

nt

[Malva Zebrina]

29. I am

speaking for myself and am not afraid to do so. are you? What are you speaking about , other than challenging me in some way that you may think is so clever? Sheesh. Do you have anything to say that would put you up on the drawing board? come on--be brave--speak your piece or forever hold it. If you have nothing to say then I would suggest that you not so weakly post a post to me that says "speak for yourself" when I am , indeed, speaking for myself!! Who else am I speaking for--if you read my post, you will see that I am speaking for myself--and everyone who p0sts here, is, indeed, "speaking for themself,including you, if you would be so brave as to post a post that would speak for yourself.

[karlschneider]

53. "speak for yourself"?? Is that the best you can do?

If the reasonably eloquent post you are dismissing so cavalierly fails to represent your views, it seems you could come up with something with a bit of substance. One might tend to think you have no mind of your own. I might think that too.

[Lisa]

72. I think Marianne makes an excellent point about the "play acting"

No question, they are getting good at setting up attractive vignettes for video/photos. If you don't believe me, read Elizabeth Bumiller's article explaining how much is involved in this.

http://work.colum.edu/~amiller/0516/stagecraft-1.htm

The other thing they're doing is drowning out any attempt to communicate an alternative message -- whether it's from other events (like Hillary's visits to Afghanistan AND Iraq) -- or criticism of their chosen events. Until the "stagecraft" part is made clear, the "pretty pictures" will continue to be used to sell him.

[mlawson]

15. Just be glad it was today.

When 99% if the population is supposedly watching football, and eating poultry, etc. Most will not see the news, if this caricature is correct.

Actually, one photo-op won't elect *. This did NOT help us, but still...

[lancdem]

20. Actually, I didn't know about Bush's trip

until I logged onto DU in the early evening. I was watching football all afternoon. :)

[mlawson]

22. Ah, empirical evidence... Thanks, lancdem!!!

[lancdem]

44. You're welcome!

[FubarFly]

23. Unless there is a satisfactory resolution to the Iraq Invasion

(to the majority of the American people, not DU) by election time, then this photo-op will have little value. If another 500-1000 American soldiers die in the next year, then b*sh is going to need more than an uplifting campaign commercial to show America- he's going to need actual substance.

I believe that for most Americans, we are past the point for cheap rhetoric. Too much blood has already been spilled. Eventually our soldiers are going to come home. And when start telling their stories... let's just say that we will have ample opportunity to provide a robust rebuttal to the argument that b*sh is strong on National Security.

[Solomon]

67. I never saw it either and only just learned about it here on

DU. I wish I had seen it tho the way you all are talking about it.

[NJCher]

16. your post is very shortsighted, sgr2

doubters swinging back over a photo op?

The poster who said that if it goes badly on the ground--as it has been--no number of photo ops or secret missions will save him.

As far as the amount of media that's purchased, I used to be a media buyer and I can tell you that it's more about careful planning than it is about blowing the other side away with massive amounts of commercials. There is a point of diminishing return. Quite fortunately for us, the repukes never know when to quit.

Still--planning for the worst is never a bad idea.




Cher

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. I still have a bit of faith in Americans.

I don't think that this obvious flagwaving photo-op is going to sway many voters.

The polls that I've seen show pretty much the same situation as in 2000. A pretty evenly divided country with about 20% wavering in between.

Despite the rah-rah road trip to Iraq, the occupation is still going badly and the bodies, though concealed, are still coming home.

How very courageous of him to sneak into Iraq, get some programmed cheers and hurry back to good ol' Crawford, for dinner with poppy and the kiddies.

Americans may be ignorant of the world outside the US, but they aren't dumb.

[coralrf]

24. Amen...

nt

[salinen]

33. I keep getting flamed

for thinking this, but I feel that bullying for as many debates, will be more important than it was in 2000. For these reasons:

1. As bad as bush is in a debate, Gore was second worse. Line him up against a real speaker, and he comes across as the juvenile.

2. In all other areas we are overmatched. Media is all conservative. $250,000,000 war chest will mean hardly a peep from us and overkill for their side. They will define who they are and who we are. Double fucked. How it is now.

3. The debates will be rigged no doubt. But a savvy debater can overcome this. This will be the real Bush vs. Candidate X. Ad lib is bush at his weakest.

[asjr]

26. problem

We all know why he went. It is entirely political. Some bad stuff is going against him now right here at home and he wanted to divert our attention. But I don't think it will work. He has tried this crap once too often and the voters in this country are not as dumb as he thinks they are. It will get full coverage of course in the media, but they too underestimate us. Too many people are really fed up with this administration and I think and hope we have a chance in 2004. But one thing that worries me is our Dems don't get enough "good" coverage by the media. They always show clips of Dems bashing Dems and play it up. There is not much we can do about that. If you are like me you have e-mailed until your fingers are sore, but nothing seems to change.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[andym]

27. Recipe

Recipe:
1 part
$150-200 million dollars spent by the committee to re-"elect"
showing Bush as a glorious succeful wartime leader.
+
1 part
X million dollars spent by Pacs to demonstrate that the Democratic nominee is a "liberal" untrustworthy traitor.

+
1 part
media complicity in touting Bush as a successful President

Outcome: bad loss in the fall + loss of house/senate seats.

How to avoid this:

We need a nominee who can compete on national security with a wartime President.

We need a nominee with charisma and charm.

We'll need very good strategy, tactics and a quite bit of luck as well. All likely nominees have to establish a register a winning persona with the American public now to vaccinate them against later attacks.

[FubarFly]

30. No, we just need a candidate who is willing to stand up to the

b*sh machine and tell it like it is.

Iraq has been an unmitigated disaster. Anything said to the contrary is a blatant lie. The truth will set us free...

[andym]

38. No, I disagree

Most of our candidates will "tell it like it is."
Some will even do it with great passion.

Problem is that they won't be heard by the majority of the American public, because the "truth" will be discredited by presumptions of a partisan agenda.

That's the power of propaganda.

Our greatest truth-tellers are regarded as losers and kooks.
Carter, Mondale ("We'll have to raise your taxes"), McGovern...

Look at the great Jerry Brown, brilliant political innovator who launched both a campaign and a movement against special interests (see 1992 and the "We the People" campaign and organization). How seriously was/is he taken now. I hope that someone chooses him as VP, but I suspect that won't happen, because he has been so "discredited."

[FubarFly]

47. Common sense trumps propaganda-

as long as you give people a believable alternative.

I'm not saying we don't have a whale of a fight on our hands. But the facts are on our side. Iraq is a disaster comparable to Vietnam. b*sh has not made us any safer. I think most people in their hearts realize this. That is why they'll listen. But we do have to speak sensibly, forcibly, and with a united voice.

[andym]

51. I agree that we must speak sensibly forcibly and with a united voice!

Good thought!

I think you are partially right. Common sense can trump propaganda, but not always. And one way it can is by following your prescription. The best way is when enough non-partisan voices will join in.

[FubarFly]

59. I'm glad we agree on this.

We can't win this fight if we remain divided.

[0007]

50. I guess the best to do now is have the next democratic debate .....

live from Iraq with Jim Lehrer from the PBS News Hours as the Moderator.

This would throw water on junior's act, 'eh? If Halliburton can be protected by our troops why can't the troops protect the canidates. In fact the Iraqis perhaps would a applaud the plan and welcome the debate.

[FubarFly]

55. Has the actions of the b*sh presidency made you feel

more or less secure?

If the majority of American's answer "more", we will lose this election.

[Zhade]

73. Too good an opportunity for TraitorCo to whack the candidate(s) they fear.

NT!

[leesa]

35. How can these people be so STUPID?? They are like retarded

children! You are right though. All the ignorant flag wavers will be cheering the war criminal on. None of them will recall that we aren't at war according to the First Cheerleader.

[salinen]

42. Has anyone here

ever felt this insane before? What the fuck is happening to this nation. Criminals in the control room and a cheerleading populace behind it. Fuck!

[Demobrat]

39. You really think Americans are going to fall for

a three hour photo op in an airport? I have more faith, thank goodness.

[rumguy]

45. In politics a year is A LONG time, think back how you felt

one year from today...the repubs had the senate and house and bush's approval ratings were still high...and we knew there was a big jingoistic war coming on...now THOSE were dark days...

it's better now, so think how much better our chances could be a year from now...it's not a guarantee...just let's not worry, let's get motiviated, donate and organize!!!

[sleipnir]

52. Hello? Americans only remember 6 months of history...this is a nonissue

This is why 9-11, 2000 Election fraud, the Afghan war, tax cuts and a miriad of other issues will actually be non-issues in 04. The American public has an amazing abilitiy to forget anything that hasn't happened in the last 6 months. It's true, it's true. That's just one of the quirks about America. Therefore, the issues that are going to shape this election haven't even HAPPENED YET! So stop getting all bent out of shape and focus on the future, that's where the real fight will be.

[enough]

54. Another day, another photo op.

I just can't see this thing making that much difference one way or the other.

The aircraft carrier stunt makes these gestures suspect, and this one with skulking away after a couple of hours isn't going to help him in the long haul. Sure his supporters loved it -- they always will. I see no reason to think it will convince anyone who is doubting.

If anything, it makes him look more irrelevant. Couldn't they even come up with some kind of meeting for him to go to, or some sort of policy announcement?

[UTUSN]

57. Kick for Coming Together

And a pox on "when someone points it out, there's even more flaming."

[ShaneGR]

68. Thanks for noticing

That was the whole point of the thread.

[dflprincess]

58. I checked the message board at the Mpls Star Tribune's

website. I would say the comments are running about 80% against this publicity stunt. The people who are writing in about Bush*'s trip are not being fooled into thinking his motives had anything to do with caring about the troops.

[many a good man]

60. He will campaign as he ruled

with lies, lies, lies...

Be prepared for one mindfuck of a campaign...a barrage of too good to be true images and words in direct contradiction of reality. A foggy fantasy of a world not like the one we see.

Flight suit, serving turkey, bullhorn on the rubble...it will be a sensory overload of wonderfulness. This photo op will be a three second transition shot among hundreds of other totally bogus images that will saturate our brains over the long months of the campaign season.

We're in BIG trouble only if we fail to puncture the illusion, the dream. The gas lit hallucination of a democratic system on the verge of collapse. The Great Experiment failed.

We will have to respond with every weapon available. We need more than one type of candidate, with a certain style or background or geographical base. To save the party we have to throw at it everything we have. All losing primary candidates must take to road and campaign for the standard bearer as hard as if they were campaigning for themselves.

Ads must be powerfully emotional, based on issues, based on images, positive and negative. The Republican party has been hijacked by liars and extremists who have stolen our democracy and sold it to the highest bidder. They are all phonies. Voters must be told to look at their ads closely and watch for the manipulation. Compare their pictures of reality with statistical truths and real-life stories.

This is the biggest election of our lives. Maybe of our nation's history. Hearken back to the patriots of '76 and what they were willing to sacrifice their lives for. What activists the last 227 years have fought for. What are each of us willing to do to save this country?

[rumguy]

62. right on

it will be one mind-fuck of a campaign. and to win it will take all this party has.

"Voters must be told to look at their ads closely and watch for the manipulation. Compare their pictures of reality with statistical truths and real-life stories."

We must reframe their crap with the truth and we must do that by directly callimg them on it....we can't just put out good policy positions....

[BeHereNow]

64. Make no mistake-

We will have four more years of Bush.
What ever assets you have, get them out of
US currency NOW.
Got sons? Got daughters?
Have a friend in Europe adopt them.
Keep those passports ready and gold and silver
coins handy.
We be FUCKED- so say the writing on the wall...

BHN

[FubarFly]

65. Before you leave, can clue me in with some lottery numbers.

You seem so good at predicting things...

:eyes:

[BeHereNow]

75. Bookmark and get back to me

After the elections...
No lottery numbers, but maybe, just maybe
I will give you some stock tips.
I just made 4 grand in 9 days.
Heh-heh.
BHN
PS: Nothing to do with predicting btw-
strictly research and analysis.
Trust me, the power elite have just gotten
started and they aint ABOUT to let go in 2004-
Like I said, bookmark this thread and we'll talk later.
Peace-BHN

[FubarFly]

76. Will do.

But I might be too busy throwing Republicans off of the ramparts to respond. :evilgrin:



I have no doubt that we have dark days ahead. But I think I'll save my defeatism for after I'm actually defeated.

[Catt03]

69. This photo op will sway many voters

The millions in the Republican base are now known as worshipers; the undecided were emotionally manipulated.

Rove is Bush's brain and no one can beat his gameplan;cater to the dumb, the radical, the angry and the greedy (sic). Election 2004 will be an uphill battle no matter who the candidate is. Sorry, that is the way it is.

Some respite from the gushing media:http://www.independent.co.uk/

[Wapsie B]

74. Do we have a problem

today that we didn't have yesterday? Am I quaking in my boots because of some staged photo-op? No friggin way.
Oh he's going to have a monstrous warchest along with an obedient media shilling for him at every turn, but what's new about that?

[Gloria]

77. What will his next photo op be?? Shaking hands with the Shiite cleric

running an Islamic Iraq???

This photo op will be buried if things continue to deteriorate....
If those mortars finally hit Central Command in Baghdad....

[OldSoldier]

80. It's not such a big problem

He went to a fairly secure area--about as secure as anywhere in Iraq can be. He made the joke about "looking for a warm meal" then refused to eat any of it. And he managed to piss off the 82nd Airborne troops in attendance by not displaying an All American patch on his jogging jacket.

OTOH, Senator Hillary Clinton went to a far less secure area and ate with the troops.

The Freepers are probably creaming themselves over this, and Bush's base loves it...but Bush could hold his base together even if he murdered someone on national television.

Our candidates need to start attending military funerals. Especially the ones who are already elected officials of some sort. This will really undercut Bush.