Weekend Open Thread: 6 in 1, 1/2 Dozen the Other

We were right, again (0.00 / 0)

From Media Matters.

Ridge-induced flashback: Media dismissed Bush terror alert skeptics as paranoid conspiracy theorists
In his forthcoming book, former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge reportedly claims that politics may have played a role in the question of whether to raise the terror threat levels on the eve of the November 2004 presidential election -- echoing contemporaneous allegations made by several progressives. Media Matters for America presents a sampling -- by no means exhaustive -- of media personalities who at the time portrayed those progressives as suffering from "cynicism" and "paranoia" and obsessed with a "conspiracy theory," despite credible evidence that the Bush administration was using the War on Terror for political gain, particularly in the months before the 2004 election.

I'm hard pressed to think of a negative Bush administration story that turned out not to be true.

[Tucker] CARLSON: Well, listen. I'll give you a great example. And it was brought out today in a piece in the San Francisco Chronicle.

How many times have you heard Democrats say, when there's a terror alert, you know, whisper to one another, or say, so (inaudible) say, this is all political. This is phony, cooked up by the White House.

Well, this San Francisco Chronicle piece basically claims to show that every time one of these terror alerts comes out the public is afraid and Bush's poll numbers go up.

I don't think it's a matter of gloating to say this. We were called some nasty names over the years, so it's worth pointing out that we were right 90% of the time.

---

by: JimC @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 08:05:01 AM CDT

Try as I might, I can't get my mind around (4.00 / 1)

what the Chronicle story is supposed to be "a great example" of.

There's some sort of leap in Carlson's logic that I can't follow.

Anyway, I'm hoping that after we dispose of the health care issue, we'll tackle reforming the Homeland Security Department and get rid of the shoe inspection program.  I'm sure somebody had many moments of wicked glee at the prospect of making Americans take off their shoes to get on a plane while Iraqis take theirs off to go pray.
Oh, the irony!

---

by: hannah @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 09:37:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

WHAT? Partisan politics played a role in determining the color-coded DHS threat level? (0.00 / 0)

Stop the presses.

--
New Hampshire's stimulus: a train to Boston.
Visit NHBTI.org to learn about the NH Capitol Corridor project.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 17:31:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Shameful (0.00 / 0)

and embarrassing.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 12:44:26 PM CDT

What do Grassley, Gregg, Gingrich and Graham have in common, (0.00 / 0)

other than being Republicans and having their last names start with 'G' as in George?  They are goofballs.  Which, as far as I can determine is an affectionate designation in Iowa.

That might explain something.

---

by: hannah @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 12:51:29 PM CDT

I kinda liked Grassley until recently - (0.00 / 0)

He seemed to have a common sense, we're-all-neighbors Max Yasgur thing going. Not the sharpest chisel in the set, but sensible.

Maybe I just wasn't paying attention. He's clearly acted as a partisan hack in the last month or two. Maybe he always did and I didn't pick up on it before.

---

by: elwood @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 13:28:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think by comparison to (4.00 / 1)

some of the others, (Santorum, Coburn, etc.) he looked good. With the country being pulled so far to the right, he could afford a bit of magnanimity. Not anymore.

---

by: Jennifer Daler @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 13:34:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Agree (4.00 / 2)

I've generally thought of him as what passed for moderate in the Senate Republican Conference.  At the least, I would have thought of him as being more reasonable than average among that group.

He's up for re-election in 2010, and I wonder if his seeming shift is a product of his reading of Iowa.  We often mention New Hampshire as a good example of how the political landscape has changed over the course of the Bush Era, but perhaps Iowa is a better example.  While the Republican Party, nationally, is very top-down, driven by insiders and pundits, the Democratic Party, nationally, allows for a far greater influence of the grassroots.  (That's not to say our party is perfect in that respect or lacks any top-down influence, but it's at least balanced, particularly now.  History proved Howard Dean had a better read of the nation than did John Kerry going into the 2004 election--and I say that as someone who wasn't a fan of Dean until well into his DNC Chairmanship.)

New Hampshire's character makes it uniquely predisposed to resist the influence of a top-down party structure shifting the ideology of a party.  Therefore, considering their respective driving forces, when dramatic a dramatic shift happens in either party, it seems to me that New Hampshire's Democrats are more likely to go along with their party's shift than are New Hampshire Republicans.  Granite State voters are not changed by the shifts of their national party (our state is aptly nicknamed), so the party more likely to have its shifts prompted by the grassroots is more likely to shift in such a way that New Hampshire voters of that party would go along with.

I think this accounts for why Mike Huckabee was able to win the Iowa Republican caucus but lose so decisively as to effectively end his campaign in New Hampshire.  I think New Hampshire Republicans, being New Hampshirites, are more likely to remember what it meant to be conservative once upon a time than are Republicans elsewhere, who are comparatively more influenced by Fox News types.  So while both states have turned blue, Iowa's Republicans seem more in line with the new, crazy Republican Party.

My point is this: Grassley needs to evolve as his national party has evolved to keep the confidence of his Republican base in Iowa, even as Iowa is becoming more and more blue.  

On the other hand, while I have myriad disagreements with New Hampshire Republicans (particularly their leaders), I do trust them to save us from Sarah Palin in 2012, should the need arise.

(apologies for the length--hope it was worth the read)

--
New Hampshire's stimulus: a train to Boston.
Visit NHBTI.org to learn about the NH Capitol Corridor project.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 17:53:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Question: (0.00 / 0)

How long will it be before the right-wing nut squad starts trashing Ridge in the tradmed, if it hasn't already (I haven't checked Faux News as yet).

---

by: GreyMike @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 19:23:11 PM CDT

Already started (0.00 / 0)

Someone else -- a woman, I forget her name -- "remembers it differently." She said the political aspects were discussed "on the fringes of it," and in terms of whether Bush would be hurt if he was seen as politicizing the list.

The fringes ... artful.

---

by: JimC @ Sun Aug 23, 2009 at 07:04:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

So, like, in the dark corners? (0.00 / 0)

Cockroaches. All scatter when the lights go on.

---

by: GreyMike @ Sun Aug 23, 2009 at 08:00:10 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Frances Townsend n/t (4.00 / 1)

---

by: elwood @ Sun Aug 23, 2009 at 08:30:48 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sorry, that should've ended with a "?"... n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: GreyMike @ Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 19:24:03 PM CDT