Batfink's Beep -- 03-7-06

E.J. Dionne gives up

March 7, 2006

It has been said both well and often, that the Democrats have no agenda. There has been much anguish among Democrats that they cannot seem to gain any ground in the debate, no matter how things go for Bush and the GOP, and their lack of an agenda is consistently and convincingly offered up as the reason. Writing in the Washington Post today, Shailagh Murray and Charles Babington relate, in unintentionally quite hilarious terms, both the difficulty facing the Democrat leaders who are trying to come up with something, and the clarity of the fact that nothing like a consensus currently exists.

It is, as I said, an extremely entertaining read for anyone not inclined to believe the Democrats ought to be in charge regardless of whether they are motivated by anything other than naked power lust. Indeed, it has rarely, if ever, been more clear that a major party wanted power for its own sake first, foremost, and to the exclusion of all else, than it is now; for there is nothing anyone can offer up that even pretends to be the honorable reason they should be given control of the levers of power. Just look at how hard a time they're having, trying to articulate one:

But many in the party have their doubts. On Feb. 27, Reid and Pelosi appeared before the Democratic Governors Association. At one point in the conversation, Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, noting that the two leaders had talked about a variety of themes and ideas, asked for help. Could they reduce the message to just two or three core ideas that governors could echo in the states?

According to multiple accounts from those in the room, Reid said they had narrowed the list to six and proceeded to talk about them. Pelosi then offered her six -- not all the same as Reid's. Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski said later: "One of the other governors said 'What do you think?' and I said 'You know what I think? I don't think we have a message.' "

At least Murray and Babington face up to the fact that something to believe in and promote is necessary, if the Democrats are ever to have a chance at leading the nation again. Heck, even Howard Dean thinks there has to at least be the appearance of an agenda. That's why he keeps repeating the tired (and unsuccessfully used by Kerry in 2004) slogan "Together, America Can Do Better". Sure, he doesn't know that a slogan isn't an agenda, but he is Howard Dean, after all. And that's the point: Even he knows they need something to point to besides Bush. But this is not a sentiment shared by everyone on the left.

So: Who, then, doesn't know something so obvious that even Howard Dean knows it, you ask? Well, that would be E. J. Dionne, also writing today. Dionne, who, don't laugh, I have actually heard called intelligent, has decided that hating Bush will be enough after all. Get a load of this:

After a period of bad news for President Bush, media outlets invariably devote time and space to "balancing" stories that all say more or less: "Yes, the Republicans are in trouble, but the Democrats have no alternatives, no plans," etc.

The pattern began to fall in place this weekend in the wake of two truly miserable weeks for Bush.

The stories about the Democrats are by no means flatly false -- Democrats don't yet have a fully worked-out alternative program -- but they are based on a false premise, and they underestimate what I'll call the positive power of negative thinking.

Dionne acknowleges what everyone seems to know, that the Dems have no plan. He just doesn't think it's a problem. After all, he says, neither does Bush:

But Democrats have no good answer to Iraq. True. And neither does Bush, who started the war and should be held accountable for where we are now.

The fact that Bush doesn't need to run again seems to have escaped Dionne, though. Too, the fact that the GOP has both the House and the Senate. I'm not saying that as a gloat, but simply to note that the case for change is the burden of the out-party, or else why change? No matter how bad one thinks things are going, shouldn't the challengers ought to be able to say what they'd do different, at least? And frankly, in times as momentous as these, the fact that, 5 years into a global shooting war, the out party cannot even come up with a couple sentences of mission statement, does not exactly encourage the thought that, maybe, we ought to give THEM a whack at it.

top

Visitors since Dec 1, 2005:

Revised: 05/19/08 08:07:09 -0400 .