As Democrats go through their biennial rite of premature victory celebrations, they are inviting defeat again by obsessing on polls about how many congressional seats are "in play" rather than on explaining to the American people what a Republican victory on Nov. 7 would mean to the nation.
In the last three elections, George W. Bush has claimed mandates for his policies even when there were questions about the legitimacy of Republican victories. In Election 2000, Bush brushed aside the fact that he lost the popular vote to Al Gore and pressed ahead with a right-wing agenda.
The Republican congressional victories in Election 2002 convinced Bush that the voters were behind his plans for "preemptive" wars. He called Election 2004 his "accountability moment," ratifying both his invasion of Iraq and his expansion of executive powers.
So, there should be little illusion how Bush would interpret a Republican upset victory on Nov. 7. It would be taken as a public embrace of his authoritarian vision for America's future and as an endorsement of the neoconservative commitment to wage "World War III" against Islamic militants around the world.
If the GOP keeps control of Congress, Bush would be strongly tempted to double up on his bloody wager in Iraq with military attacks on Iran and Syria. That expanded war would guarantee reprisals by radicalized Muslims around the world and thus draw the United States into a virtually endless conflict.
At home, the consequences of indefinite war would be fatal, too, to the already wounded American democratic Republic. Bush would translate a GOP victory into public acceptance of his de facto elimination of key constitutional rights and his creation of an imperial presidency.
Though the major U.S. news outlets have paid scant attention – and the Democrats have mostly ducked the issue – Bush already has put in place the framework for a modern-day totalitarian state.
Operating under Bush's assertion of "plenary" – or unlimited – presidential authority, his administration has devised a system of electronic eavesdropping that can pry into the private lives of Americans; has set up arrangements for detention camps; and has secured from Congress the power to detain American citizens for allegedly aiding U.S. enemies.
Indeed, the new Military Commissions Act of 2006, enacted on Oct. 17, establishes what amounts to a parallel legal system under Bush's control that permits the indefinite jailing of both citizens and non-citizens who are deemed enemies of the state.
The law specifically strips non-U.S. citizens of habeas corpus – the right to a fair trial – but American citizens caught up in Bush's legal system also would be denied the right to challenge their incarceration, effectively eliminating their habeas corpus rights, too.
Under the new law, Bush could put "any person" into the military tribunal process for allegedly aiding America's enemies and the detainee would be barred from filing any motions "whatsoever" to the civilian courts.
So, while the New York Times has assured Americans that they would still possess their habeas corpus rights, that amounts to semantics since the law's court-stripping provision means that American citizens might technically possess their rights but couldn't exercise them.
Bush's parallel legal system also sharply curtails the rights of detainees when they are put on trial before a military tribunal, permitting secret evidence and even coerced testimony to be used against them. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com's "Who Is 'Any Person' in Tribunal Law."]
Though few Americans understand the full scope of the law's provisions – or what "World War III" against many of the world's one billion Muslims would entail – Bush would surely interpret a Republican congressional victory as a personal mandate to proceed in those directions.
Court Prospects
If Republicans keep control of the House and Senate, the chances of the U.S. Supreme Court striking down the Military Commissions Act also would be reduced. The court, which rebuffed Bush's earlier administrative version on a 5-4 vote, would weigh both the congressional approval and the voters' acquiescence in judging the law's legality.
Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at
Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.'
If We Lose This Election, We Could Lose Our Democracy
The celebratory mood of the Democratic Party is indeed a danger to the country and our democracy. The Democrats should not be slapping backs and giving each other high-fives, this is the party that in the first election against Bush, distanced themselves from one of the most popular president's in history, and failed to capitalize on a robust economy and the lowest deficit in decades. They practically gave George Bush the keys to the White House without a fight, and still won the popular vote but lost the election because of poor prior planning. The next election pitted Kerry, a Vietnam Vet that wouldn't even defend his wartime service, against a NeoCon that couldn't even make his National Guard drills, and had shown the nation that he was virtually incapable of doing anything right. During that election, Democrats couldn't come up with a cohesive message and allowed Bush to use every dirty trick in the book while they took the high road and basically refused to fight back.
This election has been and continues to be, not a clamor for the Democratic message...there really isn't any, but more of a referendum on Iraq and the President's high-handedness. The Democrats need to continually show how Bush and Company have eroded the Constitution to a point where another two years of Republican rule in Congress might just mean that there won't be a meaningful election in 2008.
I'm not a Democrat, and I will never be a Democrat. I left the Democratic party when I saw how badly led and also how much it had left it's core constituancy and became a second Republican party. This came about because of the need for corporate campaign dollars and the replacement of statesmen with millionaire politicians. There is no party for the middle and lower classes. Only the well to do are represented in this country, and liberal has become a dirty word to Republicans and Democrats alike. I would like to take this opportunity to warn the Democratic Party that they are facing a last ditch attempt at saving their party. They have just about succeeded in alienating all of their old constituancy. The only reason that the Democrats are in this race is that there is no other party to vote for that has a chance of taking power away from the Christian Right. The last thing that they should be doing at this time is toasting each other in the mistaken belief that they have given the people of this nation any real answers to any issues that this country is facing.
I am deadly serious about this, and I believe that if the American people were polled in regard to the question "Are you voting for the Democrats, or agaist the Republicans" that the answer would be against the Republicans. There is no time for play here. Either take control of Congress, or cease to be a viable political party. I believe that I don't just speak for myself, I think I am speaking for many Americans. The Democrats have shown almost no leadership and no new ideas, while the Republicans tear away at the underpinnings of our democracy. I believe that this is more than a warning, it's a prediction.
by
Timothy V. Gatto (348 articles, 177 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 574 comments)
on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 at 12:20:48 PM
Conyers just sent out a letter explaining that a Democratic victory could mean "a different direction in Iraq," and possibly a hike in the minimum wage, free tuition, and better health care.
If they're just going to keep us in Iraq, what's the difference? Should we be fighting less on one side of Baghdad and more on the other side of Baghdad? How about peace as an option -- is that totally off the table for Democrats? What about torture? Not something we want to talk about? How about removing a dictator and restoring checks and balances? Not on the agenda for the foreseeable future?
by
Mark E. Smith (21 articles, 30 quicklinks, 100 diaries, 1325 comments)
on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 at 12:54:36 PM
The Dems want to lose again but we must not allow them
Sounds funny, right? But that is what is really happening.
The Demparty does not exist anymore. I think, Mark Smith once made a very good analysis. The party, any party exists only if there is a party machine whose sole purpose is to win. No matter how, no matter which, no matter on what grounds. What we see is nothing like that. We see a very big group of people who just want to continue to be a part of the process while feeling comfortable about themselves. They want the crime to take place but so that they could wet their beak a little bit. The WHOLE activity of the Demparty now is for only one goal - to send a message to the big boys that those should not forget to pay them their share. That is all. There is no Democratic campaign. BTW, there is no GOP campaign either except for pumping money. There are no reasonable discussions, no challenges, no real POLITICAL WORK. In fact, if there could be a word which describes the current elections ( a very crucial to the fate of the country, I agree) the only word coming to mind would be a cemetery. Our democracy is 6 feet under and the Clintonian mob with Hilary at the helm is dancing on the grave. Hilary is really the Corpse Bride and Bush is a groom.
Now, why do we, the normal people have to drag those marauders to win. There is only one reason- that will give us time. If they do come to power they will need time to develop a strategy to loose again. That time is needed to develop new people, new cadres, save our young and our best. If GOP wins now, forget it. They WORK 25 hours a day to NOT GIVE US A TIME TO DEVELOP OUR PEOPLE! They (the GOP) know the drill. They know why they want to win. They also know what strings of our society must be cut to make it a living corpse. And they do just that- cut the strings. So either we have them (the GOP) and we surely will rot to death or we have a group or reluctant, cowardly, idiotic and sleasy Dems who will have to stop dancing and need some time to regroup. That time could save us. That time we fight for. And if God willing the Dems win in Y2006 our work only starts.
by
Mark Sashine (51 articles, 19 quicklinks, 244 diaries, 3454 comments)
on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 at 1:50:16 PM
GOP/Democrats offer only the APPEARANCE of a choice
My take is that the only purpose of the GOP and the Democratic parties is to give the appearance (i.e. illusion) of a choice. They're smart enough to know that people are less likely to rebel as long as they THINK they have a choice. Anyone ever employ this technique when dealing with a tantrum-prone child? It's one of the oldest "tricks" in the book. When the child wants to eat candy and you say: "OK, champ....you have your choice of Cheerios or MonsterSugarRotYourTeethAwayCrispies!!" (sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't; all depends on how clever you are).
Apparently, the Gop/Demos have proven to be quite clever, since they have kept most of us fooled for quite some time now. However, that is changing; it's just not clear if it's changed enough already to make a significant difference. In the meantime, G-d isn't fooled. And from what I can see, that's the only thing that's actually keeping us in the game at the present time.
by
Lilith's Spirit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments)
on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 at 2:45:19 PM
So we have an incompetent, minority party and a small but passionate blogworld that needs a home. I side with Markos of dailyKOS - the party is a vessel. The progressive movement can become the 'center wing' of the Democratic party, replacing the 'inside the beltway' dems who care only about maintaining their little spheres of influence.
But even the disinterested majority knows it's time for a change. Our job is to keep the energy and focus on winning in two weeks. After that we see where the biggest failings were, whether it's weak candidates or tampered voting machines.
"You don't fix a bad system by fighting it. You fix it by replacing it with a better system." - Buckminster Fuller
by
Jim Prues (15 articles, 33 quicklinks, 10 diaries, 73 comments)
on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 at 2:48:35 PM
Recruit the Opposition - They are Ripe for the Taking
I would suggest the answer to not blowing it is recruiting the opposition. They (Disenchanted Moderate Republicans - DMR's) are available and can be persuaded to vote Democrat but the Democrats need to do a better sales pitch.
I speak as an expert as I am one of these - a ripe, pivotal voting block ready to be harvested; ready for the taking. If the Democrats embraced ideas outlined in these following articles, mine and my peers' votes will gleefully go to the Democrat party.
Rahm Emanuel and the DLC are withholding money from Democratic candidates who do not toe the DLC line. Thom Hartmann devoted a portion of his show yesterday to this very subject. Makes one rather queezy about what we win if they win.....
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 at 7:32:33 AM
7 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
