Democrats Must Take Aggressive Offensive Till November

by Allen Snyder

OpEdNews.Com

With the Turbocharged Rove-O-Matic Model 2004 Hate, Smear, and Lie Machine cranking up to its most imposing settings against BushCo’s likely opponent, John Kerry, the Democrats should already know how they’re going to handle the inevitable glut of libel, slander, defamation, factual distortions, and outright lies which are the Rove-O-Matic’s specialties.

$150 million buys a whole lotta imaginary closeted skeletons and phony
adultery accusations these days, so it should come as no surprise what
pathetically sordid and desperate measures BushCo takes to preserve its
suffocating stranglehold on American political power.  We saw what a major
hatchet job they did on Al Gore in 2000 and on Howard Dean in this year’s
Democratic primary (no thanks to the media).

BushCo’s already shown us enough of its hand; these guys are not at all
subtle  By now, the Democrats ought to have a good plan.  Not one for
responding to false attacks about sexual dalliances or defending,
justifying, rationalizing, or countering all the bogus charges BushCo’s
media lackeys at FOX will predictably shout into the Right Wingnut Echo
Chamber, but a plan to take the aggressive offensive against BushCo and not
let up till Election Day + 1 (and depending on how Deibold’s voting machines
perform, maybe even longer).

Take just one example.  It’s no big national secret that Dumb Dubya’s IQ
lounges around somewhere down there in Double-Digit Land.  It’s also no
secret he’s barely competent in his native tongue, that he knows little, if
anything, about modern science, and that he answers most questions with
mostly meaningless sound-byte-style gibberish or smoky platitudes.  Simply
put, the guy’s a brain-challenged moron, incapable of defending himself or
his policies articulately.  The Democrats should be using these obvious
facts to their advantage.

What if Kerry challenged Dubya to a set of debates (or even just one) live
on prime-time national television?  Well, Dubya would refuse, of course,
because the last thing his puppeteers want is for him to speak
extemporaneously to Americans about anything that really matters.  Anyone
who watched the interview on ‘Meet the Press’ with Tim Russert a couple of
weeks ago knows that Dubya can barely string two sentences together
coherently.  His responses were generally off point, rambling and illogical.
  If you don’t believe me, just read the transcript; it’s like he’s speaking
nonsense in a foreign language.

Now, picture the Kerry campaign running a prime-time spot where Kerry
formally asks Dubya to a series of debates to discuss those issues uppermost
in Americans’ minds.  Kerry’s requests are, of course, met either with stone
silence or some worthless trumped-up excuse for Dubya’s refusal to debate
(he has a $50,000-a-plate fundraiser to attend or a prisoner to
execute…Sorry).

Great!  Let him refuse; that’s what we want.  When he does, Kerry gets to
ask why Dubya has so little faith in his own policies he won’t defend them
on TV to the people on whose behalf he’s killing, maiming, and overthrowing
governments.

Imagine all the questions BushCo would demand Dubya not be asked.

How ‘bout them WMD?  Where’s Osama?  What was that coup in Haiti all about?  
Is Venezuela next?  Why won’t Condi testify about 9/11?  Why won’t you or
Dick-head Cheney?  What about Valerie Plame?  Why do you deny global
warming?  When will you resurrect the draft?  Why did you desert the Guard?  
What about the hundred other illegal and immoral things you’ve done, lied
about, or covered up?

Easy to see why BushCo doesn’t want to get anywhere near a formal debate.  
BushCo’s inevitable refusals must be spun to paint Dubya as unsure,
insincere, cowardly, dishonest, uncommitted, scared, desperate, and weak
(all of which he is, but about half of all voters don’t see it yet).

On the infinitesimally small chance Dubya agrees to debate, then we’ll be
treated to a prime-time political assassination as a lucid and fluent Kerry
makes a foolish Bush look the part.  There’s no defending the indefensible?  
Bob Novak and Tucker Carlson try and fail at it practically every day on
CNN’s ‘Crossfire’.  Their arguments are so weak and pathetic, it’s
embarrassing to watch these otherwise intelligent men deliver them with
straight faces.  They’re both a testament to the self-serving and Siren-like
allure of Republican conservative partisan ‘loyalty’ and the lamentable
commercial success of right-wing political hacksterism.

For Kerry and the Democrats, this is but one part of a win-win strategy.  
Surely there are other political fronts where the Democrats could force the
same sort of result, embarrassing Bush and exposing his failures further.  
Whatever the case, the Democrats don’t want to follow the advice of former
University of Tennessee football coach Bill Battle, who in the 50’s said,
‘Defense wins championships’.  For this election, the best defense is
definitely an aggressive offense.

Allen Snyder is an instructor of Philosophy and Ethics. He can be reached at asnyder111@hotmail.com This article is copyright by Allen Snyder and originally published by www.opednews.com but permission is granted for reprint in print, email, blog, or web media so long as this credit is attached.