Thursday, August 17th, 2006

Democrats Go For The Trailer-Trash Vote
Harsh headline, and woefully dependant on stereotypes. Hey, I'm just trying to pre-empt Coulter. Democrats on the campaign trail for the past few weeks have been attacking Wal-Mart, in an effort raise populist sympathy. Various incumbents and challengers have been supporting and stumping at anti Wal-Mart rallies, questioning big business profits over low wages and inadequate health care. Analysts and spinsters say this is the message Dems want to bring, forcing the Republicans to answer in order to maintain their heart-land working class popularity, which will conflict with their pro-business ties. It's about time. It's a non-issue, (that is, an issue used to polarize, but not easily solvable with quick legislation) but so are abortion, gay rights, and stem-cell research. Finally, democrats are fighting fire with fire, another indications that opposition to the Republican majority is coming together under a single banner. Watch for this cohesion in the next few months on terrorism, national security and the war.

Republicans Do Exercises to Strengthen Finger-Pointing
Due to organizational error, I didn’t post my update for Sunday correctly, so I'll take advantage of that by repeating some of my sentiments. It looks W. et al are attacking democrats, using the terrorism issue. We already know Dick Cheney said Lamont's win would encourage Al-Qaeda types. A few days later, suspected terrorists are arrested in London, a kind of convenient "told you so" moment. And so the message Republicans want to bring is that only the GoP can protect America. They are foisting on the people a classic logic blunder (one I am sure they know they are making, but hoping dumb rednecks don’t catch) which is to say that if you are against the war, you are against protecting the country.

That doesn't add up. And I used the word "add" purposefully: the TSA say they don't have the money to install scanning equipment that could, effectively, detect illegal substances in liquids, or on a person body, or in their shoes. They certainly don't have the money to use such equipment on the cargo that goes on planes, or to install machinery like that at train stations, or sports stadiums, or movie theaters, or any place else that would make a great target for terrorism. Would they be able to if we shaved just a bit from the half a trillion dollars spent on Iraq? And it's not even as if we need upset the GoP's ties to business. Have Halliburton buy-out some scanning-equipment company, and boom, instant contracts.

Actually, Democrats are getting together to point out that it's Bush's policies and the conservatives policies which congresses supports that have made the world more dangerous for Americans. In the past it's been social welfare versus security, healthcare versus security, education versus security, tax reform versus security, so on ad nauseum. Now the democrats are ready to point back and say "soft on security? You've been in charge, and we're worse than we where pre 9/11." November is going to be nasty.

Judge Rules: Sorry Prez, You Can't Break the Law Either
A judge ruled today on a suit brought by the ACLU to stop the government from warrantless wire-tapping. The judge said such activities are unconstitutional, violating the first and fourth amendments, as well as the separation of powers doctrine. Nor can it be excused by spying on foreign communication (in the United States), nor does it fall at all within the President's special authority. This is pretty big news, and should be all over the papers tomorrow, as well as in the microphones of every radio pundit out there. I'm eager to see how Limbaugh, Coulter, and Hannity attack this decision. I am expecting conspiracy theories from Rush, ad hominem attacks from Anne, and Sean will probably bemoan our steady slide into degradation and danger. And the progressives will love it, simultaneously thanking the judge for protecting our rights, and pointing out this is more proof that Bush et al wanted to spy on citizens and opponents in the manner of a Watergate Nixon. Oh, and watch the profits of 900-number companies shoot up again.

Ken Lay: Rest in Peace, but Behind Bars Please
Lawyers are trying to get Ken lay's conviction tossed out on the grounds that he died before all of the appeals had been exhausted. There is precedent for this, but there's the civil suit against Ken's estate going on, where bilked ex-employees of Enron are trying to get some of their money back. This is another one that will grist for the pundits, but only the pundits, as the politics don't benefit either side. Look for your local mic-jockey to bring this one up, opine some kind of theory while playing twilight zone music in the background, and then take a call from a whacko before moving on to the new JonBenet Ramsey news.