Byron York writes in National Review that accusation of lying against Bush are backfiring for the Democrats. From the landing on the Lincoln to Iraqi WMD, the Democrats appear eager to find any charge against the President that will stick.
The problem with the Democratic Party is that they’re operating the same way the GOP did in the late 1990s. They have no idea how to be a real opposition party. A viable opposition party cannot expect to have any chance at regaining power unless they can stand on a platform that consists of more than attacking the majority. Republicans lost seats in 1996 and 1998 because they had nothing to stand on other than attacks on Clinton. Even major policy proposals were sidelined by Monicagate, Whitewater, and the other scandals of the Clinton Administration.
Now the Democrats are even more eager to dredge up whatever dirt they can. The Democrats are failing to learn from history – unless they can stand on something other than attacking Bush, they will remain a minority party. (Not that such a thing would be bad for the country at this point.)
Attempt to think objectively, if only for a brief moment. What sort of proactive agenda would you embrace these days if you were the Dems? It strikes me they have precious little wiggle room considering their primary concern has to be reversing Republican debt that’s currently straitjacketing them to a taking a defensive stand. I am certainly willing to hold the Dems accountable for their many mistakes, but there’s not a heck of a lot they can propose so long as Bush insists on destroying their capacity to do so, a very crafty and evilly successful calculation on Karl Rove’s part, even though it forces future generations to kneel over the grave Bush is digging us and waiting for him to pull the trigger of the crown-plated revolver he’s pressing to the back of their heads.
That’s an interesting question… and one that deserves a full entry…