Now here's a real cowboy! Ooo, boy, does he look fine.
Posted on 05/07/2003 8:56:02 PM PDT by Howlin
Every so often you come across evidence that a political party is losing its mind. Something like that is happening to Democrats over President Bush's fabulous "top gun" photo-op aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln. It's a case study in how Bush and Karl Rove have left so many Democrats undone.
Rep. Henry Waxman of California has asked the General Accounting Office to provide a full accounting of the landing's costs, since the event had "clear political overtones." Sen. Robert Byrd, who, as longtime appropriations czar, is in no position to throw stones over dubious uses of taxpayer money, lashed out at Bush instead for "flamboyant showmanship," saying the White House had no business using the carrier "as an advertising backdrop" for the president's speech. Democratic staffers are working overtime to gin up media interest in the "scandal."
Let's be clear. Yes, Bush manipulated the timing of the Iraqi showdown to suit his purposes in last year's midterm elections. And yes, he's now hoping to put America's military success to his political advantage. But for all that, Bush's decision to take out Saddam was the right thing to do. And as for the news that Bush is now trying to use the result to help himself - well, do we really have to trot out the old Casablanca line about being shocked to find there's gambling going on here?
For foes of Bush's domestic agenda, like myself, the worst part of these Democratic attacks is how ineffective and tone deaf they are. The party's most idiotic argument (it's hard to find a gentler word that's also accurate) is that in staging this event, Bush showed disrespect for the troops, because he delayed their return to their families by an extra day after a 10-month deployment.
Isn't it obvious even to Democrats that, if you took a vote of the sailors on board, they'd have unanimously hailed the idea of a visit from their commander in chief to deliver the thanks of a grateful nation? It's a moment they'll cherish for the rest of their lives and tell their grandchildren about. Democrats, inspired perhaps by the trial lawyers who bankroll the party, are acting as if these troops are good prospects for a class-action suit.
The cost was puny anyway. Early Democratic salvos complained that the photo-op cost at least $100,000, as if we should be outraged. Reality check, please. Fifty million dollars for Kenneth Starr's investigation was an outrage; $100,000 to land on deck and welcome troops returning from war is patriotic pageantry.
Earth to Democrats: There is nothing wrong with a little patriotic pageantry. And the costs of presidential movements are always extraordinary. When a president changes where he eats a meal one afternoon, taxpayers probably drop $100,000. You know what? We give the head of the free world a budget for that.
Democrats, of course, know this. Which helps explain why as I write this I've already received fresh e-mails from a Democratic press office raising the cost estimate for Top-Gun-Gate to $1 million. Bet they'll get it to $10 million before week's end.
I know, I know - this is politics. GOP operatives routinely toted up the cost of Bill Clinton's trips to New York City and the man-hours lost to Manhattan gridlock in the service of Hillary's ambition. The right wing never tires of trotting out the size and cost of Clinton's entourage when he traveled abroad. Both sides perennially engage in this irrelevant nitpicking - like so many other depressing aspects of public life, this seems to be a political law of nature.
But this latest episode shows how demoralizing life in the minority must be. Henry Waxman is admired even by Republicans for having done more over his career to extend health coverage to poor and near-poor Americans than perhaps anyone in the country.
Now look: Ten years after Newt Gingrich's earthquake, poor Henry is sniping guerrilla-style over political sideshows. How depressing must that be?
This is no time for Democrats to go bonkers over the small stuff. If this is what they consider smart politics, it'll be a long wait until 2008.
Now here's a real cowboy! Ooo, boy, does he look fine.
She kept calling the camel her secret weapon calling it "My Bradley". She asked for a "bazooka" at the army base and found out that it wasn't a piece of bubble gum.
And is this a photo op or what?
Of course, the troops are happy to see their CinC here, after all this was in 1993, and very few people had any idea what we were in for with this wrecking crew in the WH.
No one could ever have imagined...
Yes, it is. LOL
OMG, I've been thinking the same thing! It seems to boil down to that! LOL...things may be just that basic...
They're really disorganized and it has gotten noticeably worse. While everyone is wondering about Edwards & Kerry etc..I think we'll start seeing the transformation of Hillary...her Book cover being the beginning....We'll see face lifting, botox, hair change, clothes change...and she definitely needs "charm school".
She's a female "clod" and her only chance is a complete makeover, turning an "belligerant bit** into a "sophisticated bit** AND losing Bill "permanently".
Well okay he didn't say "y'all" but it was pretty clearcut to me who was being petty about the whole thing. Don't those dims have anything better to do with their taxpayer funded wages...
What do the dems need to do about it? Why, that's obvious: they need to stage images of themselves in daring-do activities for the public. This has never really presented problems for them in the past, and they should simply read up on their own history a bit. For instance, they could be seen driving cars off of bridges, flying small planes off over the North Atlantic at night without benefit of instruments or instrument rating, ski downhill while operating a camcorder and throwing footballs.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.