Friday, September 03, 2004

Yipes...Just Yipes





One never knows how well one should believe someone, who, in politics, cries "Unfair!" I especially don't want to beleive someone who says "our side is just too darn nice!" (riiiiiiight...that's what Moveon.org is...nice), as Susan Estrich says in her column from Wednesday.


But when Susan says she's mad as hell, and she isn't going to take it anymore, I believe her. Lacking firm evidence to the contrary, I can't even deny any of her assertions regarding Bush the Elder's 1988 campaign against Dukakis. But I also believe she's missing the message here.


Did anyone actually want to vote for Dukakis in 1988? I mean, was he the kind of man that people were falling all over themselves to elect? I was only a wee lad of eleven, but I don't recall any Kennedy/Clinton star-power that was turning the masses on. My folks were going to vote for him, and did, but then my folks voted for Mondale ('88 was the last such display of liberal certainty for them; Mom turned into a Republican during our three years in California, and voted to re-elect. Dad may have voted for Clinton, but wasn't overjoyed at it; both voted for Dole in '96 and for W. in 2000 and will be doing so again in two months).


Not that Bush had any either, mind you; P.J. O'Rourke, writing at the time, succinctly summed up the '88 election as "two quibbledicks vying for rides on Air Force One," and he was right. But when push came to shove, Dukakis was altogether too liberal and vague for the public. O'Rourke again: "If we liked Reagan, we could vote for Bush, and presumably, get seconds. If we didn't like Reagan or couldn't admit to ourselves that we did, we could vote for Dukakis and get someone else...but God knew what..."


And if I were Susan Estrich, making comparisons between Kerry and Dukakis is not the strategy I'd be pursuing right now. In fact, I'd be going out of my way to de-Dukakasize Kerry as fast as I possibly could. I don't know that reaching for further handfuls of mud, either. If Kerry had a clear objective for his potential Presidency other than Not Being George Bush, then a good combination of See My Platform and The Other Guy's an Even More Twisted SOB Than We Thought might work. But, lacking that, denouncing Bush with as-yet unheard mud ("There's gotta be three or four DWI's! And Abortions! Kitty Kelly Sez Ther're Abortions! And Cheney's a Drunk!") is gonna be more of the same-old, same-old Bushitler routine.


So it's go time. Let's have the Senator tell us exactly, or even approximately, how he's gonna fight the war on terror better, how he's gonna get the French on our side, how he's gonna raise taxes on the people that hire other people and not downshift the economy, etc. He's supposed to be a smart man, and you're all supposed to be sharp, sophisticated folk around him. So, in the debates, stand tall and tell us, what are you gonna do?


Or if it's too late for that, then set your sights on drafting someone for '08 who's done something in the past 35 years, who's taken stands and made them stick, who can draw respect from moderate Republicans and still appeal to the Democratic base. Find a candidate you can get Excited about, one that leads the party instead of hiding behind it. If you build it, they will come.

No comments: