It's the War, Stupid [The NYT's Frank Rich blasts Dem Party "leadership"]

The NYT ^ | Oct. 12, 2002 | Frank Rich

[summer]

PS :)

[summer]

they can't contribute real ideas to the debate on any subject

You really hit it. That seems to be their problem on both the national and state levels. And it's a serious problem.

[OrioleFan]

Today I was channel surfing and CNN had 5-6 of their females sitting in loveseats discussing the debate and vote on Iraq. Since I don't watch CNN, I didn't know who any of them were. They were trying to point out that Bush really had a slim majority because of the timing of the vote. They said that a large number of Democrats would have voted against war with Iraq if the vote had been taken after the November elections. They all agreed that the UN should look at the vote in this context and see that Bush does not have a consensus.

What this really shows is that DemocRATS will say/do whatever it takes to get re-elected. Voters should take this into account in November to send the UN a clear message on US resolve.

[caltrop]

At the federal level education will always be an issue. It's like health care, the problems never end. The beauty of both of these issues, from the standpoint of those who seek to make the government larger, is that the more involved the federal government becomes, the greater the crisis. The solution to both problems is for the federal government to stop getting involved. Unfortunately, most politicians (and all liberals) believe that trying to fix the problem is what matters. Results, which nobody ever seems to be accountable for, aren't the issue for liberals.

The Democrats would argue that, under Jimmy Carter, they created the Department of Education. That it's been a disaster isn't a problem for them. Conservatives want it shut down as a waste of money and because it undoubtedly doesn't improve education anywhere. That Bush made education his first and signature issue speaks volumes about his view of government.

At the state level education policy varies greatly, as it should. Education, it seems to me and as we've discussed before, should be managed and funded at the lowest possible level. From the liberals point of view that's a really poor idea. It's not only efficient and responsive but results in uneven results. Some schools, for example, would be excellent. Far better, from the liberals point of view, that all schools be uniformly mediocre so that nobody's disadvanteged and the government gets to call the tune.

Here in Florida education will always be an issue. We have a huge, and relative to other states, transient population and counties which have been encouraged to take every opportunity to point to Tallahassee for funding and to pass the buck on results. The state leadership should move to increase local authority and responsibility, not to take over the entire education system, as they seem to be doing. Until they move responsibility back to local authorities, they'll never get anything but mediocre results.

[aristeides]

So, because the Dems have to vote the opinions of their constituents before an election, that means Bush does not have a consensus? Seems to me that means that he does have one.

[thescourged1]

Thanks Summer....feel free. It's a good article, I was already here. ;)

[The Grammarian]

Thanks for a truly disturbing image.

[OrioleFan]

Yes he does, and if the voters are too blind to see what the Dems are doing, then we all lose.

[okie01]

All these traditional "Dem issues" remained on the table because the Dem leadership proved to be so ineffective in dealing with these matters.

It wasn't "ineffectiveness". It was intentional.

The Democrats aren't in the business of solving problems. In the interest of gaining power, they want issues to run on (or against). Thus, keeping problems festering and unresolved is in their interest.

It was never Clinton's intention to solve anything!