GOP Struggles To Define Its Message for 2006 Elections By Dan Balz and Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post Staff Writers

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) said the root of the problem is a failure of Washington Republicans to stick to principles, saying that his party risks losing power because it has done “a pretty poor job” of executing its small-government philosophy. “Republicans just need to take stock, go back and realize that the American people elected them because of their principles, and when you do not adhere to those principles, the American people are just as likely to turn you out and choose someone else.”

Lately, the drift Perry described has been on glaring display almost daily. …

Because of these realities, Republicans have adopted a midterm strategy designed to avoid making the election a national referendum on their performance or one that focuses on their policy divisions. Their goal is to concentrate less on the kind of positive message they have challenged the Democrats to produce and more on framing a choice that says, however unhappy voters may be right now with the Republicans’ leadership, things would be worse if Democrats were in charge.

War! Good god y’all!
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing!

Three years ago, the United States invaded Iraq. Our enlightened leaders slammed the country with shock and awe and still expected flowers to be thrown at our troops and democracy to take instant root. Our lying leaders tried a wide range of lies to justify the invasion. And, before the invasion, hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets all over the world to stop the war before it began.

Here in Albuquerque, our own police fired tear gas at protesters. Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White, chair of the re-elect the liars committee, begged for the opportunity to show the citizens what he thinks of our right to protest. All around us, flags waved and dissent was shouted down with accusations of treason. Is it treason to oppose an unnecessary war? To oppose an administration spoiling for a fight long before 9/11, a completely unrelated matter?

Now, the flowers have become IEDs and more people recognize the lies from the bully in the pulpit. No matter what happens in Iraq, it was an unnecessary war botched by incompetent leaders. Iraq was no threat to America. But Iran is more dangerous than ever. Al Qaeda has more support than ever. Bin Laden is as safe as ever. Has anything good been accomplished?

Today, hundreds marched again in Albuquerque, unintimidated by prior police excesses, ignored or dismissed by the media. This time the assault was by fierce wind, not tear gas, and gas-bags like White were home watching whatever big game distracts them from the mountain of evidence of the utter failure of the Radical Right.

peace, mjh

Update 3/19/06: In coverage lasting a bit less than 1 minute, KOAT-7 TV news at 6pm estimated the crowd at about one hundred — perhaps because they didn’t arrive until long after the march reached the park. I saw no other coverage on TV.

Today, the Albuquerque Journal covered the march and printed the views of a local Iraq War vet against the war:

ABQjournal: Over 1,000 Join Anti-War Protest in Duke City
—–
ABQjournal: Iraq Vet: This War Is Wrong By Anthony Thomas Garcia, Iraq War Veteran
—–
The Albuquerque Tribune: National Government
Then and now

March 18, 2006

Some statistics and polls on Iraq at the time of the invasion and today:

President Bush’s job rating

March 2003: 67 percent of Americans surveyed in ABC-Washington Post poll approved of Bush’s job performance as U.S. and allies invaded Iraq.

March 2006: Overall approval rating now 37 percent, lowest of Bush’s presidency, according to latest AP-Ipsos poll.

Opinions about the war

April 2003: 70 percent in ABC-Washington Post poll said war in Iraq was worth fighting.

March 2006: 29 percent in CBS poll say results of war worth the cost.

Opinions about Bush’s handling of Iraq

April 2003: 71 percent in Gallup poll approved the way Bush was dealing with Iraq.

March 2006: 39 percent in AP-Ipsos poll approve Bush’s handling of situation.
—–

From Three Years Ago —
03/20/2003: War Protests in New Mexico

About 600 demonstrators protested the war near the campus of the University of New Mexico at 6pm, Thursday, 3/20/03 (the first day of Spring). Eventually, riot police used tear gas and “chemical agents” to “calm” the crowd. There was very interesting TV footage of children under 10 fleeing to nearby restaurants, eyes streaming tears. One bystander was hit between the eyes by a tear gas canister and taken to the hospital. 17 protesters were arrested, some for throwing the tear gas canisters back at the cops. Police advise those planning other protest not let “bad apples” make problems; “we will not tolerate them taking over the streets.”

Have you noticed how cops now all look like soldiers? The uniforms and, especially, the machine guns?

Peaceful protesters are camped outside the gates to Kirtland Air Force Base. It’s raining & 47 degrees at 11pm.

In Santa Fe, protesters surrounded the Roundhouse, the State Capitol building. Some 60 high schoolers walked out of school to join protests and were suspended for 2 days for “open defiance and willful disobedience.” No one was arrested. mjh

Remember what Sally Meyer said after the ‘riot’? What Mayor Marty did? Or what one-among-many of our fellow citizens wrote about protesters? Read on:

Continue reading Three Long Years →

GOP Irritation At Bush Was Long Brewing By Jim VandeHei, Washington Post Staff Writer

“Bottom line, there is a lot of buyer’s remorse,” said Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.). If the vote were held today on the Medicare prescription drug benefit, he said, as many 120 Republicans would vote against it. “It was probably our greatest failure in my adult lifetime,” he said. …

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), a Bush ally who dismissed concerns about an inattentive White House, said he regrets voting for the No Child Left Behind bill in the first term.

Ginsburg Faults GOP Critics, Cites a Threat From ‘Fringe’ By Charles Lane, Washington Post Staff Writer

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg assailed the court’s congressional critics in a recent speech overseas, saying their efforts “fuel” an “irrational fringe” that threatened her life and that of a colleague, former justice Sandra Day O’Connor. …

[A Feb. 28, 2005, chatroom] posting said: “Okay, commandoes, here is your first patriotic assignment . . . an easy one. Supreme Court Justices Ginsburg and O’Connor have publicly stated that they use [foreign] laws and rulings to decide how to rule on American cases. This is a huge threat to our Republic and Constitutional freedom. . . . If you are what you say you are, and NOT armchair patriots, then these two justices will not live another week.“