The Chilling Effect
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), the second-ranking House Democratic leader, have recently implied that outspoken Democrats might be risking re-election by speaking out against the war in Iraq.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is advocating a quick pullout of Iraq. Additionally, Howard Dean recently said, “”the idea that we’re going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong.”
It takes huevos to take these stands, and I applaud them both for being rare, straight-shooting politicians
Reflexively, Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer, who both have suspiciously odd names, are clearly part of the problem and not part of the solution. They think Pelosi and Dean should pipe down. They favor a more passive strategy, which is clearly one based on fear of the Republicans’ current mastery of framing an argument.
Is it logical to say that because Howard Dean is soft on the war in Iraq he is therefore soft on defense, or would falter in a justifiable war? No it is not logical. Will the Republicans try to spin it that way? Of course they will. Should the Democrats therefore bow their heads, cower to the Neo-Cons, and zip their mouths in order to keep hope of re-election alive? FUCK NO! Emanuel and Hoyer need to grow some balls! When the Republicans claim that Dean is soft on Defense, the Dems need to give the Neo-Cons both barrels by claiming that they are using the chilling effect to exact their agenda, and that the Neo-Cons fear criticism because their policies are grossly flawed.
We know that American voters are idiots, and may not understand this. So say it with a tone of voice says you know what you are talking about. Do it with flourish, and the voters will nod and smile. Then create a commercial where republican wolverines are tearing apart the Bible or something.
But don’t be a pussy please.