Question Details	Asked By	Asked On
Maybe this is the problem????	CeeBee2	06/27/06
Article Abstract: Progressives have fallen into a trap. Emboldened by President Bush's plummeting approval ratings, progressives increasingly point to Bush's "failures" and label him and his administration as incompetent. Self-satisfying as this criticism may be, it misses the bigger point. Bush's disasters — Katrina, the Iraq War, the budget deficit — are not so much a testament to his incompetence or a failure of execution. Rather, they are the natural, even inevitable result of his conservative governing philosophy. It is conservatism itself, carried out according to plan, that is at fault. Read the entire article at: Bush is not an incompetent What do you think?
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/27/06 4:16 pm: 2nd paragraph should read But where they continue to fall into this trap is that this does not help them define their alternative . Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/28/06 3:57 pm: why ? My best guess is that they continue to gear their politics to the 'grapes of wrath 'era ,instead of dealing with the fact that our system has generated enourmous wealth in this country ;and coupled with China and India going capitalist and churning out cheap goods means that American consumers ..even the poorer ones..have access to products unheard of in the past . Their class warfare message resonates with fewer and fewer Americans . This has been a trend for a long time now . Consider : they ran' progressives' in 1972, 1984, 1988 and were handily defeated .In 2004 they ran against a President who was carrying alot of baggage and still lost . When they ran moderate to conservative (at least by appearance )in 1976 and 1992/1996 AND relied on Republican scandal(Watergate) /or a Third Party entry (Ross Perot )to split the conservative vote ;they won the Presidency . We are pretty much talking about a 36 year cycle that the electorate has repudiated the progressive message .
Answered By		Answered On
tomder55		06/27/06
Sum up the argument this way : Since Bush can no longer run ,it is not in the oppositions best interest to lay the blame for what they perceive as failures on Bush because it then would be logical to conclude that if you found a more competent conservative than Bush you could conceivably get better results . Better at this point to place these alleged failures on the underlying flawed political philosophy that is the premise in the decisions that have led to these "failures ".In other words it is in fact the conservative successes that has the progressives in a panic . But where they continue to fall into this trap is that this continues to help them define their alternative . Are they saying that the progressive philosophy would make for a more competent administering of the executive branch ? How so ? What is it about progressive that would make them better managers ? What exactly is their alternative ? They shy away from giving details . They have consistently failed to excite the electorate with their alternative and with good reason . The last 2 Democrat Presidents ran from the middle .They did not offer a progressive alternative just better management . The candidates who have run from the left or even the moderate left have been pummelled at the polls. I would love to hear it however . George Lakoff, Marc Ettlinger and Sam Ferguson have it right in this regard . Let's put the cards on the table . Let's hear liberals shout proudly they are liberal and make their case. Then let's see which side of the debate the American people really think is most competent for running the country .

Additional Options and ratings are only visible when you login!