Chinks in the GOP Armor:the imperfections are increasingly visible

[kpete]

Chinks in the Republican Armor

By Fred Hiatt

Monday, December 12, 2005; Page A25

Not so long ago the talk was all about the self-perpetuating machine the Republicans were constructing in Washington.

The image was of links in a chain of power that the Democrats could never break. The GOP, having captured both houses of Congress and the White House, could press lobbyists to hire only Republicans and give money only to Republicans. The money would guarantee dominance in state legislatures. The legislatures would redraw congressional districts so that Democrats could never win. And if anyone objected, too bad; Republican-appointed judges could be counted on to slap down any complainers.

All in all, a perfect loop. Even when House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was indicted in September, he was depicted as a no-longer-essential cog in the apparatus he had helped design and build. People could come and go, the chain would remain.

The mood in Washington today is different. It's been remembered that the chain holds only as long as most people vote next year the way they voted last year.

Today it is conceivable, though by no means assured, that Democrats' vote total in 2006 could grow, and Republicans' shrink, by enough to shift control of the House or Senate. Even a whiff of such uncertainty may prompt donors to hedge their bets.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/11/AR2005121101098.html

[napi21]

1. Actually, the quote is a bit different....

]b]It's been remembered that the chain holds only as long as most people vote next year the way they voted last year.


I believe it's "The chain is only as strong as it's weakest link!"

It's looking more and more like there are a lot of weak links in the Pub Party...starting with their dumbell anchor Ahrub!

[libodem]

2. Any chain is only as strong as it 's weakest link

and Chimpy is made out of smoke and mirrors.

[Nite Owl]

3. This guy doesn't have a clue

It sounded ok until the end:

"And unlike in many pseudo-democracies, the mechanics of elections, including, not least, the counting, can't be controlled by those in power -- which means that they do need to worry about what voters think."

How did dimsom get in in the first place? Forget about Deibold even, it was the Surpreme Court and stopping the counting that put him in power.

And the paragraph before he says they can't control the press? Yeah right.

[bryant69]

5. What do you mean by control the press?

At any rate, I certainly think there is reason for hope.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[seafan]

4. Two points:

This is buried deep on page A25, and:


--snip


Unlike in Russia, it turns out that prosecutors and judges can't be controlled, no matter who appoints them: just ask DeLay, Jack Abramoff or Scooter Libby. Unlike in Russia, neither can the press. The congressional Republicans' cringing abdication of their branch's traditional oversight role has helped diminish attention to scandal and malfeasance, but it can't erase bad news altogether.

And unlike in many pseudo-democracies, the mechanics of elections, including, not least, the counting, can't be controlled by those in power -- which means that they do need to worry about what voters think.

--snip


Fred Hiatt, you need to stop with the kool-aid. Those two statements just obliterated your credibility.

[Toots]

7. What was that quote by Stalin again

"It doesn't matter who does the voting it only matters who counts the votes" Or something very similar to that....

[chat_noir]

6. broken chain =