Author: GussieFN

[duped from dKos]

Lower taxes, smaller government, stronger military, better values. The Republican Creed. What do they all have in common, besides being diametrically opposed to the real-world effects of Republican policies?

None of these goals are finally attainable. You can always lower taxes further, shrink the government more, discover new ways to attack gays. The struggle never ends.

(flip the flop)
There are other benefits, too. You know exactly what to blame for all the evil in the world: high taxes, big government, anti-military sentiment, bad values. You force political opponents into insupportable positions: ‘They’re for high taxes! They’re for a weak military! They’re for bad values!’ Finally, this ‘creed’ appeals to ‘common sense’ and base emotions: the drive to be richer and stronger and better. What kinda freak doesn’t want that?

Not me. I wanna be better, stronger, and richer, and I want my country to be better, stronger, and richer too. This Administration, for all its incompetence, cronyism, and dangerous naivete, has done one wonderful thing for me: I’m more patriotic now than I’ve ever been.

Watching these people loot my country infuriates me. Watching them destroy our reputation, undermine our military, endander our children, poison our rivers, destroy our forests, attack our schools … they’re fucking with America here. They’re sending my brothers and sisters to die for a pipe-dream, they’re selling my children into debt-servitude, stealing from my parents, destroying my economy and playing politics as my cities crumble.

They’re an insult to a great nation, a danger to the best country on earth. That’s right: the best country on earth.

Screw anything else. Screw policies and programs. What do Democrats stand for? American First. American Number One. USA! USA! USA!

This is the best country on earth, and anything less than Number One is unacceptable. Anything less than first is shameful. Anything less than the best is a crime.

Right now, where do we stand?

• 22nd among developed nations on childhood poverty.
• 41st in the world in infant mortality.
• 49th in the world in literacy.
• 37th in terms of overall health performance, and 54th in fairness of health care.
• 13th in total quality of life.
• 8th on the United Nations Human Development Index–in 1990 we were ranked 1st.
• 27th in percentage of population in poverty.
• 15th in women’s reproductive health.
• 27th of 28 countries in life expectancy at birth.
• 51st of 142 nations in environmental sustainability.
• And Europe surpassed the US in the mid-1990s as the largest producer of scientific literature.

Blame America First? Are you kidding? How about we make America first? We’re THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, we must be the best by every measure, because we are the best.
Number one on quality of life, women’s reproductive health, education and poverty and environmental sustainability and health care and science. Democrats shouldn’t accept one single silver medal. We want gold, down the line.

America First. Biggest military? You bet. Most money? Without a doubt. But we already win those events. Time we focus on the shameful areas where we’re losing. We need to win the highest percentage of citizens covered by the finest health care system, the best schools for all our children, the cleanest air and water, the most opportunity for every single demographic, the lowest poverty, the best-paid workers.

Anything less is an insult to this great nation. Figure the specific policies and programs later, crunch the numbers, evaluate the feedback later: those are vitally important … but just details. First we need a goal. A unifying ideal. A simple heartfelt message. America First. America Number One.

Four problems with ‘Bring the Troops Home Now’:

First, logistics. We can’t bring the troops home now. We can ‘start bringing the troops home now,’ but we can’t simply bring them home now. This is a process that, even in a perfect world, with competent leadership and no ‘insurgency’, would take a good deal of time.
     I realize, of course, that ‘bring the troops home now’ functions more as a rallying cry than an actual policy recommendation, and really means ‘start withdrawal now.’ But in this media environment, a rallying cry which is unrealistic–and gives the blowhards something to easily oppose and ridicule–is not optimally effective.
Second, ‘Bring the Troops Home Now’ is divisive of the left. There are many on the left (including many on this site, and Howard Dean, for example) who want an exit plan and support phased withdrawal … but don’t or can’t get behind ‘Bring the Troops Home Now.’
     Some of this is undoubtedly political calculation (which I leave to the political calculators–maybe they’re right, maybe wrong) but some is reality-based consideration. Several months ago, Juan Cole said a simple US withdrawal was not wise (though I don’t know if he’s changed his mind). So this statement–slogan, whatever–divides the left.

Third, ‘Bring the Troops Home Now’ unites the right with the center with the wafflers. If ‘withdrawal now’ is the most cohesive statement of the left, the right will claim anything less as their own. Everything from increasing troop numbers and ‘staying the course’ to phased withdrawal and drawing-down the number of troops (which are the only way to begin to bring the troops home now), are ceded to the right.
     Everyone who thinks, ‘ I’m not sure we should bring the troops home now” is led to conclude that they are not really anti-war, and–given this polarized environment–to figure that means they must be pro-war, or pro-Republican, or pro-stay-the-course.

Fourth, there is no evidence to suggest this administration responds to events in the actually-existing world. They don’t respond to the facts on the ground in a war zone, they don’t listen to career military experts … why assume they’d heed this cry? They control all the centers of political power: we cannot force them to take action, we must convince them to take action.
     Obviously, many will never be convinced. But given recent polls, there is a possibility that we can make the political cost of supporting this quagmire perfectly clear. However, ‘Bring the Troops Home Now’ does not heighten the political costs for those on the right to continue to support the occupation. In fact,  it lessens the cost. We give them something to oppose and to blame (‘Immediate withdrawal, Jim? That’s crazy lefty defeatist talk–as well as being impossible!’) and the right thrives on opposition and blaming.

Now, this is all political talk, and doesn’t address the real human loss–the death, the despair, the grief–of the war. But it is politics which determines our course in Iraq.

So what is the most effective slogan we can adopt to oppose the quagmire? The slogan must unite the left, wedge the right, appeal to the center; must have the ring of self-evident and common-sensical truth; and must coopt the support of at least some Republicans. (Also, it preferably negates the ‘these colors don’t run’ and ‘if we leave, the terrorists win’ arguments, which I think are tremendously effective for the right.)

This is my suggestion: an up or down vote. Ask Iraqis to determine if we stay or leave.

Instead of Bush mumbling about the Iraqis deserving freedom, and how we took down Sadaam, we insist he walk the talk: give them freedom to determine who stays in their country. The right and center has been primed to accept ‘up or down vote’ as eminently sensible. The fear that ‘the terrorists have won’ is dissipated as we declare victory–free elections to determine our own presence–which encourages even Republicans to back this.  And we get the hell out … if asked.

Of course, there are problems with this idea (besides that the whole thing was dreamt up by a chubby bald guy sitting at his computer). Given the Bushco electoral meddling in Afghanistan and Iraq, do we trust them to run this vote? Are there regional votes, so we might stay in some areas and leave others? And there are undoubtely dozens more.

But I think ‘Bring the Troops Home Now,’ though a very simple, strong statement, isn’t the most effective thing we can be saying. An up or down vote in Iraq: Let Them Decide.