Finding something to grouse about

This Reuters story has plenty of good news in it. It shows a healthy Edwards bounce for the Democratic ticket- a 6 percent lead of Kerry over Bush in a one-on-one. It also shows that Cheney is weighing down the Republican ticket- which cheers as well. Not only is Cheney very, very unlikely to be replaced (after all, it's hard to imagine Bush flushing the most powerful man in the White House), if he were replaced it would be seen as show of weakness for Bush. And the White House That Is Never Wrong would never do that. However the poll referred to shows one result I can't get my head around.

It says a Bush/Powell ticket would kick the living snot out of a Kerry/Edwards ticket. Why? To any one who's been following the presidency, Powell has been out of power in his position as Secretary of State from the very beginning. Why would VP be any different? Cheney has been a very atypical VP, holding more power than any previous VP. I think that's fairly indisputable. Now, of course, that may mean Bush would reign unencumbered by Cheney's ultraconservative warhawk influence, but my understanding of the president puts his personal beliefs closer to Cheney's than Powell's. Or, at least, to the way Powell's are portrayed. Despite three years as CesState to establish an identity, Powell is still something of a cipher. There remains a general impression of a decent, sober ex-general who's moderate on social issues. It's not an impression I believe in, though.

If Powell was the straight arrow moderate he's invariably portrayed as (By the way, I don't know if you've noticed, but Powell is a media favorite, much like fellow "moderate" McCain) he wouldn't have gone along with the WMD charade at the UN, nor would he have just stood there while the Bush administration committed other acts of foreign policy foolishness. I figure, then, that Powell is either no moderate or no straight arrow. I vote the latter.

Flinging it all against the wall hoping something will stick.

A new Reuters story has Bush bringing out the full spectrum of Republican attack rhetoric and delusional nonsense. Some of it is just completely bizarre.

Quote Bush: "You can't be pro-small business and pro-trial lawyers at the same time. You have to choose." Well, first I have to mention that trial lawyers are often small businessmen themselves. But nevermind that. This is not an attack I have ever heard. Unlike most conservative soundbites, it's not exactly intuitive. It's easy to imagine a conservative demonizing trial lawyers for increased medical costs. Hell, that's the most common anti-trial lawyer tack. Tort reform, medical malpractice costs, you hear that all the time. Or trial lawyers cost jobs by making it harder for big businesses to do business. Class action suits and all that. But small business? Kinda weird.

It's all a part of the back-assward attempt to attract small businesses by masquerading pro-big business policies as pro-small business policies. Just like Republicans are capable of convincing the merely middle income that tax cuts that save them less than a thousand dollars and save the superrich hundred of thousands, they can fool shop owners and car dealers into thinking that a party thoroughly beholden to Big Oil and defense contractors and insurance companies has their interests at heart.

Bush also accused Edwards of being pessimistic, particularly about the economy. Bush suggest that the economy is rolling into high gear. The diminishing jobs growth tells a different story. And average wages are declining, which, one imagines, means they are declining somewhat more precipitously when one works in constant dollars and considers that most wage growth is concentrated at the top of the socioeconomic scale. And it doesn't help that growth in medical costs has remained high, and the ranks of the uninsured are undiminished. Sometimes seeing things the way Edwards does is not pessimistic, but necessary. Anyone in Bush's position who is either so deluded about the state of the country or that dishonest should be fired.

And fire him we shall.

It needed to be said...

Dick, go Cheney yourself.