Below is the MSNBC Countdown link and partial transcript from Tuesday, September 5 where guest Howard Fineman make some excellent talking points that Democrats and Democratic candidates should be using to effectively refute Bush's, Cheney's, and the RNC's spin and rhetoric about the war on terror.
I really like how Howard Fineman can cut through spin and make some excellent points! Here are some key phrases he says which are concise, right to the point, and are easy to articulate to the voters in my opinion:
FINEMAN: "Well, I think what the Democrats have to try to do is to say, Look, Mr. President, we don+óGé¼-£t disagree with you that these are evil people. We agree wholeheartedly. Our problem is that you+óGé¼-£ve screwed up the war against them.
I think for George Bush to go time after time after time, including today, to the argument that we+óGé¼-£re facing nasty people is just the beginning of the+óGé¼GÇ¥should be just the beginning of the discussion, not the end of it. That+óGé¼-£s the point the Democrats have to make... people are questioning not the theory but the practice of the war."
"Well, I think what the president and Karl Rove are doing is trying to draw the Democrats into the wrong fight for the Democrats. As I said, the issue is not whether we+óGé¼-£re facing evil. The question is whether we are competently, shrewdly, and smartly defeating it.
And that has to be the Democrats+óGé¼-£ argument. Obviously, the Republicans and George Bush are saying, If you+óGé¼-£re not supporting the administration, you+óGé¼-£re somehow supporting the terrorists. That+óGé¼-£s the simple equation that Karl Rove, who+óGé¼-£s a past master of this, is trying to draw the Democrats into..."
"I think they+óGé¼-£re just adding to the laundry list of names to call people who oppose their policy. That+óGé¼-£s what this fall campaign is going to be about, framing the thing based on name calling. And it+óGé¼-£s beginning from the president on down."
I really like how Howard Fineman can make the simple point that we do not disagree that the terrorists are evil people and that there is a war on terror. The real question that Democrats need to be specifically asking is whether Bush is properly and competently fighting that war on terror (and that question will trickle down to Bush's rubber stamp GOP candidates which is what this election is mostly a referendum on)!
Please forward this on because Democrats framing the war on terror debate like how Howard Fineman is defining it will help Democratic candidates to win over many more disillusioned Republicans and impressionable voters from Bush's spin and rhetoric speeches in my opinion!
Mitch Dworkin
http://www.securinga...
Listen to Gen. Wes Clark fight for Dems on Sean Hannity's radio program:
An excellent example for all of us to follow and what we all need to be doing to help fight against extreme right wing Neocon smear propaganda which will help our local candidates to win their races!
http://securingameri...
Gen. Wes Clark's endorsement of Jim Webb against George Allen
--------------------
'Countdown with Keith Olbermann' for Sept. 5
Read the transcript to the Tuesday show
Updated: 10:44 a.m. CT Sept 6, 2006
Guests: Howard Fineman, Thomas Kean Jr., Ron Magill, Michael Musto
OLBERMANN: Good evening. This is Tuesday, September 5, 63 days until the 2006 midterm elections.
And the president apparently chose not to mention it, but, as he took to a podium before the Military Officers Association of America to brand his critics as the equivalent of Nazi appeasers, to link the very word +óGé¼+ômedia+óGé¼-¥ to al Qaeda, and to vow he would not allow any retrenchment in the so-called war on terror, ABC News was reporting that the government of Pakistan had just cut a peace deal with violent tribal groups allied with al Qaeda and the Taliban, groups which control the area in which Osama bin Laden is believed to be hiding.
Our fifth story on the COUNTDOWN tonight, while the president was insisting on eternal vigilance, his allies were reportedly agreeing to a treaty so generous that if bin Laden turned himself in tomorrow, they would send him home, as long as he promised to live like a good citizen.
My special comment on Mr. Bush+óGé¼-£s speech in a moment.
First. parts of that speech.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: These radicals have declared their uncompromising hostility to freedom. It is foolish to think that you can negotiate with them.
Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. The question is, will we listen?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
OLBERMANN: While the insult to honest opposition was not new, Mr. Bush+óGé¼-£s choice of experts to quote about Iraq was. Repeatedly, he used not his own arguments but the words of bin Laden. And it is a rare thing for him even to mention bin Laden, to make the case that Iraq is central to combating terror and a linchpin of al Qaeda+óGé¼-£s hopes for creating a vast region ruled by its version of Islam. The president+óGé¼-£s response?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: In the long run, the only way to secure our nation is to change the course of the Middle East. And so America has committed its influence in the world to advancing freedom and liberty and democracy as the great alternatives to repression and radicalism.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
OLBERMANN: MSNBC political analyst, chief political correspondent for +óGé¼+ôNewsweek,+óGé¼-¥ Howard Fineman joins us now from Washington.
Howard, good evening.
HOWARD FINEMAN, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, +óGé¼+ôNEWSWEEK+óGé¼-¥ MAGAZINE:
Hi, Keith.
OLBERMANN: This ABC report about a Pakistani deal, that it+óGé¼-£s pulling its military out of the area where bin Laden is hiding in exchange for the promise that the tribal warriors will not attack the Pakistani troops any more, did that just take the air out of what the president was saying today, if not his entire credibility on this point?
FINEMAN: Well, if true, it+óGé¼-£s remarkable and punctures a big hole in the president+óGé¼-£s claim to be dead set against supporting or being allied with any country that harbors terrorists, because Pakistan would be doing just that if this report is correct, not only harboring but making life comfortable for.
And that runs straight into the heart of George Bush+óGé¼-£s theory about taking the offense. He+óGé¼-£s been saying we+óGé¼-£ve got to fight them there so we don+óGé¼-£t have to fight them here. The Pakistani government would basically say, Well, you fight +óGé¼-£em, we+óGé¼-£re not.
OLBERMANN: Unless ABC butchered the story outright, what happens politically in Washington tomorrow as a result of that story? Even if there are details or nuances that ABC missed, what do the Democrats do, and what do the hard-line Republicans do?
FINEMAN: Well, I think what the Democrats have to try to do is to say, Look, Mr. President, we don+óGé¼-£t disagree with you that these are evil people. We agree wholeheartedly. Our problem is that you+óGé¼-£ve screwed up the war against them.
I think for George Bush to go time after time after time, including today, to the argument that we+óGé¼-£re facing nasty people is just the beginning of the+óGé¼GÇ¥should be just the beginning of the discussion, not the end of it. That+óGé¼-£s the point the Democrats have to make.
And I think what you+óGé¼-£re seeing from Republicans increasingly, whether it+óGé¼-£s open questions from Senator John Warner of Virginia, or some of the candidates who are now saying they want+óGé¼GÇ¥the Republican candidate saying they want Don Rumsfeld to quit, is that people are questioning not the theory but the practice of the war.
And I think you+óGé¼-£re going to hear more Republicans doing that in the weeks ahead, especially as they face a tough election season.
OLBERMANN: And there+óGé¼-£s also this issue of terminology. I+óGé¼-£m going to go into this in depth in a moment. But this drumbeat about Nazis and appeasers, it seems as if each time we have heard this, dating back to Mr. Rumsfeld last week, the rhetoric has been increased by about 10 percent each time. How risky is that for the president, how risky is that for the administration?
FINEMAN: Well, I think what the president and Karl Rove are doing is trying to draw the Democrats into the wrong fight for the Democrats. As I said, the issue is not whether we+óGé¼-£re facing evil. The question is whether we are competently, shrewdly, and smartly defeating it.
And that has to be the Democrats+óGé¼-£ argument. Obviously, the Republicans and George Bush are saying, If you+óGé¼-£re not supporting the administration, you+óGé¼-£re somehow supporting the terrorists. That+óGé¼-£s the simple equation that Karl Rove, who+óGé¼-£s a past master of this, is trying to draw the Democrats into.
This is the direct-mail theory of politics that Rove has practiced ever since he started three or four decades ago.
OLBERMANN: Lastly, it+óGé¼-£s a little off point here, but discussing the subject of Iraq in an interview with +óGé¼+ôEssence+óGé¼-¥ magazine. Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, quoted as saying today, +óGé¼+ôI+óGé¼-£m sure there are people who thought it was a mistake to fight the Civil War to its end. I know there were people who said, Why don+óGé¼-£t we get out of those now, take a peace with the South, but leave the South with slaves?+óGé¼-¥
Unlike some of her colleagues, she hit the nail on the historical head there. The Democrats were ready to make peace in 1864 until General Sherman took Atlanta. But does that analogy ring at all with anybody who does not own the complete Ken Burns collection?
FINEMAN: I don+óGé¼-£t think so. I think they+óGé¼-£re just adding to the laundry list of names to call people who oppose their policy. That+óGé¼-£s what this fall campaign is going to be about, framing the thing based on name calling. And it+óGé¼-£s beginning from the president on down.
OLBERMANN: Howard Fineman of +óGé¼+ôNewsweek+óGé¼-¥ and MSNBC. As always, Howard, great thanks for your insight.
FINEMAN: Thank you, Keith.
THE CHRIS MATTHEWS SHOW
Weekend of August 13, 2006
Mr. FINEMAN: The Democrats have to argue that stupid decisions aren't strength. They have to say, `We're strong but smart and we got to figure out how to do it.'
MATTHEWS: The day after that the news broke of the terror plot targeting trans-Atlantic passenger flights. President Bush left no room for interpretation.
President GEORGE W. BUSH: This nation is at war with Islamic fascists who will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom, to hurt our nation.
MATTHEWS: You know, it smacks of choreography. I want to ask you, Howard, 33 percent approval rating for the president, the lowest he's ever had. Eighteen percent edge by the Democrats in winning seats in the House this year. The president is now bringing us all back to 9/11 again. Can he do it? Can he say, as he said this week, the choice is between those who believe the terror threat is real, and those who don't?
Mr. HOWARD FINEMAN (Newsweek Chief Political Correspondent): Well, that's their plan, to make it as stark and us-vs.-them contrast as they can. This election in the fall can be about three things. It can be about George Bush, it can be about the war in Iraq, or if the White House has its way it's going to be about the, quote, "war on terrorism" more generally, and they're going to try to make a bright, sharp line and say, `If you had any questions about the Patriot Act, if you want to redeploy troops away from the center theater in Iraq, if you--if you have any doubts at all about the willingness to call Islamic fascists what George Bush called them...
MATTHEWS: Where'd that come from, that phrase?
Mr. FINEMAN: That comes from two things. That comes from their desire to make this a clash of civilizations--I'm talking about the White House--even if there were a way out of it and the Democrats think there is. And it's about George Bush trying to identify himself with World War II, with the fight against Naziism, with a global clash. George Bush's answer to anything, and Karl Rove's answer to any political predicament is to make the stakes larger.
MATTHEWS: Yeah.
Mr. FINEMAN: This is the way they operate. In 2002 and 2004 they took a positive approach. The president as strong as commander in chief.
MATTHEWS: OK, who buys this...
Mr. FINEMAN: This is going to be a negative approach. Negative approach...
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about this question--you know, I'm pushing ahead here because I think it's a question everybody watching right now wants the answer to. What's the connection between Iraq and the war on terror? I think that's an open question. The question being: If we get--every night on television they're seen killing Arabs, Islamic people. Does that encourage teenagers, early-20 adults to want to kill themselves to get us? Or does it discourage them?
Mr. FINEMAN: Yeah--yes. Yes. That's got to be the Democrats' argument. They've got to turn the connection that the White House has made between Iraq and the war on terrorism on its head. They have to say that the war in Iraq has made us less safe. Now George Bush, very interestingly the other day, said, `We are safer than we have been.' He hasn't always said that. He insisted on that. But the polls show that the American people don't believe it. And what the Democrats need to do is argue, as John Kerry has, as Ned Lamont has, as Ted Kennedy has, that going to Iraq has made us less safe here.
MATTHEWS: Because?
Mr. FINEMAN: Because, number one, the money we've spent, the lives we've lost, the distraction that it's been, and the reason that you cite, which is in London.
MATTHEWS: OK.
Mr. FINEMAN: Young Bri--young Islamic...
Ms. BUMILLER: And--and...
MATTHEWS: OK, this battle...
Mr. FINEMAN: ...Britains are willing to commit suicide...