Bizarro World Gephardt

So, I was thinking of not mentioning that the following quote is an actual quote form Gephardt because it seemed obvious in context. On second thought, the quote seems so outlandish that it may not be clearly an actual quote.

Dick from Inside Politics June 17, 2005:

Let me take you back to 1983. I know history's boring, but you've got to look at it to learn.

Note to Gephardt, it ain’t 1983.

Dick Gephardt desperately needs a time machine to get back to the present; that, or a quick tour of Bizarro World!

KING: Thanks Kitty, have a great weekend.

And now back to INSIDE POLITICS.

When Richard Gephardt was the House Democratic leader, he supported the decision to war in Iraq, no some of Gephardt's old colleagues in congress are calling on President Bush to establish the time table to begin withdrawing the troops. The president says no.

Today I talked with the former congressman and I asked him what he thinks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEPHARDT: We’ve got to succeed in Iraq. Put aside the whole debate about why we're there and even how we went there. I've been critical of the president and the way he went without the U.N. But now that we're there, if we leave arbitrarily before we've gotten a good result, we're going to buy ourselves lots more security problems here in the United States. We'll have terrorists galore in Iraq. And we'll send a message to the whole region that we don't clean up our messes and we don't do what we say we're going to do.

That said, this war has been mismanaged by the Republican leadership from day one. We went in without international support. We went in without the right number of troops. And we went in without equipping the troops we had with body armor and armored vehicles. That’s the fault of the Republican leadership that didn’t want to listen to those who said we were unprepared. Now some of my Republican colleagues think that exiting Iraq is the best solution. It may or may not be, but we must stop the mismanagement and corruption the Republican leaders are piling on top of this problem.

KING: Let me ask then, what specific policies are Democrats pursuing help our situation in Iraq?

GEPHARDT: Well first off, we need to get better congressional over-site of what is going on over there, You know, no more secret no-bid contracts. [Insert folksy business colloquialism here]. Then we’ve got to eliminate all the waste we find and find out what are the better ways of doing things and where we are currently going wrong.

You see, I believe in the power of the ingenuity of the American people. The shield of secrecy this administration is holding up prevents the American people from exercising that ingenuity and fully eliminating corruption [Sub-text: Screw their crony capitalism and the secrecy they use to justify it].

KING: Let's move on to the domestic front and the conduct of your party in the Congress in opposing this president. The president this past weekend at a big Republican fundraiser, he said this. He said, "on issue of an issue, they stand for nothing except obstruction.", They being, of course, the Democrats in that case.

There are some Democrats in Washington who think that's the right strategy, say no when it comes to Social Security, say no when it comes to the Central American Free Trade Agreement, say no on other issues and take that into the midterm elections a little more than a year from now. Is that enough, sir? Or do the Democrats need to be more articulate about what they would do in the alternative.

GEPHARDT: Well, John, you know, the Democrats stand up to protect the resources Americans need to succeed, like retirement security and education, we stand to protect the diversity of ideas that made this country great, and we fight corporate corruption.

Now when Republicans are attacking those values, when they attack retirement security by trying to privatize social security, when they attack the ingenuity that made America great by disallowing stem cell research, when they attack our individual rights like they did in the Schiavo case, and they enrich their buddies at Enron and Halliburton, of course Democrats are going to fight. Now of course, Bush isn’t going to like it, but I think that the American people appreciate it when we stand up and defend them, John.

KING: Assume nothing changes in the dysfunctional -- to use a kind word -- relationship between the president and Democrats at this moment moment, your party has underestimated this president and his political team many times in the past. Let's just take Social Security, is it enough for the Democrats to say we don't like his plan, his plan is bad? Or do they need to go to the voters and say here's what we would have done in the alternative?

GEPHARDT: What are you asking, John? If you’re asking if the Democrats will help the Republicans dismantle Social Security, I think the American people know the answer on that is no.

But I’ll tell you where the Democrats are taking action. We think it’s time that the minimum wage gets moved. We think its time hybrid technology gets looked in a serious way in this country. And we think we need tighter regulations on corporations so that we don’t have disasters like Worldcom and Enron.

KING: Let me ask you I question about Howard Dean, the man who leads your part. You just tried to take me back in history to the internet boom. I'll take you back to the last presidential campaign. He was one of the Democrats seeking the nomination. Many would say he has a habit of his tongue getting out ahead of him, saying things that get quite controversial. Is he doing a good job as chairman? Does he need to reign in some of the more controversial things he has said of late?

GEPHARDT: Well, let me first say that Howard is a very talented individual. I have high hopes for his leadership in the Democratic Party. My personal opinion is that some of the comments aren't helpful, but then again it wasn’t helpful for George Bush to call our invasion in Iraq a crusade. Now, I won’t attack the President or Vice President because they have an occasional slip of the tongue, but I think Howard agrees with me that their incompetence and corruption are inexcusable.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING; Congressman Dick Gephardt, former Congressman, a bit earlier today.

Commentary: Bizarro Gephardt manages to talk about the withdrawal proposal and turn it into an attack on the Republicans without expressing his own support for withdrawal nor disparaging the effort. The Bizarro Dems are completely agnostic on the issue until it shows whether it will succeed or fail on its own, then they will bandwagon. Until then, all the bad aspects of the proposal are the Republican supporters’ fault. If the audience likes the idea, it’s the Democrat supporters’ fault.

On this plane of existence Gephardt really makes the somewhat newbie-ish mistake of questioning the prudence of bringing up withdrawal. King punishes him for it, as you’ll see. The italic paragraphs are a question and its answer that was substituted in Bizarro World where Bizarro John King attempts to attack the weakness of Bizarro Gephardt’s first response in a way similar, but less effective, to the way the John King attacked Gephardt’s mistake in this plane of existence.

Other than that, the Bizarro Dems still use the elevator pitch in appropriate places, still connect any reference to Dean’s statements to the Crusader’s own mis-quotes as I explained before, still don’t apologize for “obstructionism” and call it fighting, and generally try to maintain solid message control.

As always, for comparison, the exchange as it manifested on this plane of existence:

KING:When Richard Gephardt was the House Democratic leader, he supported the decision to war in Iraq, no some of Gephardt's old colleagues in congress are calling on President Bush to establish the time table to begin withdrawing the troops. The president says no.

Today I talked with the former congressman and I asked him what he thinks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEPHARDT: I think I agree with the president on this. We've got to succeed in Iraq. Put aside the whole debate about why we're there and even how we went there. I've been critical of the president and the way he went without the U.N. But now that we're there, if we leave arbitrarily before we've gotten a good result, we're going to buy ourselves lots more security problems here in the United States. We'll have terrorists galore in Iraq. And we'll send a message to the whole region that we don't clean up our messes and we don't do what we say we're going to do.

So, I don't think this is a good idea. I think the discussion of it in a democracy, legitimate. And I admire the people that want to talk about this. But, you know, we're not sending the right message when this is becoming the dialogue here in the United States.

KING: Then how do you have the responsible political debate about the administration's policy without, as you say, Democrats going too far, even some Republicans going too far in demanding a date and timetable?

GEPHARDT: Well, in a democracy, you always have these debates. And that's part of the health of our democracy. And you know, some people will read it wrongly, but that's the price of having a democracy.

I have no problem with having the debate. I just hope that we make the decision that we're going to stick it out, try to get the Sunnis involved in this government. Try to get the Iraq security forces to be beefed up enough so they can do the security without us. And then get our people out at the right time when we've achieved the result that we set out to achieve.

The whole world is watching this. And you know, we need to hang in there. I do also though think the president's got to be more clear with the American people about the costs that we all have to bear to make this a success.

War is an ugly thing. This is tough stuff. We need people. We need money. And the American people have to be behind this effort, and the president's going to have to be very clear about why we're doing this, why it's important that we succeed, and then leading the American people, which is what his job is.

KING: Let's move on to the domestic front and the conduct of your party in the Congress in opposing this president. The president this past weekend at a big Republican fundraiser, he said this. He said, "on issue of an issue, they stand for nothing except obstruction.", They being, of course, the Democrats in that case.

There are some Democrats in Washington who think that's the right strategy, say no when it comes to Social Security, say no when it comes to the Central American Free Trade Agreement, say no on other issues and take that into the midterm elections a little more than a year from now. Is that enough, sir? Or do the Democrats need to be more articulate about what they would do in the alternative.

GEPHARDT: Well, John, you know, there's an old saying it takes two to tango. And I'm afraid that applies to this political situation. You know, the president does need to gain the cooperation, not only of his own party, but the opposite party in the Congress.

But to do that, you've got to reach out to people at the earliest moment when a debate really begins and try to collaborate with them, listen to them, respect their views, even if you don't agree with them, and then try to find common ground.

He's never done that on Social Security. He's not done that really on health care. He's not done that on a lot of the issues that are before the Congress now, the energy bill. You can go down the list.

KING: Assume nothing changes in the dysfunctional -- to use a kind word -- relationship between the president and Democrats at this moment moment, your party has underestimated this president and his political team many times in the past. Let's just take Social Security, is it enough for the Democrats to say we don't like his plan, his plan is bad? Or do they need to go to the voters and say here's what we would have done in the alternative?

GEPHARDT: Well, they're very right, I think in saying, look, if you want to get a collaborative solution, let's sit down, put everything on the table, let's throw off the table what neither side can live with, and let's figure out a solution.

Let me take you back to 1983. I know history's boring, but you've got to look at it to learn.

KING: Let me ask you I question about Howard Dean, the man who leads your part. You just tried to take me back in history to the 1980s. I'll take you back to the last presidential campaign. He was one of the Democrats seeking the nomination. Many would say he has a habit of his tongue getting out ahead of him, saying things that get quite controversial. Is he doing a good job as chairman? Does he need to reign in some of the more controversial things he has said of late?

GEPHARDT: Well, let me first say that Howard is a very talented individual. I have high hopes for his leadership in the Democratic Party. My personal opinion is that some of the comments aren't helpful. But I think he at the same time is motivating some in our base and he's also, I think, working hard to build the structure of the party at the grass-roots level.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING; Congressman Dick Gephardt, former Congressman, a bit earlier today.