"We are ruled by bunglers"

Today, Paul Krugman states what should be obvious to every American: That the Bush Administration is perhaps the most incompetent bunch of fuckups ever to govern this country. And he asks why Democrats seem so completely unable to capitalize on this indisputable fact:

Every major venture by the Bush administration, from the occupation of Iraq to the Medicare drug program, has turned into an epic saga of incompetence. In retrospect, the Clinton years look like a golden era of good government.

[snip]

Our leaders' bungling hasn't escaped public notice: more than half of Americans say that the Bush administration has been a failure. Yet it's not at all clear that Democrats can translate this sentiment into large political gains — because despite the governing skill of the last Democratic administration, the public doesn't think of Democrats as being effective.

A lot of this has to do with the way the news media cover politics: they focus mainly on Washington, and many news organizations — especially the broadcast media — prefer to do horse-race stories rather than discuss policy issues. And from that point of view, the Democrats present a sorry spectacle. Not only are they a minority in Congress, shut out of power; they're an undisciplined minority constantly facing defections from their own ranks on crucial issues.

The issue of Iraq epitomizes the political paradox. The war has been a monstrous policy failure, but it remains a political asset to the Bush administration, because it divides the Democrats and makes them look ineffectual.

Yet if the Democrats could present a united front on Iraq, they'd probably have a lot of public support. You'd never know it from the range of views represented on the Sunday talk shows, but a majority of Americans believes both that the administration deliberately misled the nation about W.M.D.'s and that we should set a timetable for withdrawal.

And the public's views on other issues seem to favor the Democratic position — or, rather, what the Democratic position would probably be if the Democrats could agree on one — even more strongly. For example, the public believes by two to one that the government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans.

The point is that Democrats are largely winning the battle of ideas: on the issues, public opinion is shifting in their direction. But to take advantage of that shift, they have to overcome an image of ineffectiveness that is partly the fault of the news media, but largely the result of their own disunion.

I'm not sure why Washington Democrats insist on behaving as if George Bush were still sitting with a 90% approval rating, and yet that's what they're doing. On issue after issue, the Democrats have caved, and they seem unable to articulate a vision of their own. When one of their own, John Murtha, who is hardly a radical lefty, called for a phased withdrawal over the next six months, every Democrat in Congress should have come to his aid. And yet they were silent while wingnuts on the other side resorted to the tactics of the Swift Boat Liears in an effort to smear them.

So-called "Democrats" like Joe Lieberman and Henry Cuellar embrace Bush and behave like Zell Miller's only slightly less insane brethren. If Lieberman loves Bush policies so much, let him switch parties. As for Cuellar, he seems to be one of those guys who fell into the "He's a charming guy I'd like to have a beer with" meme that made so many Americans vote for an idiot who may very well be brain-damaged at this point.

That the Democrats have been so timid and so unable to rally their own ranks into any kind of coherence is not, I believe, a question of ideology. Rather, it's a question of money. Washington Democrats have become so accustomed to begging for the scraps left at the table after Republicans finish gorging themselves that they have become like Kevin Bacon in the frat house hazing -- begging for more abuse, just so they can be accepted. One of the saddest spectacles has been the rapid devolution of Barack Obama into yet another cautious Democrat, afraid of his own shadow.

As crime after scandal after crime is revealed in Washington, with both the White House and Republicans in Congress wallowing in filth, the Democrats have been unable or unwilling to speak up. Yes, they have the Chris Matthewses of the world with whom to contend, and the broadcast media in particular seems to have a renewed vigor on the Bush Bandwagon. But it's time for them to realize that Tim Russert is not their friend. CNN is not their friend. God knows Matthews is not their friend. And it's time for them to demand as much accountability from the talking heads as they do from their Republican peers in Congress.

I have high hopes for Paul Hackett and some of the other Fighting Dems currently running for office, but I worry that unless the DLC appeasers and triangulators are removed from the equation, once in office, these guys too will find themselves muzzled and weakened.

The Democrats need to give us something to support if they want "the base" to get out and vote at all, and if they want independents to vote for them. "We're just like them only maybe marginally less dirty" isn't going to cut it.