Memo to GOP: Run Against Congress, Not Against Clinton

Prior to the start of tonight's post, I wanted to pause to pay respects to Benazir Bhutto. Mrs. Daddy opined over a month ago that it was only a matter of time before Mrs. Bhutto would be murdered and she was prescient. I know Mrs. Bhutto was heavily criticized for corruption on some right-wing blogs, but she represented a choice for democracy in the midst of growing Islamic fascism; and for that she was killed.

Now, some strategery. I think running against the Democrat controlled Congress is the political equivalent of the "Easy Button" in today's environment. This was first perfected 60 years ago in the 1948 election by Harry Truman who ran against a "do-nothing" Congress. Well what do you know, some things don't change. Here are some of the key advantages to this strategy:

All the leading Democrat candidates are current or recent members of Congress. It allows one to be on the attack against Clinton, Obama and Edwards without directly being on the attack. Truman showed how effective this could be by exploiting the divisions between the GOP presidential nominee, Thomas Dewey, a New York Republican, and the more conservative GOP members of Congress. (The GOP had taken the majority two years before, another coincidence?) Dewey did not respond to the attacks, thinking himself above the fray and look at the results.

Attacking Congress is also helpful in demoralizing the net-roots segment of the Democratic Party. The eventual Democrat nominee is not going to be near as gung-ho about pulling out of Iraq as the bloggers at DailyKos, MoveOn, or MyDD. (An interesting aside, Obama is taking some hits at MyDD for opining the obvious, that Bhutto's assassination is the result of terrorism. "Obama sounds too much like Bush." BDS strikes again.) Reminding the net-roots of the failure "their Congress" to do anything about pulling out of Iraq, coupled with the Democratic presidential candidates having mostly semi-reasonable positions on the war may drive them to self-inflict some wounds.

If the enemy general is obstinate and prone to anger, insult and enrage him, so that he will be irritated and confused, and without a plan will recklessly advance against you. Art of War-Sun Tzu

Further, This Congress has made itself an easy object of ridicule. After pledging to end the "culture of corruption" of the Republican controlled Congress, the Democrats have passed record amounts of pork barrel spending under the earmark system. (Remember, it was through the use of earmarks that Randy "Duke" Cunningham, may he rot in jail, was able to reward those bribing him.) As commented in a recent article by George Will:

Hell bent on driving its approval rating into single digits, Congress adjourned after passing an omnibus spending bill larded with at least 8,993 earmarks costing at least $7.4 billion -- the precise number and amount will be unclear until implications of some obscure provisions are deciphered. The gusher of earmarks was a triumph of bipartisanship, which often is a synonym for kleptocracy.

Beyond their only success at getting their snouts in the trough, the Democrats of this Congress can be lambasted for the things they attempted but fortunately failed at. The Congress did not end international communications intercepts, they did not end support for the troops by stopping funding for the war. This plays well to Americans who actually like divided government, and are worried that with Congress and the White House in the hands of Democrats, they might run amok.

Let's get this party started. I fear all of the Democrat leading candidates more than any on the GOP side, except Ron Paul (maybe a post on him later). Like handing the ball to LT in the Red Zone, hit the easy button and campaign against Congress.