I - R - A - N
Candidates and their affiliates (DNC, DCCC, etc.) have been hammering at the issues stemming from the other four-letter country - Iran's neighbor - since Bush declared Mission Accomplished. The failures with Iraq and Katrina, the widespread scandals, and social issues like stem cells are important - but could they be losing their freshness. It's quite possible that voters will tune out the message ("Yeah, yeah. Iraq sucks, I've heard it already.") and not get enraged enough to turn out.
But, Iran, that's a whole other story. What if Dems hammered away at this point for the next two months:
"Bush and his favorite congressmen are seriously, actually considering a preemptive attack of Iran. Do you us to be bogged down in another country in the middle east? My opponent rubberstamps Bush 90+% of the time - so he won't stand up to another preemptive Mid East war based on bluster and shoddy intel - but I will.
The details can be filled in with
the increasing news reports that the neo-con war machine is revving up for conflict with Iran - but you get the gist. Americans do not have the stomach for another war. Every Republican candidate can be tied to Bush/Rummy - and thus made a surrogate for the War on Iran.
In fact, some have provided their own war mongering talk about fighting Iran, making the connection easier:
U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R., Pa.) yesterday called Iran the principal leader of the "Islamic fascist movement" that poses the greatest threat to America's freedom and way of life, and said the country must be prevented from developing nuclear weapons.
Santorum also proclaimed Iran's president to be "one of the greatest threats this country has ever seen," and guaranteed that those who don't know who he is or what he stands for will know his name within a year.
The senator, who is locked in a tough reelection battle this fall with State Treasurer Bob Casey Jr., made the remarks during a forceful speech at a press-club luncheon in Harrisburg yesterday, where he conjured a dark future for the United States if Islamic fundamentalism were not stopped.
"We are at war with Islamic fascism," Santorum argued while addressing the standing-room-only audience. "... And the principal leader of this Islamic fascist movement is Iran, led by a man named Mahmoud Ahmadinejad."
"People look at me and say, 'Who is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? I can't even pronounce his name,' " Santorum added. "Well, let me make a guarantee: Within a year, or probably less, every one of you will be able to pronounce Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - you will know him, and know him well."
The simple question to hammer at Santorum in debates and in ads the next two months is: "Do you support a preemptive attack on Iran?"
Google your favorite right-winger and you're likely to find similar "stop Iran" talk. Here's George Allen mixing in the "we cannot take the military option off the table" line. And even if you don't find it, it's always easy to tie the candidate to Cheney and company. Or say "Congressman so-and-so still supports Bush's failed policies in Iraq and we deserve to know if he/she would support a Bush decision to attack Iran."
This issue could push the Dems over the hump - and put every one of these Republicans on the defensive.
"Do you, Congressman Rubberstamp, support a preemptive military attack on Iran?"