Broder on Politics

David S. Broder
Washington Post Columnist
Friday, July 21, 2006 12:00 PM

Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and Washington Post columnist David S. Broder was online Friday, July 21, at Noon ET to answer your questions about the world of politics, from the latest maneuverings on Capitol Hill to developments in the White House.

Broder has written extensively about primaries, elections, special interests and the business of politics. His books include "Democracy Derailed: The Initiative Movement & the Power of Money," "Behind the Front Page: A Candid Look at How the News Is Made" and "The System: The American Way of Politics at the Breaking Point."

The  transcript follows.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: A new book, "Polarized America," by Princeton, NYU and UC political scientists claims that Republicans pursue economic policies favoring America's elites at the expense of the middle class; and claim Democrats are Godless and unpatriotic in order to distract voters from the Republican Party's commitment to enriching the rich. What is your take on this assertion?

David S. Broder: I think that analysis is way too simplistic and distorts the positions of both parties.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Your front page July 16 article on how the common ground of 9/11 gave way to partisanship in America includes a statement that,"...President Bush and his team skillfully used the issue of terrorism to expand Republican congressional margins and to retain the White House." Why did you choose to characterize the handling of the terrorism issue as "skillful" which has a positive connotation, rather than call what was done "deception" or "manipulation" either of which captures what many believe was the key element responsible for turning supporters of the President after 9/11 into critics? Unwilling to characterize the President's actions as anything other than "skillful," you fail to suggest accountability on his part for the return to partisan rancor and even go on to say such a result was inevitable.

David S. Broder: I don't think the word "skillful" implies a judgment of approval. He was a "skillful liar" means that he sounded plausible, not that he was admirable. Not speaking of Bush, of course.

_______________________

Columbus, Ohio: Although I found your piece Sunday with Dan Balz most interesting and a pleasure to read, and the related experimental results you discussed were fascinating. But I think the latter called into question the validity of the seemingly universal belief that Democrats need to engage the Republicans aggressively on the defense and terrorism fronts. I think the experimental results strongly suggest that a focus on domestic issues holds real potential to actually sway voters' views. If I were advising a non-incumbent Democratic candidate for Congress, I would recommend a "rope-a-dope" strategy on the war and let the Republicans identify themselves all they want with that situation, and to focus voters' attention on the profoundly poor stewardship of the majority controlled Congress: the endless deficits and monstrous growth of the national debt, stagnant wages for the vast majority of workers and continuing erosion of employee benefits, failure to deal with huge problems with the environment and oil dependency, and a willingness to give a blank check to what many people of both parties feel is an incompetent and divisive president. This can be done most effectively with succinct TV ads with very simple and clear cut messages, and that voting for the incumbent is voting for more of the same including the war.

Does my theory make any sense in your view, given these experimental results? You seemed to more or less go along that defense issues are more or less the only relevant issue in the 2006 and 2008 elections.

David S. Broder: I do not pretend to be apolitical strategist, but your analysis makes sense to me. I would disagree that the implication of our article was that only national security issues matter. We said that the economy moved more votes--especially reminders of gasoline prices.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: For several years, those of us pointing out the gross dishonesty and pervasive incompetence of this administration were labeled "unpatriotic Saddam lovers who side with the terrorists." Now that it's become apparent to most Republican legislators that we were right, they are saying many of these same things. Has anyone asked them yet why they don't move to France if they hate our country so much? I'd certainly like to.

David S. Broder: That question has not been asked of them, as far as I know. I would think you would welcome them joining your band.

_______________________

Detroit, Mich.: Given Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s recent exhaustively researched article on how Republicans prevented 350,000 voters from casting their ballots in Ohio -- which easily would have given Kerry the state -- and the fact that Republicans are even now attempting to limit voting to as narrow a populace as possible, why should Americans have any faith that even when a clear majority of the population wants to see the Democrats control Congress that there's even a remote possibility of such thing happening?

David S. Broder: I think the press is learning how to monitor elections more closely--certainly my consciousness has been raised. And I hope we will be vigilant in 2006 and 2008. Please don't give up on voting. It is the greatest power you have.

_______________________

Greenacres, Fla.: What made Bush want to come to the NAACP convention? Did he have a hidden agenda? What will Bush do next to improve Republican party with Black ties?

David S. Broder: I don't think there was a hidden agenda. My guess is that he did not want to let a symbolic issue fester over a seeming boycott, and the new head of the NAACP went out of his way to assure Mr. Bush would be properly received.

_______________________

Seattle, Wash.: After they lose to the Plames, how little money will Cheney, Libby, and Rove have left? I mean, besides a pension that dwarfs that of most Americans who suffer under this regime?

David S. Broder: Most of the so-called experts with whom I've talked give that lawsuit little chance of success, so I don't think you have to plan any Cheney benefit fundraisers yet.

_______________________

Fort Myers, Fla.: Hello Mr. Broder:

I'm curious about the "big veto." Initially the White House said there would be no photographs of the "big event." "It's a veto," Tony Snow stated, as if the president had just made a decision about what to order for lunch.

Then, almost magically, a big to do was made of the non-event, along with a full compliment of former embryos to serve as props. The president was fully prepared for his "I value human life" bit, yet I've not yet read a single news story pointing out that Mr. Bush signed more death warrants than any other governor in U.S. history.

Have I missed the coverage or has the press just decided not to report that rather glaring case of hypocrisy?

David S. Broder: I don't think you missed anything, but if I were an editor, I would not have ordered up a story about the Texas executions to run with the veto of the stem cells bill. I happen to support the legislation and regret the veto, but I think that the issue stands on its own.

_______________________

Detroit, Mich: Many lawyers I've spoken to believe a more than solid case can be made against the Bush administration---broke the law in invading Iraq? Do you believe this to be the case?

David S. Broder: I am not a lawyer, but I do think that the congressional resolution authorizing all necessary means was a rationale for war. It was so interpreted at the time.

_______________________

Lindenhurst, N.Y.: Should the US send troops to aid Israel in Lebanon?

David S. Broder: I know of no request from Israel for troops. They are using American-supplied equipment and probably have sufficient means to conduct the campaign themselves.

_______________________

Anonymous: In your July 13 column, you listed seven foreign policy crises and then declared "Bush is largely blameless for all these troubles."

A cloud of witnesses testify to the contrary, especially where Iran and North Korea are concerned. Do you actually believe that Bush's mulish refusal to engage in anything resembling diplomacy with these nations has not come back to haunt us?

David S. Broder: Iran and North Korea were both causing big problems for the United States and its allies before our President Bush came to office. Of course, one can question his diplomacy in both instances, but these regimes were troublemakers independently of anything he has done.

_______________________

Kensington, Md.: The latest test of Tony Blair's poodlehood seems to be afoot, with the US authorities' arrest of the CEO of a British online gambling web site (presumably for taking sports bets from Americans - who are prohibited by Shar'ia Law from doing such things). Is this causing any stir at the highest levels between the two countries that you know of?

David S. Broder: No, not that I have heard.

_______________________

Seattle, Wash.: "Distorts the positions of both parties"? I think the poster meant the practical aspect of a massive tax burden on the middle class, while their Social Security and Medicare reserves are siphoned away to pay for no-bid contracts for billionaires and multi-millionaires who have an effective tax rate of around 8 percent.

That sure sounds like a class war against America by the GOP to me. Doesn't it matter what the practical impacts are, instead of the lying words?

David S. Broder: You make the rational case against President Bush's economic policies. What I objected to in the earlier posting was the ascribing of motives of the worst sort to both Republicans and Democrats. That is what poisons political debate. Your arguments are perfectly phrased, and ought to be at the heart of the coming campaign.

_______________________

Mons, Europe: Arab autocrats seem much more amenable to U.S. interests than their people. Will Bush's grand idea of bringing democracy to the Middle-East survive the latest events?

Hamas is the democratically-elected leading party in Palestine and Hezbollah part of the democratically-elected government in Lebanon.

David S. Broder: Your raise the fundamental question about the whole Bush "democracy" initiative--what happens when people freely choose to elect a government controlled or influenced by forces we do not like? There is no clear answer, but I think we have to put our trust in the process and not reject the results. We can, however, use our influence to insist that these governments keep peace with their neighbors--rather than support terrorism.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: After winning the nomination we've heard nothing from James Webb? What's going on with his campaign against George Allen?

David S. Broder: It's called fund-raising, and he has a lot to do to close the gap with Sen. Allen. I expect you'll see much more of him after Labor Day.

_______________________

Woodbridge, Va.: When Arelen Specter faced contentious primary, Rick Santorum came to his aid with a personal endorsement and active on-the-ground support that took the wind out of Toomey's sails. Who on the Democratic side is coming to Lieberman's assistance? BTW, in light of this dichotomy, which party/ideology do you view as more intolerant of dissent?

David S. Broder: Next week several prominent Democrats are scheduled to campaign for Senator Lieberman, including former President Clinton and Sens. Barbara Boxer and Joe Biden. There may be others as well.

_______________________

Crofton, Md.: According to an article in the Post today, Bush's position on the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah is to sit on the sidelines and let Israel inflict as much damage as possible. Apparently, one justification for this policy is to weaken Hezbollah so that democracy can flourish in Lebanon. Seeing how successful that strategy has been in Iraq, how likely is that to occur in Lebanon? Also, if it fails, will Bush's policy of sitting on the sidelines while Israel engages in a ground war (which seems very likely), further damage our stature throughout the Middle East?

David S. Broder: I cannot assess the risks of failure in Lebanon, but it is clear that our hands=off attitude on the fighting has hurt us in the broader Muslim world.

_______________________

Princeton, N.J.: I think your analysis of Polarized America was way too simplistic. In What's the Matter with Kansas we see the same analysis worked out in detail in one state. In Off Center we see how the Republicans have exploited flaws in our electoral system to govern the country far to the right of the population. There is a great article in the New York Times, The Rise of the Super-Rich, that shows how successful the Republicans have been in shifting wealth and income from the poor and middle class to the rich and even more to the super-rich. In 1948, when I was ten, my father told me that that the Republicans were the party of the rich while the Democrats were the party for the rest of us. That has never been more true than today.

David S. Broder: I have been a consistent critic of the Republican tax and budget policies. But it is my view that those who advocate those policies believe them to be beneficial to economic growth. You may believe it is all a conspiracy to enrich the super-rich. But we have to part company when you got down that road.

_______________________

Anonymous: Are you following the Missouri court case involving petitions that were rejected as not being in compliance?

National Voter Outreach, the petition company filed a Motion to Intervene, based on the fact police officials (whose salaries would be impacted by the ballot measure to limit spending), harassed and in one case, physically attacked a worker, who immediately went into premature labor and two hospitalizations.

It appears to be the first time a petition firm has done so.

Hearing in the matter is set for 1:30 p.m. this afternoon with Judge Richard Callahan.

Thanks.

David S. Broder: I was not aware of the controversy, but thanks for alerting me.

_______________________

Crystal City, Va.: A reporting question: Since Hezbollah and other militia forces do not wear uniforms, how accurate are reports of "civilian" casualties in the middle east?

David S. Broder: I don't know the answer, but I think all reports from battlefronts must be treated with some skeptics

_______________________

Please don't give up on voting: Thank you for taking questions. My comment vis-a-vis the above post, is that many Americans haven't given up on voting, they are simply indifferent or apathetic. I wonder if you agree, and if so, why do you think this is the case?

David S. Broder: I think the indifference comes from two sources. One is the feeling that the fighting between the parties or the candidates is too confusing to sort through. The other is a sense that elections don't change anything; that the special interests decide what happens in Washington. Either way, it hurts.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: Bill Clinton had this to say recently in Aspen about the differences between Democrats and Republicans (from the Minneapolis Star Tribune):

"I think Democrats tend to believe that the source of the country's economic strength and national greatness is in ordinary, middle-class citizens. And therefore we believe we ought to have a country of equal opportunity and shared responsibility. Republicans believe the source of the country's greatness and economic strength is in the economic and political elite that agree with the conservatives that are running things. And therefore they believe we should concentrate wealth and power to a maximum extent.

The Democrats believe in a government that's open and accountable and concentrates on empowering people. The Republicans that run Washington believe in a government that's secret and unaccountable and concentrates on helping their crowd.

We believe, we Democrats -- it makes us look weak sometimes -- that we're not right all the time. And therefore we believe policy should be made on the basis of evidence and perfected through argument. They believe policy should be made on the basis of ideology and rammed through by attack."

I thought this was a very actionable analysis. Does his wife -- or any other candidate -- have the ability to make it work against the Republicans in your view?

David S. Broder: I don't know the answer. Bill Clinton was the best candidate the Democrats have nominated in a long time. I haven't seen his equal in the new bunch.

I have to sign off now and go back to work. Thanks to all of you. Dave Broder

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.