Obsessing on Bush

Peggy Noonan, the former and great Reagan speechwriter, has written in the Wall Street Journal about how hatred to distraction of Bush is costing Democrats in the 2006 election. Excerpts:

They say the election is all about Iraq. It's not. It's about George W. Bush. He . . . obsesses the discussers. I think that Americans have pretty much stopped listening to him. One reason is . . . there is no new data, only determination. . .

George Bush and his presidency have been enormously consequential. He has made decisions that will shape the future we'll inhabit. . .He doesn't declare, he commits; and when you back him, you're never making a discrete and specific decision, you're always making a long-term investment. . .

With all this polarity, this drama, this added layer Mr. Bush brings to a nation already worn by the daily demands of modern individual life, the political alternative, the Democrats, should roar in six weeks from now, right? And return us to normalcy?

But I feel the Democrats this year are making a mistake. . .The Democrats' mistake--ironically, in a year all about Mr. Bush--is obsessing on Mr. Bush. They've been sucker-punched by their own animosity.

"The Democrats now are incapable of answering a question on policy without mentioning Bush six times," says pollster Kellyanne Conway. "'What is your vision on Iraq?' 'Bush lied us into war.' 'Health care? 'Bush hasn't a clue.' They're so obsessed with Bush it impedes them from crafting and communicating a vision all their own." They heighten Bush by hating him.

One of the oldest clichés in politics is, "You can't beat something with nothing." . . Because if you're going to turn away from him, you'd better be turning toward a plan, and the Democrats don't appear to have one. Which leaves them unlikely to win leadership.