Rove invoking the specter of Democratic rule

* further to my INVESTIGATIONS post yesterday, Digby picks up the same issue, with some twists

I certainly hope that Democrats aren't going to follow John Dickerson's tepid analysis that concludes they shouldn't mention investigations or risk losing in November. They are being played.

Over at Political Animal, Zachary Roth writes:

It's also worth noting that Republican attempts to highlight the investigations issue have come almost exclusively in fundraising emails. In other words, they're using it as a tactic to gin up their plugged-in supporters, but not, so far, as a part of their broader message to ordinary voters. And when you think about it, you can see why they might not be too enthusiastic about a campaign message that draws voters' attention, even obliquely, to the slew of scandals and screwups of the Bush years. After all, it's not exactly inconceivable that voters might welcome the prospect of a party pledging to look into, and then fix, the policies of a president with a 32 percent approval rating.

Ya think? The Republicans are in free fall. Considering that, is it not possible that the American people would like to find out what happened to the billions missing in Iraq? That they would be happy to see the congress exercize its oversight of the executive branch? That looking into the hanky panky leading us into a dramatically unpopular war is good for the country? Hello?

[]

But think about this. Do the Republicans really want all these scandals being brought up constantly during the campaign? I don't think so. That's why they are trying to manipulate the Democrats into keeping quiet about them. Any six year old could see through this cheap ploy.

Update: Yglesias has more on this, here. He makes the interesting point that "One of the main things those people might be hoping for from a Democratic congress would be a check on Bush's power. Indeed, many of them may not be very interested in a progressive agenda for America at all, just scared of where the current crew is heading things. By promising oversight, Pelosi is re-iterating that though you can't vote the unpopular Bush out of office, you can vote in a congress that will keep him under control."

[]

Update III: Harold Meyerson writes:

...to stave off the specter of Democratic rule, Rove has decided that the only way to rally the Republican base is to invoke the specter of Democratic rule. Democrat John Conyers, who would become chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has spoken of investigating the president for high crimes and misdemeanors. Henry Waxman and Ted Kennedy will get subpoena power if the Democrats win both houses. Unspecified horrors lurk behind every corner if the Democrats take control and hold hearings about the administration's relations with the oil and pharmaceutical industries. A sea of partisan vendetta, Republicans prophesy, stretches to the horizon if the Democrats are allowed to win.

As a strategy, this has its shortcomings. It's not clear how many independents, or even conservatives, will warm to a campaign that focuses on forestalling congressional oversight -- not with gas prices soaring and the American military bogged down in a war with an increasingly undefinable mission.

Again, I think Rove is trying to mau-mau the Democrats and getting the always compliant press to help him do it. He's shaping the battlefield the way he wants it. It won't work unless Democrats take the bait.

It's an interesting discussion. Perhaps Digby is correct and Rove is trying to scare off the democrats from even talking about the crimes of the Bush administration - and the only way he can do that is by mentioning the threat of investigations - and perhaps by getting out this message now, he hopes to have silenced all such talk when the real campaign begins (whenever that is.) Tough job trying to thread that needle...

Yesterday I said:

it's definitely not a Dred Scott dogwhistle like we saw in the debates - everyone is hearing this message loud & clear, ergo the repugs are apparently assuming that this message is useful at the margin.

Zach Roth says this scare threat is "almost exclusively in fundraising emails" - I'm not sure if that's true. Obviously the Elizabeth Dole email got a lot of attention, but I see them making the exact same arguments on Fox all the time.

We'll have to wait and see how it all plays out - strange circumstances indeed.