Monday, June 19, 2006

Democrats and Desperation

Democrats and desperation: the two go hand in hand. Out of power for years on end, the Democratic Party, once a party of principle and ideas, today is floundering like a recently boated bass, flopping wildly, trying to get back in the water.

Devoid of ideas, the Democrats are left to grumble, snipe, whine, demagogue, pander and bellyache because things do not suit them, but they can do nothing more than that. They don’t like what the Bush administration is doing, especially when it scores points, but they have no real ideas about what we ought to do instead.

Back in 70s and 80s NBC News characterized the party out of power as “The Loyal Opposition,” a phrase that acknowledged that the party out of power is just as devoted as the party in power in advancing the interests of United States, but merely has different ideas about how to achieve those interests. Today, that just isn’t so. For the Democrats, it’s not about advancing the interests of the United States, it’s all about gaining political power to advance its own agenda, an agenda remarkably different from the traditional values of our county.

The Democrats are in the unenviable position of having to oppose everything the Bush administration does, without regard for the validity of the administration’s initiatives. You may have noticed, for example, that many prominent Democrats eagerly anticipate something—anything—that allows them to criticize the military, to call them murderers, to brand them as torturers, even before an investigation has been conducted. I think the normal position of patriotic Americans is to first take the position that our military acts properly, and then let someone prove otherwise. But the Democrats are out of power, and they hate George W. Bush more than Osama bin Laden, and nothing must be allowed to prevent them from getting Mr. Bush, not even what is in the interest of the United States.

Because of the position in which the Democrats find themselves they are forced to adopt foolish and wrong-headed policies and to oppose anything and everything that George Bush does, rather than to advance and stand for some supportable principle. Consequently, they find themselves on the wrong side of one issue after another.

Iraq and terrorism are two timely examples.

The Democrats are eager to advance the idea that because the war in Iraq hasn’t gone perfectly we should withdraw the troops. In other scenarios such a proposal would be termed “surrender,” but the Democrats can’t admit that surrender is what they want, so they try desperately to call it something else. And because a true global war against terrorism would play to the benefit of the Republicans, Democrats now are in the position of having to deny that terrorism is a real threat.

There is another possibility on the war against terrorism: Perhaps Democrats honestly don’t believe terrorism is a real threat. But that begs the question, “Which is worse: A group of people that doesn’t recognize reality when it stares them in the face, or a group that puts political considerations ahead of confronting threats to the safety of the American people?”

It doesn’t matter. Whichever way you answer that question, the inescapable conclusion is that the Democrats are unfit to govern.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

No comments: