Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Between Revolution and Insanity

I am not going to venture a guess as to the results of the midterms, but I concede that Republicans stand a very a good chance of losing their majority. Having said that, the difference between the 1994 Contract with America and the current Democratic effort is huge.

Republicans came to power because they had a platform of strengthening an individual’s capacity for self-reliance by reducing government excess. The GOP ran on an idea and won. But what do Democrats have to offer? Their election strategy seems to be solely about one man- George Bush.

After my blogging hiatus, I was compelled to write this piece after seeing a clip from Death of a President, a British film portraying President Bush’s future assassination. Not content to rely on a lookalike or fictional president, the filmmakers actually digitally placed George Bush’s face on an actor.

The degree of personal hatred and cheapening of political discourse is sickening. To be fair, the GOP attempted to gain mileage from bashing President Clinton. But this is different. American foreign policy has been greatly harmed by the left wing’s hate for President Bush. Foreigners gleefully exploit this weakness in the American government and we are all the poorer.

The illness that has captured the fringe of the Democratic party also captures headlines. Recent news stories related to the fifth anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have started the process of mainstreaming the mentally ill or hopelessly stupid proponents of conspiracy theories, most of which portray President Bush as the mastermind of these attacks, or the hapless puppet of his neocon (read Jews) masters.

It is convenient to think that these views are in the mainstream. I am more comfortable with the idea that my political opponents are unemployed college kids with a computer and a low intelligence to creativity ratio. I hope this is not the case, although recent events have to make you wonder. Ned Lamont ran against the Democratic Party’s nominee for Vice President and won on a platform that was mostly centered on Joe Lieberman’s Great Crime—he received a kiss on the cheek from President Bush following the 2005 State of the Union Address. Apparently comity with the other party is treason to the Democrats’ new horde of mentally ill devotees.

I’m generally against compelled speech, but for the good of the country, Democratic leaders ought to publicly agree with and espouse the following platform:

  • The World Trade Center was brought down by Islamic terrorists flying hijacked commercial aircraft.
  • The Pentagon was struck by a hijacked commercial aircraft.
  • Although there were fundamental errors made by the national intelligence community, there was no conspiracy, nor willful blindness, by the U.S. government.
  • The War on Terror is a serious struggle between America’s security and Islamic terrorists who want nothing more than global empire and dead Americans. While there are legitimate and divergent viewpoint on the best method for prosecuting this war, it is a war both parties agree is critical.

This list is simple enough, but I doubt the Democratic leadership will ever embrace it and publicly espouse it. There is too much cheap mileage out there for Bush bashing. And we are all the poorer.


Blogger Ezzie said...

I'm too busy to comment, but WELCOME BACK! :)

9/13/2006 8:12 PM  
Blogger respondingtojblogs said...

Thanks Ez. It's good to be back.

9/13/2006 9:19 PM  
Blogger Nephtuli said...

Welcome back. Man, where have you been?

9/13/2006 10:53 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home