Is a visionless Democrat better than an apocalyptic Republican?
Let's face it, the Democrats are a weak, visionless party - and that's kind of scary. Although not as scary as the scary, prophetic Republicans who are leaving every ally behind in a streak of unilateralism that will ultimately lead to economic and political isolation. Sad as it is to admit, the people with true vision, political skill and ingenuity are staying the hell away from politics. They're filming Girls Gone Wild videos. Serenity Now!
by faktorial.com - where we sell vision in little plastic bags for $40 an ounce
Here is the key paragraph from the article:
The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: All Things to All People: "What an incoherent disaster. When you actually read for content, you see that the speech skirts almost every tough issue and comes out on both sides of every major concern. The Iraq section is shamefully evasive. He can't even bring himself to use the word 'democratic' or to contemplate any future for Iraq, democratic or otherwise. He can't bring himself to say whether the war was a mistake or to lay out even the most meager plan for moving forward. For every gesture in the direction of greater defense spending, there are opposing hints about reducing our commitments and bringing the troops home."
Labels: Commentaries, Politics
5 Comments:
Democrats are getting better, but there are no real stars in either party
I think he did just fine. I don't know what you are talking about. He doesn't even have to do that much to be better than president idiot.
I'm a proud, registered Republican and while I agree there are things Bush could do better, I'm absolutely TERRIFIED of a Kerry / Edwards Whitehouse!!
I completely agree with the NYTimes article that Kerry continues to dance around difficult issues and hasn't yet communicated (which means he probably doesn't have) a plan for making resolving the difficult issues. Additionally, many of Kerry's speech points are in direct conflict with his voting record during his whole tenure as Senator, during which he's done...........????oh, that's right, nothing significant...
The Democrats are going to:
- revoke or severely hamper our individual, Constitutional, Second Amendment Rights
- improve the economy? how? dunno, Kerry can't / hasn't said, but my guess is that the Dems will actually sink the economy by raising taxes and crushing consumer confidence / spending at this critical junction...
- do what in Iraq? dunno, Kerry can't / hasn't said.
- do what to win the war on terrorism? dunno, Kerry can't / hasn't said.
Bush, on the other hand, while admittidly not perfect has actual accomplishments...
- the economy is actually improving.
- While the mass media wants everyone to believe otherwise, Iraq is actually a much better place.
- We, as a Nation, are getting better on security and making forward progress on the war on terror.
Bush also has all-important experience and a plan for moving forward.
It scares me tremendously that so many of the folks our age are going to Vote for a hollow Kerry / Edwards ticket soley because our favorite bands (Springsteen, Dixie Chics, Dave Matthews, Pearl Jam) are hosting concerts to raise money / awareness and without knowing the actual facts... But, hey, that's essentially how the Clinton Era Assault Weapons Ban got passed... some Democrat saw a gun that looked scary and got a bug up her or his ass, and the people went, "Oh, they're banning assault weapons, gee, that's good..." without having any sort of clue as to what weapons were actually banned, why and how, if at all, they differ from other weapons, if the ban made a difference, nor without knowing anything about firearms and related crime statistics....
How's Kerry going to fix our Nation again? I don't think anyone knows, not even him - if he does, he certainly hasn't told anyone.
I agree that Bush has a record compared to Kerry, but I would hardly say that it's one of accomplishment. As the job reports revealed, only 32,000 jobs were created in the last cycle - way fewer than expected. Also, the international campaigns have been spotty - Afghanistan is largely forgotten and underfunded, Iraq is determined to purge America from the region, and the international community is in anarchy. Poor, rogue states are all shopping for nuclear weapons. Poor nuclear states are selling it to them. Our allies feel marginalized and are forming their own alliances that exclude us. Could this be considered good job performance? And, I still haven't mentioned the deficit, restrictions on free speech and bans on stem cell research.
Kerry has only thus far presented laundry lists and not a cohesive plan, but at least he has the benefit of hindsight and a clean slate...which I think will go a long way this time around. Neither choice is great, but i don't think Bush has the credibility or the skill to do the job effectively in a second term.
Dems should have nominated a couple of chimps to run against Bush and Cheney. This would have avoided two things and produced something I hope to someday see:
1) Having to sit through Kerry acting like he understands what it's like being middle class. He really understands how hard it is to live paycheck to paycheck while he's at his vacation home in Idaho. And if John Edwards is there "everyman," God help us! He looks like a televangelist!
2) Hearing how he's a war hero and has done. . .well not much else in the 20 years since. If that's all the Dems have, they may somehow find a way to blow this layup of an election.
3) The thing I hope to see: a chimp in a nationally televised debate! Now that would be funny! Even funnier than the chimp serving drinks at a party! Both would be great, but hearing a chimp explain his plan for health care would rule.
Seriously though, both parties are a joke. Our political system is a complete diseaster. Can we invoke the Brewster's Millions "None of the Above" option?
PS: Steve, this website rules!
Post a Comment
<< Home