When you have nothing to offer…

Mary Katharine Ham notes a Boston Globe piece on how, just under three years away from the next presidential election, the Democratic Party is already seeking dirt on a potential Republican contender.
This is yet further proof that the Democrats are out of ideas. Their only platform continues to be “We’re everything the Republicans aren’t.” That may work with the lunatic fringe of the Left, but in mainstream America, voters like to hear about plans and ideas for moving the country forward.

3 thoughts on “When you have nothing to offer…

  1. It’s funny that you see it that way. I definitely consider myself more in the dem’s than the rep’s camp, yet my complaint about them is that they
    a) Try to be as much like the Republicans as possible, (which, I guess, makes me the lunatic fringe?) and
    b) They have no ideas how to move the country forward.
    (I do think that (b) is true for both parties, though)
    As for (a), all I really want for the Democratic Party is to take a stand. At this point, any stand will do. Just a bit of spine is all I ask for. I’ll give the Republicans that they take a stand for their ideas – I just don’t agree with many of them.

  2. Groby,
    I’m curious to know how you think the Democrats are trying to be like the Republicans. Do you have some specific examples?
    I do not agree with your assessment that both parties have no ideas for moving the country forward. I believe the Republicans do, even if you and other Democrats/leftists do not agree with them.
    By contrast, I believe the Democrats either:
    1. Have no plans for moving the country forward, as evidenced by their behavior the past two election cycles, which seems to be nothing more than “We’re not Republicans, Kerry is not Bush”
    2. They actually do have ideas, but they’re scared to allow them in to the light, because they know a majority of Americans would oppose them, since they’re likely just repackaged versions of the same failed policies they’ve foisted and attempted to foist on the public for the past 40 years.
    Therefore, the best they can do is to oppose the Republicans on the GOP’s ideas, without answering with ideas of their own.
    I would say right now the Democrats have taken at least one stand, and that is to indulge the radical anti-war left. These radicals apparently do not remember or want to recall the history of appeasement with regard to Hitler, and figure “if we can all just get along,” things will be okay. The problem is that the Islamofascists we are at war with are not interested in “just getting along” with Western culture, they want to annihilate it.

  3. Just one quick example: Liebermann’s and Clinton’s constant attempts to disallow speech based on morality. (Video Games debate). I might be biased, since I am a game developer, but last I checked judges agree that games are speech. To cite more details, I’d need to do deeper research. The main point is that all Democratic plans are quite close to the Republican ones – there’s no sense of real difference between the two parties.
    The disagreement without clear ideas is used in the areas where they’d have to admit that they don’t have a better idea either – and I’ll concede that there are plenty of those.
    As for the Republicanss, I have yet to hear any concrete plans on how the Republicans want to combat rampant poverty, failing education and a broken medical system – which I consider fairly significant points for bringing America forward. In case you’re interested what I am thinking should be done: Campaign Finance Reform, Truth in Legislation (no more Omnibus Bills), harsh penalties for the abuse of the legal system. All of the three points I mentioned are not blocked by political but by economical interests.
    I wonder where you got the impression they indulge the radical left, though. I’ll exclude the call for withdrawal here – a truly stupid idea that will create a lot of trouble down the road. I never was for the war against Iraq, but now that we’re there, it’s imperative we finish things properly. (It doesn’t help that Bush very prematurely called “Mission Complete” – what the heck was he thinking?). The radical anti-war left is a bit more radical than that đŸ˜‰
    Addressing the Islamofascist claim: Just as food for thought, fascism is defined as the collusion between politics and industry. We’re closer to that than Iraq. (Which, btw, was secular before the ill-planed war).
    I do agree that there are Islamic groups that are not interested in getting along. (Which is putting it rather nicely, btw). I just propose that there might be better ways to deal with them than indiscriminately bombing a whole country, while at the same time raping the constitution and instituting torture.
    As a final aside – I don’t intend this as a flame war. I’m truly interested in your views. Should this come across differently, please ignore me.

Comments are closed.