« A bomb-thrower at the ballot box | Main | Fencing with fools »

How The Democrats May Have Already Blown It

In my Townhall column today I talk about how the Democrats have blown the advantage they have had going into the md-term elections by not coming up with any plan of their own to address national security or Iraq..

In the past, Americans have known more about what Bill Clinton pulled out of his pants, than what Sandy Berger stuffed into his. That might have changed somewhat this past week though, as Berger's high profile opposition to the ABC movie focused attention on his actions both before and after 9/11.

Some Republicans are making sure the attention of the American people stays focused on national security. Majority leader John Boehner drew criticism from Democrats this week when he said, "I listen to my Democrats friends, and I wonder if they are more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people." Speaker Dennis Hastert said Capitol Hill Democrats are confused about who the enemy is.

Although Democrats cried foul, some votes and positions taken by Democrats on issues such as the NSA surveillance program and the Patriot Act provide some support for the statements.

Democrats were sure the Iraq war would be their silver bullet in 2006. They believed a failed Bush policy would be enough. What they did not do was come up with a plan of their own. In the absence of any coherent, unified plan, on Iraq or national security, some of the more outrageous comments from Democrats filled the void.

I have used the Berger line before, but not for a while since his case had been out of the news. I should have known he would be back eventually. These people just won't go away.


Comments (36)

What Democrats seem to keep... (Below threshold)
Mike:

What Democrats seem to keep missing is that elections aren't referendums on the incumbents. Elections are a multiple choice question where the instructions are "Choose the least wrong answer" because nearly never will any of the choices be 100% aligned with all of your principles.

The alternative the Dems co... (Below threshold)
hermie:

The alternative the Dems come up with, no matter what the issue is 'We'll Do It Smarter'.

That's what passes for Dem policy positions...Oh, that and.. "We're Not Bush"

I wonder if they are mor... (Below threshold)
Brian:

I wonder if they are more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people.
...
some votes and positions taken by Democrats on issues such as the NSA surveillance program and the Patriot Act provide some support for the statements.

Unless you believe that following the law and the Constitution inherently "protects the American people" and, more importantly, the American institution. You may believe that the laws need to change, and that's a separate debate. But arguing that anyone has the right to violate the law to "protect the American people" is a distinctly un-American viewpoint. That applies to you, and that applies to the president.

Democrats ... believed a failed Bush policy would be enough. What they did not do was come up with a plan of their own.

I'm amazed by the frequency of outright lies on this site. The Democrats most certainly offered a plan of their own. Feel free to pick it apart, criticize it, or debate its merits (or, as is more common on here, lob ad hominems at it). But don't lie and say it doesn't exist.

Hey Brian... (Below threshold)
DavidB:

Hey Brian

arguing that anyone has the right to violate the law to "protect the American people" is a distinctly un-American viewpoint. That applies to you, and that applies to the president.

Here we go again . . .

I'm amazed by the frequency of outright lies on this site.

They seem to be coming from your side of the aisle, why not offer substatiation for your spew?

The Democrats most certa... (Below threshold)
Clay:

The Democrats most certainly offered a plan of their own.

You're kidding, right? That's a plan? That's nothing more than "We'll do it better."

Brian,To disagree wi... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

Brian,
To disagree with you makes someone a liar?
I look at your link and I don't call that a plan. Goals, maybe, but no details on how to achieve them.

The Dem's 'policy' come dow... (Below threshold)
hermie:

The Dem's 'policy' come down to simple answers.

'We'll fight the war on terror'..OK...How can you when you dismantle intelligence programs, and burden soldiers with the thought of imminent criminal prosecution if they do not follow all the new PC rules of engagement?

"Double the Special Forces"...How? Just transferring regular soldiers into Special Forces, does not make them 'Special Forces'. SF is a much higher standards, requiring extensive training, and time.

"Go after Bin Laden"..Do you proposed to take 100% of those newly-created 'Special Forces' and devote them to searching for one man, while Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Queda, and all other terrorists are left alone?

Brian,Loved that d... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

Brian,

Loved that democratic agenda you linked to. What did they do, take from the White House's web page and slap their donkey letterhead on it?

There is nothing different in that "agenda" other than the dems saying, "trust us, we can do it better."

No new message, no alternative plan, nothing.

Bush angry, petulant today ... (Below threshold)
BushHASnoPLAN:

Bush angry, petulant today in front of reporters


Remember the first Presidential debate in 2004? The nasty, arrogant, petulant George Bush showed up, surprising many Americans and throwing a sagging Kerry back into the race.

Bush appeared to show total disdain for the whole idea that he could be questioned. He sneared, he was abrupt, and he appeared angry. Well that George Bush showed up again today in front of reporters.

The talking heads and pundits have all spent the last two weeks talking about how much he is helping his party with these speeches. Well now he is being pressed by McCain and others on the Hill, and he can't handle it. Today he ripped his mask off again. He let his true self come out. The mean, petulant, blue blood frat boy made an appearance.

Let Allen, or Santorum, or whoever go back to their districts and tell their voters how much they support this President. I dare them to.

I don't think he was petula... (Below threshold)
Scott in CA:

I don't think he was petulant at all. I do think he was pissed that he still has to explain that we are at war with people who want to kill us for the 1,289,435th time. Did David Gregory get it yet?

As the Dems having a "plan". Sure they do. I'm sure they'll tell us exactly what they would have done after they lose again in November.

I thought this week we were... (Below threshold)
Mike:

I thought this week we were supposed to be pushing the 'Bush is dumb' mantra and that next week was 'Bush is mean' ? Do I have my weeks confused ? Please advise.

Uhh, Brian... that's not a ... (Below threshold)
attack_elephant:

Uhh, Brian... that's not a plan. That's just a bunch of goals. Goals are different than plans.

For instance - MY GOAL next year is to get 10 million dollars. My PLAN is to win the lottery.

The Democrats GOAL is to "Eliminate Osama Bin Laden". Their PLAN is to... ummm... hmmm...

My PLAN is probably more realistic, or at least a little clearer.

Perhaps you could fill in the Dem plan (with citations, please) so we could avoid any more of the lies that seem to bother you so much.

And no, "shoot him in the face" does not count as a plan.

@ BushHASnoPLANIf ... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

@ BushHASnoPLAN

If you had to answer loaded questions from the likes of Helen Thomas, you'd come across a little bothered.

The President is reminding the public that there's a war to be won ahead of the midterm elections, dink.

Your moniker suggests Bush has no plan. Well, the plan is underway, with, as he explained, our generals adjusting to the enemies' plans. Is that too complicated to understand? Yes? Okay then: You're another sewer pipe spewing crap in the name of free love and money.

Mike: This is "Bus... (Below threshold)

Mike:

This is "Bush is Petulant" *and* "Bush Didn't Really Win...Twice" week.

"Bush is dumb" and "Bush is mean" is next week. Get with the program, buddy!

Oh, no! The nasty, arrogan... (Below threshold)
cmd:

Oh, no! The nasty, arrogant George Bush showed up at a press conference! How will the Republic survive?

You know, maybe it's because W's pissed off at having to respectfully answer questions from a bunch of lying, treasonous, blow-dried nitwits whose closest brush with danger is when the squeegee man steps in front of their limo, and whose geopolitical knowledge starts and ends with a AAA map. And on top of that, he just got cut off at the knees by that filthy fucknozzle McCain, who once again is playing to his buddies in the Terrorist-Supporting Media because he wants to burnish his "maverick" credentials.

I'd be "petulant," too. If it were up to me, every reporter assigned to the White House beat would have their credentials pulled and ten minutes to clean out their desks. If they were on White House grounds at the end of the hour, the Marines and Secret Service would have orders to shoot to kill.

Come on, Brian. You called ... (Below threshold)
clay:

Come on, Brian. You called us liars, and now you're just going to sulk away? Back it up, where's the dem plan? Anybody?

Brian has left the building... (Below threshold)
SShiell:

Brian has left the building - and crawled back under his rock.

Jeez, an impatient bunch! S... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Jeez, an impatient bunch! Sorry if I haven't been sitting around here clicking Reload waiting for your responses.

Most of the responses to my post were empty of any actual content, but to reply to a few:

The claim was "no plan". I linked to a plan. Even if you hate the plan, if that's not substantiation of its existence, then I can't help you.

I agree some of the points are "goals", not hard plans. "Combating the economic, social, and political conditions that allow extremism to thrive" is a goal (though one that Bush doesn't share, so that's also fair to consider in an election).

These are no more vague than "bring democracy to the Middle East", though. Or "when Iraq is free, democracy will spread throughout the Middle East". Or when Bush the candidate had the "goal" but no "plan" to "bring integrity back to the White House". Or the Contract for America.

But there are many specific plans in there, if you're open enough to recognize them:

  • Rebuild a state-of-the-art military by making the needed investments in equipment and manpower
  • Guarantee that our troops have the protective gear, equipment
  • Enact a GI Bill of Rights for the 21st Century
  • Eliminate Osama Bin Laden
  • Double the size of our Special Forces
  • Immediately implement the recommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission
  • Screen 100% of containers and cargo bound for the U.S.
  • etc.

You want details of how they'll try to get OBL? Or who they're going to contract with to increase the production of protective gear? Or how many cargo screeners will be purchased? Well, that's not a realistic requirement, for either party.

Brian, Brian, Brian...This ... (Below threshold)
Clay:

Brian, Brian, Brian...This is what we waited for?

Dear Brian...Re... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

Dear Brian...

Rebuild a state-of-the-art military by making the needed investments in equipment and manpower

Being done...could be faster if we cut some entitlement programs...I've got a list

Guarantee that our troops have the protective gear, equipment

Done! [pay attention]

Enact a GI Bill of Rights for the 21st Century

What the terrorists fear MOST!! I guess this is so when the Dimocrats SPIT on them they can at least say..."But hey, we got you that bill of rights thing"

Eliminate Osama Bin Laden

Bingo! The reason we're CRIME FREE in America today is because Elliot Ness nailed Al Capone and ended crime FOREVER!! Where's Elliot when ya need him??

Double the size of our Special Forces

Agreed...as long as we cut in half the number of JAG lawyers who will otherwise insist the Special Forces be armed only with spitballs! (thanks Zell)

Immediately implement the recommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission

Actually more WOULD have been if the Dimocrats would play ball!!

Screen 100% of containers and cargo bound for the U.S.

Actually this will be done here real soon, though not by stopping EVERY ship on the high seas and combing through it.

etc.

"etc." is the REAL Dimocrat plan!!

Brian,So you cut and... (Below threshold)
scsiwuzzy:

Brian,
So you cut and pastes the goals from your link and still call that a plan.

WTF, the Underpants Gnomes had a better plan than that.

Rebuild a state-of-the-art ... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

Rebuild a state-of-the-art military by making the needed investments in equipment and manpower
- Guarantee that our troops have the protective gear, equipment
- Enact a GI Bill of Rights for the 21st Century
- Eliminate Osama Bin Laden
- Double the size of our Special Forces
- Immediately implement the rommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission
- Screen 100% of containers and cargo bound for the U.S.
etc.

We already have the best trained, best equiped army in the world.

Just what does a G.I. Bill of Rights have to do with fighting terrorism?

OBL is in a cave somewhere, and of no consequense, which is exactly what the Dems will be hollering once he is killed.

Most of the recommendations have already been done, except for those that the Dems are blocking.

You have got to be kidding. Screning %100 of the containers would require thousands of people at every major port, and cause such a back log of shipments, that foriegn countries would start screeming protectionism.

Once again the politicians have amazed me at saying stupid things.

Brian, you have trouble wit... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Brian, you have trouble with linear thinking? When asked to list plans not goals, you still list goals. Take your statement of doubling the size of the special forces in use. Do you have any concept of how long it takes for someone to become a special forces soldier, or a navy seal, for that matter? I thought not. First Basic training, then advanced training then jump school then ranger training, then special forces school. I don't know what the attrition rate is these days, but I know it is high. That is just one of your unrealistic goals. About OBL. What are you geniuses planning? To invade a nuclear armed Pakistan? You should learn to engage your brain before you run your mouth. But then you wouldn't be a democrat if you were capable of that.

Well, at least you're all n... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Well, at least you're all now agreeing that it is a plan, and you're challenging it on its merits. That's more like it.

You have got to be kiddi... (Below threshold)
Brian:

You have got to be kidding. Screning %100 of the containers would require thousands of people at every major port, and cause such a back log of shipments, that foriegn countries would start screeming protectionism.

Once again the politicians have amazed me at saying stupid things.

It was Bush who said that we have to be right 100% of the time, and the terrorists only have to be right once. Not addressing this hole in security is giving them a red carpet.

Take your statement of d... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Take your statement of doubling the size of the special forces in use. Do you have any concept of how long it takes for someone to become a special forces soldier, or a navy seal, for that matter?

Not relevant. It's a concrete thing that you can do, so promising to do it is a hard plan.

Saying "increase the efficiency of the special forces" is a vague goal. But "doubling the size" is a plan. At least, using the definitions of "goal" and "plan" that this thread has decided upon.

By the way, do you have any concept of what it takes to "bring democracy to the Middle East"? Apparently that was a good enough "plan" for you, though.

Brian: "By the way, do y... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

Brian: "By the way, do you have any concept of what it takes to "bring democracy to the Middle East"? Apparently that was a good enough "plan" for you, though."

Actually the GOAL was to cut off the source of Islamic fundamentalism. The "plan" was to ultimately inject FREEDOM into the region.

That plan led to the secondary plans...like ridding the MidEast of a murderous moron like Saddam.

Brian...having spent 8 years in the Marines I am well aware of how NATIONAL objectives have to be translated down into STRATEGIES...then TACTICS and finally OPERATIONAL objectives.

the GSTO (Goal...Strategies...Tactics...Operations) pyramid is very standard. Just not something Leftists are familiar with.

Brian:Just suppose... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

Brian:

Just suppose that we address the hole in our security and screen %100 of the cargo coming into the country, and after spending billions of dollars doing so, the terrorist just blow a nuclear weapon in N.Y. harbor before you screen it.

Kill all of the terrorist before they can act upon their irrational plans makes a lot more sense. And yes, if we happen to kill a few inocent civilians in the process, I don't have a problem with that. It beats the hell out of killing a few hundred thousand Americans.

USMC Pilot : "if we happ... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

USMC Pilot : "if we happen to kill a few inocent civilians in the process, I don't have a problem with that. It beats the hell out of killing a few hundred thousand Americans."

Effin'A...SIR!

Semper Fi

The "plan" was to ultima... (Below threshold)
Brian:

The "plan" was to ultimately inject FREEDOM into the region.

C'mon, that's no more a concrete plan than "Rebuild a state-of-the-art military" or "Eliminate terrorist breeding grounds". If nothing else, you should be consistent.

fter spending billions o... (Below threshold)
Brian:

fter spending billions of dollars doing so

We just spent $300 billion in Iraq (a significant amount of which, BTW, is unaccounted for). We can do that, but spending a few billion more on our ports will bankrupt us? Very convenient math you (and Chertoff) are using.

Kill all of the terrorist before they can act upon their irrational plans

I agree! Please tell Bush to send our troops after the terrorists that want to attack us, instead of having them waste time and lives in Iraq.

Actually the GOAL was to... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Actually the GOAL was to cut off the source of Islamic fundamentalism.

Well then Bush's aim was off, because he hit Iraq instead of whatever Islamic fundamentalist establishment he was aiming for.

The only way to get Osama (... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

The only way to get Osama (assuming he is alive) is to invade a 'friendly' country. Yep, ole Brian is a real genius.

I know the main stream democrats aren't much for reading the truth (they're more into the fantasy comics) but if Brian is so smart and up to date on military affairs why hasn't he studied the papers captured during the invasion. It will give him a head start on the October surprise. I think Powerline will give him a start since they have access to many of the documents (PDF files)that have been translated. Want WMD, they have the records, want the Saddam/Osama connection, they have that to. Go read and get ready for a shock. I thought the president was going to give it away today but he decided to let them sweat another 30 days. The democratic leadership know what's in the records and are lying through their teeth about it. They have their sheeple on a leash and don't want them running loose. Soon everyone will know.

I guess the democrats only plan is to trash everything anyone else does. Works on the retards that vote democrat most of the time. That is with the help of the traitors at the NYT/LAT and the other liberal rags and broadcast networks. This isn't working out too good for them, soon they will all be bankrupt like Airhead America.

For a good list of stupid a... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

For a good list of stupid and down right traitorous remarks made by the democratic leadership give this site a quick look.

http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=6576

The only way to get Osam... (Below threshold)
Brian:

The only way to get Osama (assuming he is alive) is to invade a 'friendly' country. Yep, ole Brian is a real genius.

I didn't say "invade". But what happened to "you're either with us or against us"? Why are you OK sitting by and letting a "friendly" country knowingly harbor OBL? Even announcing a couple of weeks ago that they will take no action to capture him?

May have?? there's no Lewin... (Below threshold)
914:

May have?? there's no Lewinsky to blame this time!




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy