----------------------------------------------------------------------
When I was a Democrat, I protested President George H.W. Bush because he did not support Democracy in the Middle East. I am still trying to understand why this current crop of Democrats are protesting today. Why?
If they hate war, why no protest over Clinton's Bombing in 1998? or his war in Bosnia?
If they hate Dictatorships, why allow Saddam Hussain to fund three Democratic Congressmen to visit Iraq before the war to say, "Peace for our time,"?
If I read my history books correctly, "Peace for our time," gave the German National Socialist Leader free reign to invade other countries and kill Jews.
Wilsonianism was founded by President Woodrow Wilson. Freedom House was created by Eleanor Roosevelt. Why have Democrats turn their back on both these ideals? Conservatives picked them up instead.
If Democrats want to save the world (i.e. Tibet, Darfur), but they oppose any use of the military, what should America use to stop these massacres from occurring? Harsh language?
Thomas P. M. Barnett, author and blogger of The Pentagon's New Map is a Green Bay Packer fan, a military strategist and a Democrat. Yet, he cites this post, about the benefits of opening up the Middle East to Democracy. Why do no other Democrats cite it?
And finally, why during these past Five years, if Democrats wanted to end the War in Iraq quickly, did they not ask President Bush, "What can we do to help?"
Democrats, I await your answers. Points if you get a Code Pinker to answer.
JSF, if you're waiting for Democrats to save the world, you'll be waiting for a long, long time. And what does that mean...save the world? Are they going to fly in in their little red capes and save Africa from starvation? Well, perhaps not...but maybe they'll recycle and chat in cafes about the poor downtrodden Palestinians. That's about the extent of it.
ReplyDeleteThe great Leftist dream is a huge illusion, a mirage on the shifting sands of time and in time, we will all come to understand this simple truth.
I only counted six words (must be my obsession with counting syllables for haiku)....but good point anyway.
ReplyDeleteRoxiticus Desperate Housewives
Aurora,
ReplyDeleteNope, I am not expecting Democrats to save the world, but I am expecting to match their rhetoric.
Did you know that the Clinton Administration was involved with "nation-building" in the Baltics and Haiti? And the Clintons failed in Haiti.
So, why is Nation Building anathema when a Conservative Republican does it?
"So, why is Nation Building anathema when a Conservative Republican does it?"
ReplyDeleteJSF, the record of nation building under conservatives speaks for itself on this one. They can't be trusted to build OUR nation let alone anyone else's.
Jason,
ReplyDeleteRemember the Marshall Plan? It was promoted by a President who was low in the polls, and every Press person thought he was just a failed businessman.
How did it succeed?
Through the intervention of Senator Vandenberg who said that "Politics stops at the Water's edge,"
If any Democrat had taken up Vandenberg's mantle, Nation Building would not have failed.
The Democrats never offered to help. They hated Bush too much. However, we only have President at a time, and all the attacks on Bush rallyed the Republicans to support him. A little give by the Dems, either in Rhetoric or action, might have done some good.
When a President goes overseas (or does some action), it is not the President's individual action, but it is America's action.
When Clinton bombed Bosnia or attacked Saddam, did the GOP in Congress (or their outside groups) make a public row?
No. Because, Politics stops at the Waters edge.
JSF, the mess we are in right now is thanks to nation building and our tampering with the affairs of other countries. To quote a radical black Chicago preacher quoting a Reagan appointed diplomat quoting Malcolm X, "America's chickens have come home to roost."
ReplyDeleteDiscussing politics with you has gotten to feel a lot like banging my head against the wall. I think I may have to quit for my own sanity. Have you heard the new Raconteurs album? It quite rocks!
Jason,
ReplyDelete1) I've heard a couple of the Rancouter's songs o 103.1 -- good stuff.
2) C'mon man. I cite Historical precedence and you say you can't debate. The best thing to do is find another case of Historical precedence, Keep me in check.
3) America suceeded in Europe on the strength of both parties holding their tounge and working together.
Nixon in his bio:RN, (Look for that scene, it's worth reading even if you don't like Nixon or Truman) describes how Truman saw the world. It was radical to folks at the time, but instead of having another European War, Truman's design became the EU.
Because of Hitler and Russian instragince, Europe learned Democracy and trade. Is the concept of Democracy such a lofty goal that no one else should have it?
Seriously, Jason, I enjoy history. That is where I see echoes of present day stuff. Nothing ever changes unless someone steps up and decides to change something.
That's why I blog, that's why your comments are important.
JSF, the new album, Consolers of the Lonely, is really really good and you should download it, play it loud in your car and rock the hell out.
ReplyDeleteNow while this could be an exercise in futility, let's take a look at some of the more recent instances of US tampering in the affairs of other countries. Saddam Hussein was an oldschool US puppet. Pinochet, US puppet. Noriega, US puppet. The Taliban and Al Quaeda, formed from the Afghan mujahadeen, US backed militia. The contra death squads in Nicaragua, US funded. I realize that probably not all of these were republican flops, but in recent history, when we install our puppets, it either becomes a human rights nightmare for the locals, or it bites us in the ass decades later, or both. I don't have a solution, but what we've been doing has been a complete and total clusterfuck.
And I'll give you one thing, bringing up history, even if it's a bit too old to be relevant in today's world, is miles above some of these stretches of logic.