What Would the Democrats Do?

ChronWatch ^ | 8-27-06 | Jan Larson

[spkpls4]

I can't remember where I heard it, from a talk show somewhere in the last week or so, but the Democrats to have a plan. Their plan is about 25 pages long and every page is blank. (Just like their minds)

[Cobra64]

lol

Actually surrendering is not a laughing matter. You'll see massive terrorist bombings all over the civilized world by terrorists.

[SR 50]

Democrats will sit down and talk while Republicans take action.

[ClaireSolt]

Yesterday, an interviewer asked Joe Biden if reports that violence is down in Baghdad don't show that the Bush plan is working. Hopefully, he said, but unemployment is 60%. LOL So, I got to wonmdering whether they want more troops or redeployment to Okinawa to lower the unemployment.

[EQAndyBuzz]

'The DemonRats will then be upset that they won't be able to blame Bush"

Sorry Free, but you are incorrect here.

The RATS will blame Bush for his failed policies and say that the attack happened because of those policies.

Then the NY TImes and every liberal rag in the world would praise the RATS for their new strategy on fighting terrorism which would be to lead with your chin.

[TenthLegion]

something tells me they all plan to get a nice, close look at the inside of their colons

[Dilbert56]

It's really indicative of how blinding hatred can be. If the Democrats were to approach this logically, they would want to take national security off the table as a campaign issue. To do this, they would answer each Administration position with a "yes, but.." rather than a "no".

Instead, they are letting the Deaniacs be their public face:

• They claim everything the President has done makes us less safe. The American public sees multiple thwarted attacks and nothing horrific here in almost five years. Results count and even the most rabid Bush haters know know they're lying when they make claims like that. Hey Deaniacs, if we're less safe than we were on 9-11-01 then why don't we need the PATRIOT ACT anymore?
• Americans don't like to lose. Comparing Iraq to Vietnam may work in the media and on college campuses but the American public doesn't want it to happen. I suspect 10-20% of the people who disapprove of the President's handling of Iraq want us be more aggressive rather than bail out. We may be unhappy with some aspects of the war's prosecution but we sure as hell aren't going to vote for a surrender monkey.
• The Democrats lose more credibility when they talk about the economy. They could have gotten away with six months of cognitive dissonance but after three full years of economic growth it's really time to admit we're not in a recession.

But they refuse to do what's smart politically because of hatred. The country is 1/3 Democrat, 1/3 Republican and the politicians have to fight over the middle third. You don't win them but appearing deranged.

[Doc91678]

Well put and well said.
Where are the rebuffs?

[Richard Axtell]

The Democrat plan: to lose the war, but not the election.

[Cobra64]

Good point. I hadn't thought about that from a political perspective. Thanks.

[UCANSEE2]

They would follow the Mama Sheehan plan.

1. Fasting. (Translation: Eat more, faster)

2. World-wide diplomacy tours (Have others pay for you to fly around the world)

3. National Protection. (Desert your family, your children, your husband. Disgrace your son and his military service. Pretend YOU are the nation, that only what YOU want counts, and that as a NATIONAL TREASURE everyone should fall at your feet and worship you)

[PhillyRepublican]

Hillary doesn't suck! If she did, Bill wouldn't have needed Monica!.....LOL