Bunker Mulligan "Let us endeavor so to live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry." ~Mark Twain

January 29, 2005

Instapundit

Filed under: Politics — Bunker @ 7:17 pm

Glenn has a long compilation on his site regarding what the Democratic Party can do to become relevant once again, and posted an email from one of his readers:

A moderate centrist party that pulls in the majority of independents and also saps the harder edges of the spectrum simply would not be beat. What we need is a party that: avowedly embraces the many benefits of capitalism and industry while also protecting investors and labor; that understands how foreign policy depends on negotiating from a position of strength instead of a position of weakness; that personal libertarianism has to be balanced with the need for communities to be able to define their own laws and norms according to their social systems and beliefs, and most of all, that America is already a force for good in the world and not a font of evil.

Sounds like a party I’d support. After all, it proposes following the Constitution. States decide almost all issues, and the Federal Government would gets out of our lives in almost everything, just as Madison and others envisioned.

January 28, 2005

Kennedy calls for troop withdrawal

Filed under: International,Politics — Bunker @ 6:29 am

Of the four Kennedy boys–Joseph, John, Robert, and Edward–the one of whom not much was ever expected was the youngest. He was always considered to be the least serious and least intelligent, and fell into his position by default–he really wasn’t capable of doing anything except politics.

But even Ted Kennedy is smart enough to understand that Iraq is not Vietnam. Equating the number of troops in Iraq today with the number in Vietnam in 1965 is hardly a valid reason to call Iraq “Bush’s Vietnam.” Yet that’s what he does. He also claims the jihadists have the same goal that we do: The hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. Somehow, I just can’t see that.

Then he calls for the one thing that would ensure Iraq is Bush’s Vietnam–he says we need to pull the troops out.

From the Boston Herald:

Just three days before the Iraqi people go to the polls to elect a new government, the Massachusetts Democrat said America must give Iraq back to its people rather than continue an occupation that parallels the failed politics of the Vietnam war.

For those of you too young to remember, we didn’t lose the war in Vietnam, we ran away. Kennedy wants us to do just that. And the politics involved have nothing in common except that the US is involved.

I cannot really understand why the leading Democrats have not, to my knowledge, come out in support of the Iraqi people by condemning the jihadists and encouraging a big voter turnout this Sunday. I know why. I just don’t understand it. They are apparently willing to see as many people die as necessary in hopes those deaths will be an embarrassment to Bush.

What is it about Bush, different from other politicians, that causes them to hate him so much that others’ lives are irrelevant? This call by Kennedy, three days before the Iraqi elections, can serve no other purpose than to encourage jihadists to murder. It is also a prelude to the certain claims by Kennedy and his ilk that the elections, once completed, are invalid and another “catastrophic failure.”

January 26, 2005

Best of the Web Today

Filed under: Politics — Bunker @ 4:22 pm

Taranto has this to say about Barbara Boxer and the other senators using the Rice hearings as donation bait:

But the bottom line in politics is votes, not profits–and a party that is relentlessly negative and reactionary is likely to keep losing the former.

I don’t know, James. It is beginning to seem to me that money is the real goal for the Democratic Party. As long as these folks keep getting elected themselves, they rake in plenty of money which they can keep in their own personal trust fund for use after they leave office.

Perhaps we’ve been reading them all wrong.

Voter Fraud

Filed under: Government,Politics — Bunker @ 6:24 am

Something about voter fraud you may not have considered. When everyone with an agenda talks about disenfranchised voters, do they ever understand that every vote cast illegally disenfranchises another, legally cast vote?

Both Hindrocket and Glenn Reynolds have some examples from the last election, and offer suggestions for changes before the next.

People tend to talk about these things before elections, and then forget about them afterward. Now’s the time to address these issues, so that we can do something about them before 2008.

I agree with Professor Reynolds. The problem is that the issue is a political hot potato. Advocates for illegal immigrants claim that legal ones will be frightened about registering. The Jesse Jacksons of the world will find all kinds of arguments for how it would hurt their constituencies.

The voter rolls in this country are bloated. The listings contain the names of many people who no longer live in the same district, and names of people who no longer live. They contain names of people who never existed, and people who are not legally entitled to vote.

The problem is that each state must make the changes. The Constitution leaves that up to individual states–part of the reason for the problems we now have. No, I don’t mean the federal government would do a better job. But I believe there should be some standard applied for identification across the nation. It was not something that could even be envisioned in 1789, at a time when less than half the population was literate, and the primary requirement for voting was to be a land-owner.

When you have to present a photo ID to buy alcohol or tobacco or Playboy, doesn’t it make sense that you would need to show one to do something far more important, and something that affects everyone else?

January 24, 2005

Senator Clinton

Filed under: Politics — Bunker @ 9:22 am

Hillary has a different definition of leadership than I.

America’s leaders don’t have a vision, and the economy may be on the brink of collapse…

Of course, it has more to do with spending other people’s money than anything else. “The economy may be on the brink of collapse”? Where was she in 1999-2000 when it was obvious to most of us that the bubble had to eventually burst?

My definition of leadership includes taking risks to do what you believe is right. There are a lot of people who warned of dire consequences if we invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban who now ignore it. There are a lot of people who warned of hundreds of thousands of deaths and refugees if we invaded Iraq to oust Saddam. Bush risked both–and it was certainly a huge political risk to do both. And both needed to be done. Bush risked, but pols like Hillary don’t want him to get the reward. Neither do Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Byrd, Boxer, and any number of their supporters.

I would really be pleased if just once these folks would praise what Americans have done in both those places without taking a second breath to condemn Bush for something.

Boortz has more.

January 21, 2005

I Guess This Means War

Filed under: Politics — Bunker @ 5:11 pm

The only kind Democrats will fight these days.

And who, by the way, is insisting Dubya “reach out”?

Fence Mending

Filed under: Politics — Bunker @ 7:10 am

This morning, NPR had a piece on the Inaugural. One of the comments from a European was that Europe is pleased that Bush will come visit, as he has many fences to mend. MSM constantly remind us that Bush needs to reach across the aisle and to those in the blue states.

Bush tried that when he first took office. He tried that immediately after 9/11. He has, I hope, learned his lesson.

When all the world’s diplomats and leaders are stuck in the past and simply trying to hold on, why should he stay there with them? He has taken the political risks to do what he believed to be right. None of them are willing to take any political risk–save Tony Blair. What obligation does he have to reach out? He won. Perhaps somebody in MSM should break out of the pack and demand that others reach out to him and try to assist in mending those fences we keep hearing about. Personally, I wonder if tearing those fences down shouldn’t be our number one priority.

People wonder why our military backs Bush so strongly–it is a bond that you cannot understand unless you have been there and dealt with some of the CinCs we’ve had in the past. Last night’s Inaugural activities included the Commander-in-Chief’s Ball which is hosted and attended by military personnel. Bush went to that one to wrap up his evening:

“I don’t want to hurt anybody’s feelings, but it looks like we saved the best for last.”

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress