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

Condoleezza Rice may have to wait. Senate Democrats aren’t done whining.

Funny, I thought the Senate should look at the qualifications of a nominee. As to their opinions, the President should decide who he wants on his team. I have yet to hear a single senator point out any lack of ability on Rice’s behalf.

I did hear something from Senator Chaffe in regards to Rice’s views on Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan dictator. He said we shouldn’t be saying anything bad about him because it insults the voters who elected him. Odd. Why doesn’t that apply to the obvious insults thrown at me for voting for Bush?

Why should Bush ever even bother to “reach across the aisle”? It is obvious they would spit in his hand.

I think Condoleezza Rice did well in maintaining her composure:

Senator, I have to say that I have never, ever lost respect for the truth in the service of anything. It is not my nature. It is not my character. And I would hope that we can have this conversation and discuss what happened before and what went on before and what I said without impugning my credibility or my integrity.

Let me translate: “Senator, if you want to call me a liar we can step outside and I’ll pound a few facts into that pea brain of yours.”

I’m sorry, this doesn’t reach the level of what I would call torture:

Al Qosi claimed they were strapped to the floor in an interrogations center known as the Hell Room, wrapped in Israeli flags, taunted by female interrogators who rubbed their bodies against them in sexually suggestive ways, and left alone in refrigerated cells for hours with deafening music blaring in their ears.

When professionals interrogate someone, they know that physical pain rarely does anything but make the person being interrogated say what he thinks they want to hear. Little information of any value ever comes from it except in movies. The Americans tortured in Hanoi weren’t being asked for real information. Their captors simply wanted them to be pliable and provide a propaganda tool.

Interrogators in this new war want real information. Making a prisoner uncomfortable is now equated to torture. It follows the decline of what sexual harrassment once was. If someone “feels uncomfortable”, it must be torture and the offending party must cease.

I don’t advocate torture, but not out of sqeamishness. It doesn’t work. I do advocate making detainees uncomfortable. Very uncomfortable.

It is a sad day for many. That will not stop the “loyal” opposition from trying to use it to their advantage. Gary Hart has already been on television, making his play for another run at the White House.

Vietnam. It was the best of times. It was a time when very vocal activists took on Lyndon Johnson and won. They took him down, and then did what they could to shift the blame to Nixon. Do not be confused by the revisionist history of that war. The US, in spite of a military hamstrung by Johnson and MacNamara making tactical decisions from the Oval Office, won that war during Tet 1968. But you would never have known it watching television news. Nixon went to the Peace Talks (in Paris) to try and withdraw our forces. After months of delay for discussion of the shape of the table in the negotiating room, Nixon began bombing targets which were previously forbidden. The North Vietnamese agreed to a table shape. After the standard delay in negotiations, Nixon again bombed the North. The talks were finally concluded. During all this “diplomacy”, more Americans were killed than have died in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Gary Harts and Nancy Pelosis of this country remember those days with fondness. What are a few American soldiers’ lives when compared to the bigger story of turning Iraq into today’s Vietnam? They are determined to make it a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Vietnam was not really a war fought in Southeast Asia. It was fought on the streets of the United States and in the halls of power in Washington. The same thing is happening today. Our military can do great things and accomplish every task given them. That is not the issue. The issue is political power. Period. They cannot allow themselves to do what needs to be done to end the problems for our troops–present a unified front. If they do that, they feel they are admitting Bush was right.

They don’t have to admit that to support what we are trying to do. They can still oppose Dubya and Rumsfeld. Nobody is asking them to change that. But they must come out and say we will stick together and see this through. That is the only way to end the insurgency short of destroying entire cities. The jihadists thrive on recognition and support–active and passive, direct and indirect. The Democratic wannabes provide, at a minimum, passive and indirect support. And there are some in this country providing even more.

It has nothing to do with being against the war. The war is over. And it has nothing to do with wanting the attacks to end. They would abate, then disappear, if the jihadists didn’t think they could influence American public opinion enough to drive us out.

What is it that the Democrats want? They can’t say. They offer no options. They offer only complaints and criticism. They are on the outside looking in, so that’s a safe stance. They don’t have to make decisions. They don’t have to offer alternatives. They simply offer platitudes.

Americans die, and they don’t care.

I’ve missed something until now. And most others have missed it, too. So I don’t feel too badly. All the whining and crying isn’t coming from Kerry supporters. Those who are seeking therapy aren’t people who went into this election with Kerry as their man.

They are Deaniacs. Their man lost in Iowa much earlier this year. They latched on to Kerry as a stand-in. After all the weeping for Howard Dean, they put their hopes in someone they had no real faith in–and he lost. That is why they are so hurt. They are double losers.

They are the ones crying for secession. And they are the ones whining that the blue states pay out more in federal taxes and receive less in return.

Let’s think about that last bit for a second. The blue states are the ones who advocate higher taxes, because they are the ones who want increased government spending and involvement in our lives (except for Defense, of course). Isn’t the fact this imbalance exists a boon to their philosophy? Aren’t they pleased?

And, if you will bear with me, who pays the taxes in this country? The top 5% income earners pay over 50%. A little logic will show that if all those things are true, the Democratic Party is the party of the rich. With all the wealth focused in NYC, Boston, LA, SF, and Seattle, it seems to me that it only makes sense.