A really great summary of the subject by Kevin Combest :
In spite of claiming to have a newfangled, singular plan for dealing with issues of security, the Democrats remain both weak and diffuse in their positions. At a recent press conference on Capitol Hill, Senate Democrats Harry Reid (NV), Dick Durbin (IL), and Tom Carper (DE) made several assertions:
1. President Bush has made this country less safe since 9/11.
Voice of sanity: We have not been attacked on home soil in nearly five years, and Democrats in the Senate continue attempts to block and defeat legislation like the Patriot Act, as well as stepping on the President's shoes over terrorist wiretaps. Not only are the Democrats incorrect about us being less safe, but they have no alternative to share with us.
2. Iraq was a mistake, and our military priorities should have been elsewhere.
Voice of sanity: Upon talking with HUMAN EVENTS, Dick Durbin revealed he thought Iran was the larger threat in 2003, but wouldn't take military action. Harry Reid coolly answered, "I can't tell you," which is politician-speak for "I don't know." Best of all, Tom Carper of Delaware claimed that the administration in Iran in 2003 was friendly, and that Iraq was the bigger threat. One doesn't know, another claims Iran was a bigger threat, and the third claims that Iran was our pal in 2003. A change in leadership requires an actual, cohesive agenda, guys.
3. We should talk with those who disagree with us.
Voice of sanity: Harry Reid cited Clinton's "success" with North Korea as an example of how we can work with potential enemies. He must be very forgetful. During the 90s, Clinton gave the North Koreans hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, asking they stop their nuclear weapons program. Kim Jong-Il took the money, and kept building the bombs. Success indeed.
So, in sum, the Democrats claim they have a better direction for our security, but don't outline it. They played fast and loose with the facts, and had not a single solution to solve the problems we face.
Who is best qualified to solve a problem? The people that caused the problem and only say "stay the course"? With that logic, an administration can stay in power forever by causing intractable problems through pre-emptive war (like Iran?).
Posted by: Jim Gesell | 09/10/2006 at 08:24 AM