The DNC Plan: I Was Right
Several months ago, we learned that Democrats were planning on a Democratic version of the 1994 Contract With America. I remember saying back then that I couldn’t wait to see it because I knew that it’d include universal health care and be fairly passive about the war in Iraq. And that it would be a total flop. Today, I was proven right. Here’s the Democrats’ Contract:
Issues that Howard Dean, Democratic National Committee chairman, will highlight:
- Honesty and integrity in government
- New Iraq policy to reduce the military’s role and its vulnerability to attack
- Limit outsourcing of American jobs and create new ones through energy independence
- Moving toward universal health care
- Improving public education
Honesty and integrity in government is a nice catchphrase but it won’t move voters. The sad reality is that a majority of people think all politicians are crooked. The other reality is that it doesn’t work when you aren’t running against the people who’ve been indicted (Libby) or who’ve pleaded guilty (Duke Cunningham).
As for a new policy in Iraq, this is laughable, especially in light of Sen. Lieberman’s op-ed and the President’s speech at Annapolis which clearly spelled out why we’re doing and what accomplishments are happening. This is the issue I hope they play the hardest because this is the most serious issue in front of the American people. It’s also the Democrats’ worst issue.
Ever since Murtha made his ‘Retreat Speech’, Democrats have been running for the tall grasses and rightfully so. If that wasn’t enough, it got worse when Nancy Pelosi said that she thought most House Democrats supported Murtha’s plan. For all intents and purposes, that stuck a stake in the Democrats’ electoral heart.
I can’t wait to hear the protectionist talk that’s needed to articulate how to prevent outsourcing or the ideas they’ll come up with to replace fossil fuels to gain us energy independance. They’re limited by the environmental extremist fringe on actually opening up new oil and natural gas fields. Most people also realize that hybrids won’t dramatically improve our conservation of gas. In other words, this one’s a loser issue.
Next we get the Democratic mantra of the last half century, universal health care. If ever there was a domestic issue that just doesn’t resonate, this one’s it. People still remember HillaryCare. Those who remember it flinch at the thought of it and rightfully so. This issue will mildly enthuse the base but it definitely won’t move independents or moderate Republicans.
As for improving public education, that’s nice-sounding but it isn’t a winner for Democrats. Most people see No Child Left Behind as a good-faith attempt by the President to improve learning. Also, the minute this issue is raised, the GOP candidate will remind everyone that the Democrats aren’t really for improving the education system as much as they’re for padding the NEA’s pocketbooks. In short, this issue is neutral at best.
As a bonus to those tasty tidbits, Dean gave Republicans more ammunition in his speech. Here’s a sampling:
Dean criticized the Republican emphasis on illegal immigration and ridiculed President George W. Bush’s recent tough talk about stronger enforcement of border security. He said Republicans exploited the topic of gay marriage in the 2004 elections with a series of state referendums on the issue, and were at it again with another hot-button social issue in immigration.
“In 2006, it’s going to be immigrants, that’s who he is going to scapegoat next,” Dean said of Bush. “Once again, the Republicans create a problem so they can think to come in and solve it.”
Check out that last sentence. “Once again, the Republicans create a problem so they can think to come in and solve it.” Is Dr. Dean implying that illegal immigration isn’t a problem? Or is he implying that illegal immigration is Republicans’ fault?
The other point in that statement is that Dr. Dean thinks Republicans created gay marriage as a wedge issue. That’s ridiculous. The Massachussetts Supreme Court gets full credit for that. After that, traditional-thinking people everywhere revolted at that. They’ll also remember that President Bush didn’t trash gay people. He merely said that marriage should be between one man and one woman. Vice President Cheney added that people were unhappy because they didn’t like judges creating laws, that most people prefered these issues worked out in legislatures.
Dean, whose strong antiwar stance fueled his presidential campaign in 2004, said Democrats were beginning to rally around a “strategic redeployment” approach in Iraq that would phase out U.S. troops and make Americans safer while there…The redeployment plan would offer another approach to Democrats torn between the idea of setting a hard withdrawal timetable or waiting until more Iraqi security forces are ready for duty.
I’ll give Dr. Dean credit. When he sets out to tell a whopper, he doesn’t mess around. If he thinks that Democrats are starting to rally around strategic redeployment of troops, he can’t be living in the same world I’m living in. As I said earlier, Democrats have been running for the hills since Murtha’s call for immediate redeployment of troops.
The other point about this is that strategic redeployment sounds like slick-talk for retreat. This sounds like a position for pacifists, which is why I can’t picture this being an appealing issue to many people.
The plan includes a phased drawdown of U.S. troops through 2006 and 2007 and a redeployment away from high-risk urban areas, with Iraqi troops taking over the security efforts there. Dean said it would allow Americans to “protect ourselves against terrorism, which the president invited into Iraq with his actions, and at the same time stop making our own troops a target.”
I hate bursting Dr. Dean’s bubble but the transition to Iraqi troops being in charge of security operations is well under way. Notice, too, the condescending tone to his quote “the president invited into Iraq with his actions.” I’d rather have the military fighting terrorists half a world away than having civilians dealing with them here in the U.S.
That quote also shows how ignorant liberal Democrats are about what the military’s responsibilities are. Dr. Dean, we pay them to stand in harm’s way so civilians don’t have to. Yes, that’s hard work and we should remind them as often as possible that we’re grateful for their willingness to do this. No, that doesn’t mean that we run from important fights. We do our best to protect them as much as possible but we don’t run from important fights.
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRing