| November 2004 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | ||||
Conservatives are supposed to be the stick-in-the-muds, the ones who just want to keep everything the way it is; Liberals are supposed to be the ones who want to change with the times.
I’d just like to point out, that somewhere along the way, our two leading political parties have traded places in this regard.
They call themselves the party for change, but the only “change” Liberals seek is to vote themselves into office. Other than that, they offer few strategies for improving the country. They’re the party of wanting to stop everything. They’re the “anti” party—against the war on terrorists; against missile defense; against the making of profits by business. What are they for? Kerry certainly couldn’t articulate it.
Per James Carville:
“The party needs a narrative,” he said. adding later that one possibility would to become “an aggressively reform, anti-Washington, anti-business-as-usual party.”
So Carville thinks the Democrats need to define themselves still more as the party that’s against things. And he’s one of the leading strategists on the Left.
The Conservatives are the ones who want to improve things for people, and offer a lot of ways to do it, including:
How can you argue with goals like those? The Libs make as big a deal as they can of the costs involved, and ignore the massive payoffs of success.
Regarding the terrorists cornered in Fallujah, the very leftwing Daily Kos says:
Problem is, we've created those monsters, and there's no way to beat them.
It's typical of the Left to reiterate a statement like that. "No way to beat them"? It's absurd on the face of it. From The Daily Telegraph, via Belmont Club:
"I got myself a real juicy target," shouted Sgt James Anyett, peering through the thermal sight of a Long Range Acquisition System (LRAS) mounted on one of Phantom's Humvees. "Prepare to copy that 89089226. Direction 202 degrees. Range 950 metres. I got five motherf****** in a building with weapons." A dozen loud booms rattle the sky and smoke rose as mortars rained down on the co-ordinates the sergeant had given. "Yeah," he yelled. "Battle Damage Assessment - nothing. Building's gone. I got my kills, I'm coming down. I just love my job."
That is known as beating the enemy.
Terrorists are not ghosts or some other superhuman critter, as Kos seems to suggest. Kos' bald, ridiculous statement that "there's no way to beat them" is a perfect example of arguments made by the Left that don't hold up to a moment's scrutiny.
This photo shows one reason why the terrorists are not going to come out ahead in a confrontation with our soldiers:
A Marine releases a "Dragon Eye" spy plane.
That's a hand-launched, unmanned spy drone, that floats above the field of battle and helps us spot the bad guys. I don't think the terrorists have much access to technology like that.
In the same article, Kos says:
It's all going to hell.
If you click the link Kos has in the words "all going to hell," you get a NY Times article that says:
Fire from rockets, mortars and assault rifles would lash out at the Americans from seemingly deserted buildings until heavy return fire destroyed them one by one, leaving only smoking ruins. Then the firing would start from another direction.
That doesn't sound like it's all going to hell. That sounds like it's going great. Could it be that Kos just doesn't approve of the US army destroying terrorists who want to kill us? He has to pay lip service to the contrary notion:
And to be clear, those insurgents in Fallujah are thugs. There should be no sorrow spared for them (they make the Taliban look moderate). Problem is, we've created those monsters, and there's no way to beat them.
...but that gets him in trouble with his own readers:
Update: To those of you who object to my calling Falluhah's defenders "thugs":
And he goes on to defend himself against those of his readers who were upset that he would call terrorists, "thugs."
Those on the extreme Left are pretty crazy. They don't like calling terrorists "thugs" and they think everything is "going to hell" when we go into Fallujah to rid the world of a bunch of them.
