How the Dems are preparing for the Fall elections

Thanks for the usual rant but what do you think about what the Democrats are going to do. You seem to be locked into a mode where you can only criticize Republican efforts. I want to hear more about what you will do in each of these three areas.

Also, wasn’t one of the complaints about the response to Hurricane Katrina that the new Dept of Homeland Security excessively bureaucratized the process? So is that something you now agree that the Democrats should take responsibility for since they were “instrumental” in getting the Dept of Homeland Security created?

Please do expound, but if criticize Republican efforts is all you can do, er, you seem to be proving my point most adeptly. Continue. Here’s some more rope.

Of course the dems have a platform, but the supposed candidates aren’t exactly getting that message out there (with the exception of the far left wing of the party, but that’s hardly going to win over a conservative guy like me). By “viable” I mean someone that I (and other voters like myself) think has a chance of convincing me they really can be an effective leader of the U.S. At this point HIlary looks like their best candidate, but she played the New York liberal for a while now and has a long way to go to convince me she can really represent the type of leader I’m looking for. As for other potential candidates, yeah, I know they’re out there and we’re still two years away, but I’m not exactly optimistic, considering what the democrats produced in the last election.

Fred – The Dems have been there all along, pushing mostly for the policies and ideas that would have done well by America and Americans. I can complain if the Republicans have chosen not to heed these good ideas and run forth into forming policy with highly partisan, misguided ideas of how to do things.

Redandy – The Democrats at least know to find good experts, encourage excellence and offer accountability. Using Clinton as an example (but by no means is he the only example), the man still was a voracious reader on policy issues who was a tough audience for his own staff. In the course of his policy due diligence work, he expected a lot from his policy staff and he got a lot from them. The key positions generally had people who were deemed experts in their fields, and those who couldn’t hack it were swiftly replaced. For all the bullshit claims that Clinton’s policy came from the polls, the guy was a very astute realist who got a lot done despite a hostile congress.

Compare that against the current crony-laden presidency, and there’s a clear difference in viewpoint about how to govern. The few smart guys initially in the Bush administration have so far been bumped out if their views are deemed “disloyal” to the neocon poppycock of the day. The nonpartisan intelligence, scientific and other experts are also overridden if their views don’t match with what the Bushies think they want. Even the bipartisan partisan 9-11 Commission’s recommendations for how to make American safer have been tossed on the trash heap by these guys. Stephen Colbert recently coined the phrase “wikiality” (click here for clip, it’s worth seeing) to cover the ability to change truth and reality through sheer repetition of wrong information.

Now, I can’t tell you who the 2008 candidates are going to be, but the 2006 elections are bringing out a lot of well-qualified candidates who are pushing for the things that matter to normal Americans. Some of the statements on the http://www.democrats.org site are general in nature, but basically what you see is what you get – there’s not going to be some sort of big bait-and-switch in which a Democrat congress starts passing the kinds of Orwellian-named piles of crap for which the Republicans have become infamous. Many of the new candidates are successful businessmen/women with the sort of clean records that life outside politics often leads to.

Among the great candidates put forth by the Dems, across the country there are the “fighting Dems” veterans. There’s young ones who’ve already fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, and there’s older ones who’ve had great career successes in their post-service lives. Despite their impeccable military records, I’m sure Rove’ll try to smearboat these guys – hopefully the press won’t be so eager to give equal time to Rovian bullshit as to the truth. However, in the long run these guys are going to start pulling apart the myth the Republicans have tried to encourage that the GOP gives a crap about our troops. The Dems are fighting to keep Bush’s crew from cutting the medical care for our increasing numbers of seriously wounded troops – there is a difference in values on this point, and the GOP comes down resoundingly against our troops. With these fightin’ Dems going after some of the walking shitbags the GOP has put forth, the Dems have a good chance of taking several key seats away.

Primary season is still going on and it’s a bit hard to catalogue the possibilities for 1/3 of the Senate, 100% of the House, but there has been an organized effort to clean up some of the weaker candidates and replace them with stronger ones. Look at the struggle Lieberman is facing – while there’s not much doubt he could be elected again as a Dem, he’s got a primaries challenger with a 4% lead who’s, simply put, listening to what people want. Much to Liberman’s chagrin, Connecticut voters don’t want their senators kissing Bush anymore. Dean has been organizing on a 50-state strategy that we should have followed ages ago, and I’m relatively confident that Americans will chose clean, common-sense candidates over guys whose policy weathervane goes wherever the evangelicals and fatcats tell them.

“Dean” and “common sense” in the same sentence. :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Thanks, I needed the chuckle. It’s a slow afternoon.

So what are those policies? I could name several Republican policies off the top of my head. You cannot name even one? that you are interested in in particular? that you personally support? Case closed. You lose.

So what are those policies? I could name several Republican policies off the top of my head. You cannot name even one? that you are interested in in particular? that you personally support? Case closed. You lose.[/quote]

What Republican “policies” can you name? Hiring of unqualified cronies into key posts … check. No accountability for when cronies screw up… check. Launch wars on false pretenses on neocon say-so … check. Forget to ask the only company retained to handle vehicle armoring to increase work to match capacity … check. Cut VA hospital budgets just as the number of seriously wounded continue to increase … check. Call reporters to release names of key weapons-proliferation intelligence agents … check. Award big no-bid contracts to crony companies … check. Fire anybody who complains about awarding of no-bid contracts … check. Looks like the only Republican “policy” is to do what’s good for their party and their cronies, not what’s good for America.

As to Dem policies, I gave you a link to a whole list and further comments to three you chose. Case closed, you’ve got short-term memory problems. See a doctor. :loco:

I think what Fred is getting at is that the Dem policies in the link are filled with the usual pie-in-the-sky crap that both parties tend to spew before elections, with no idea of how to actually implement these ideas.

Agree or disagree but Bush has passed a number of tax cuts that may be responsible for our present high growth rates. Now, if only he would cut domestic spending more. But it is not as if the Democrats in Congress (and to the Shame of the Republicans) their senators or representatives have been instrumental in making any efforts to stop such spending increases. The tax cuts regardless of whether you agree with them are a policy. Do you want to raise taxes MFGR?

Second, the Pentagon and armed forces are going through serious restructuring with base realignments all over the world to face a more mobile threat like insurgents and terrorists. This is a policy. Do you agree or disagree with it?

Third, the Republicans want school choice. I want vouchers more public-school accountability, more freedom of choice, more tough questions as to why the vast sums of money are not sufficient to teach students how to read and write. That is a policy. What is the Democrats policy? More money?

Fourth, I support extension of trade ties to numerous bilateral free-trade agreements currently being negotiated including Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, Bahrain, Oman, Jordan, Colombia and Peru. Are the Democrats against this?

Fifth, I support foreign-policy goals like stabilizing Afghanistan, staying the course in Iran and ratcheting up the pressure on Syria, Hizbollah, Hamas and Iran. That is a policy. Agree? or disagree?

Sixth, I support continued efforts to make NATO a more effective military force with rapid reaction capabilities and to extend the area of operations. Agree or disagree.

Seventh: I support continued efforts to restate welfare reform and to keep work requirements intact and to even expand them. Agree or disagree?

Eighth: I disagree with late-term or partial-birth abortions (say after 6 to 6.5 months). Do you agree or disagree?

Ninth: I support continued privatization of public entities including power plants, power transmission, ports, airports, shipyards and I would be especially keen to privatize the post office and AmTrak. Do you agree or disagree?

Tenth: I support continued efforts to reduce the size of the federal bureaucracy by sending more authority and funding control to the states (block grants) to better enable them to onsite determine needs in transportation, education, etc. so we do not get bridges to nowhere as in Alaska (even though this was primarily a Republican effort).

Eleventh: I want to abolish the following departments: interior, commerce, education, energy, labor, transportation, agriculture, HUD and Health and human services. I want all of these responsiblities devolved to each state. Basic labor standards, laws, health and safety are already being handled in each state, why have even more rules at the federal level. Put the nuclear research plants and storage under defense and just axe energy. Transporation, education, welfare grants should go directly to the states to spend as they want in the form of block grants. The government should own no public housing. The use of rental vouchers is sufficient.

Twelfth: I support looking at raising the retirement age and opening some Social Security funds to privatization.

Thirteenth: I want a total end (unilateral) to agricultural subsidies and emergency farm payouts. I don’t care what the Europeans do. End them all now today. The vast majority (consumers) will benefit.

Fourteenth: I want a simplification of the tax code. Ideally, a flat tax with NO deductions, not even for mortgage payments (interest). If not that, then I want reform along the lines of what Reagan managed in 1986.

There I have right off the top of my head given you many many policies. Now, what are the policies that YOU support?

My guess is that Fred’s being lazy again and didn’t bother to click on the clearly marked links that expand greatly upon the positions spelled out in the policy section to which I linked. Sure there’s nice general stuff, but there’s also specifics as well and I don’t have the time to teach someone who has nothing to do all day but demand the spoonfeeding of information already provided in a tidy link. I’d once mentioned that he’s like the info version of the apocryphal “welfare queen” of the 1980s, demanding that everything be done for him. I therefore dub him “info queen”.

If one were to only look at the general information, there’s a reasonable question: “Both the GOP and Dem websites are full of such nice-sounding stuff, but how can I tell who’s telling the truth and who’s full of crap?” I can’t guide you on your own decisionmaking, but frankly the Dems have credibility in having recommended a lot of good stuff over the past few years. The bipartisan 9-11 Commission, Homeland Security Dept. as a means for centralizing intelligence info, better body armor for troops, better armor for humvees and trucks, greater/reasonable accountability when mistakes have been made, strong support for winning the “war of ideas” within the Middle East and the world while winning the “war on terror” against the Al Qaeda and affiliated groups, better funding for vet medical treatment, etc. Most of what they’ve pushed for has been grounded in common-sense, while they’re up against folks whose credibility centers on “they’ll greet us as liberators” sorts of hyperbole.

Not that I was aware. Seems pretty short on specifics. Talks in generalities sort of like you do, but what exactly does ensuring “every American family has the opportunity” etc or “has sufficient income” etc. I am paraphrasing here mean?

where?

Can I use that excuse the next time you “demand” information. Sport.

Well interestingly, Republican proposed work requirements saw the number of families on welfare drop from 5 million to 2 million and the total number of people on welfare from 12 point something to 5 point something million. In this week’s economist. So given that work requirements worked for welfare queens, they should work equally well for you so get cracking and provide that information in convenient format here and now. See my posts above if you have any questions about what I am looking for.

Actually mfgr, the general theme of the link you posted seemed to go as follows: State general, fairly vague idea, say you’ll do it, decline to explain how, then move on to critisizing Bush/GOP on supposedly relevant topic. In the few cases where they don’t think there will be any opposition whatsoever (for example increasing Pell grants) they give an actual policy, the rest was pretty much political fluff. Having had 5 1/2 years of republican administration and reading Fred’s posts, I have a pretty good idea of what republican are and whether I favor them. I’d really prefer to vote democrat in the next election, but since things have changed so much since the last democrat, I really would like a preview of coming attractions so to speak, but what I’m getting are vagueries of things like “fairness” and “inclusiveness” and general statements about “fixing” health care, or Iraq, or Social security, but not a lot of specifics.

You have to dig a bit, but it’s there. Several of the links featuring what starts as a criticism of the Bush/GOP then do offer up their alternatives – particulars about what tax cuts they favor, what programs they want to protect, as well as what analysis/reports/research they favor. It’s worth noting that once you go past the intro paragraph criticizing the GOP, they usually cite to several nonpartisan sources. This latter point shows a key difference between the Republican party and the Dems – the GOP offers up ham-handed solutions that often run counter to what nonpartisan experts say, while the Dems have embraced the wonkiness of trying to offer a government that operates fairly and transparently. Bush supposedly goes with his “gut,” while the Dems try to use their brains – seeking out and listening to a variety of sources to get answers even if those answers are not always simple.

Fairness is one of the only things that a government can really try to offer its people. Life is already unfair in many unavoidable ways, but we expect our government to be fair in its own actions – hence our Constitution and the social contract we hold sacred. Unlike the monarchies of old Europe, we struck out on our own to create a nation in which we the governed were the source of power for the government. Would the Dems favor tax policies aimed at creating a permanent class of trust-fund fops? Hardly.

Some of the talk about how to fix things that have gone wrong under the highly partisan Republican stewardship are the kinds of things that do require further study, others don’t. Some will have to pass through the haggling of Congress, some won’t. But at least the Dems are willing to fight the good fight to improve things. Ask a Republican if there’s a problem with port security, they’ll deny it until the sun goes down in hopes you won’t listen to the people who really know port security. Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt – it’s a second vacation home for most Republicans.

Great! Another new tag: a second home for Republicans!

But I have provided 14 policies that I support and I was able to rattle those off with no searching for links because they are policies that I support. WHAT do you support MFGR? Why cannot you even mention one policy without referring us back to the official Democrat Party Web site? I didn’t need to go back to the Republican one and I do not even know what the link is. I provided those points from my own personal interest and knowledge. Why cannot you do the same? Or are you just one of those people who spout taglines from PR campaigns from groups that you have been led to think that you support even though you know absolutely nothing about them or what they stand for? How uncharacteristic of the mindless left. March on… and do it for the “people!”

We need FAIR trade!

For the children!

Education is important!

The environment. Why hurt Mother Earth?!

Save the Whales!

Free Tibet!!

Make Love Not War!

Just for fun… Read on…

Dig? Excavate is more like it…

None of which you can recall to name even though they are such worthy policies? tax cuts? that the Democrats favor? Are you saying then that we should not raise taxes? but cut them?

Great. The main page is criticism of the party that they oppose rather than what they propose, what they stand for?

nonpartisan sources that agree with them. I am sure that absolutely no selection was made. Any and all sources were quoted with equal nonpartisanship? haha What are you smoking?

The nonpartisanship of the sources that they quote selectively? Okay. IF that works for you. Denial…

Which policy are you referring to? Why not name even one and how it is hamhanded and how I laugh when I keep hearing you refer to “nonpartisan” sources and “experts.”

hahah. This is rich. Yet, I as a Republican am offering specifics and you are using slogans. Maybe you need to seek out and listen to a variety of sources, starting with some of those on this very forum. I mean to prove how Democrat you are. Do you feel that the Republicans on this forum go with their “gut” or do we supply so many statistics that little whelps like you whine all the time about how 42 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot. Now, you are willing to listen to “nonpartisan” sources and “experts” do what? write reports that contain “statistics” so why should we listen to them? Wouldn’t the same 42 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot apply to them equally?

Well, there’s a policy if I have ever heard one. Care to define it though?

and who said the Left didn’t have religion… oh give me the meek and the downtrodden for they shall be first. haha

That’s like saying you expect soap to clean. Where’s the difference? the policy?

Back to religious fervor from the nonreligious.

So where’s the policy? I hear a lot of intoned preachery but what is your specific action plan? Got milk?

No, they prefer tax loopholes to get out of paying taxes with high-priced accountants and lawyers with offshore investments while spouting their concern for the Little People.

Great so you won’t mind telling us which ones do and which ones don’t?

No examples?

haha. What is the “good” fight? and what do you say about Dennis whatever from Ohio and the representative from Lousiana with 90K in his freezer? Fighting the good fight? Does that include Sheila Jackson? Al Sharpton? Jesse Jackson?

So be sure and tell us what is wrong with port security and how the Democrats will “fix” it.

No denial of service is what we should be talking about since it is the message that your brain stem sends your mouth every time you get going.

I do oh so love to vacation. Good news for us hard-working, God-fearing Republicans. See there is a God and we are being rewarded with a second vacation home while you Democrats continue to suffer even while seeking a fairer world. If we are being so rewarded, why not join the party? haha I mean that both ways.

Look at the thread title: “How the Dems are preparing for the Fall elections” – it’s not “how Fred’s preparing” or “how Mofangongren is preparing.” :unamused:

That’s OK, because the link is famous for not working overseas: http://www.gop.com. Guess they’re embarrassed that people abroad might read up on their preparations for 2006. How’s that “keep down the vote” effort going? Identified more black people with names similar to felons?

Again, I think you ought to check out the thread title, although thanks for letting us know what the Fred Smith Party of One feels is relevant for 2006.

I have outlined 14 policies in a short time just as a basis of discussion. How many has MFGR provided?

Fine. Those are the positions that I support. Can you find them among Democrat or Republican position papers? So even though I myself possess them, they could also find resonance with the official party positions.

Second, my positions do not need to exactly mirror those of the Republican Party, but I find that I am most closely aligned with that party because of my positions.

Third, why does any of what I say or how closely it dovetails with official Republican policies prevent you from articulating any of the Democrat’s policies even one in detail and discussing why you support it?

Quite frankly your silence on the subject speaks volumes. The simple truth is that you do not know really what policies you support or how they dovetail with the Democrat party. You are just a rabid ranter who wants to revile Republicans without offering anything constructive in its place because you suffer from class inferiority. Again, while I recognize the Republicans are in a difficult position, the fact that you as one of the mostly highly political of posters on this forum cannot formulate even once policy that does not consist mostly of platitudes coupled with your dysfunctional class-war motivations give me hope that when voters examine the two parties and what they offer/stand for, they will continue to find that despite the Republican mistakes and even failures, that the GOP is still the better of the two.

At the end of the day, your messages appear to be nothing but reheated partisan rhetoric. AND they disappointingly carry very little content, only conviction and that does not make for an interesting debate.

Tata my little blue-collar friend. I need to cross the street to get to the more salubrious side lest I dirty myself any further while interacting with the hoi polloi.

Fred – some quick notes on how the Dem positions have been evolving. My own thoughts are indicated, although they are not strictly relevant to a discussion of Dem preparations:

Taxes – Problem for the Republicans is that billionaires only get one vote each in a democracy, so their tax breaks don’t really do much for the normal Americans. The Dems would rollback some of the goofier tax breaks given to the top .1% set and reinstate/protect many of the tax breaks that meant a lot for normal Americans. The breaks for low-income families saving for retirement, for teachers for books and supplies often paid for out-of-pocket, breaks for students, for the middle-class Americans, etc. would be strengthened.

Defense – The realignment of military forces is fine, except where the Republicans have decided to implement a policy by which some 150,000 troops have been stuck in a quagmire unrelated to U.S. security. The Dems support smart spending. Democrats believe we have to support our troops by modernizing our military to that it better meets the threats of the 21st century, but we need to make sure we never send them to war without telling them (honestly and not in the traditional mealy-mouthed Republican lying sort of way) the reasons they are being sent, giving them clear goals, supplying them with the best equipment available to keep them safe, and keeping our commitments to them when they return from war. Dems will continue to stand up for the families of those who serve our country, including income security and access to affordable health care. Dems will continue to stand firmly against efforts by Republicans to implement VA-cutting measures that will delay or deny health benefits to our wounded troops.

Education – the Democratic Party supports the recommendations from the task force formed by the Center for American Progress and the Institute for America’s Future:

  1. Expand time in school – The 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. school day with lengthy summer breaks was set in an agrarian age in American history, when kids were expected to come back to their farms to help out with chores. However, this doesn’t match in with what we now know about how kids learn and retain information and it doesn’t match in with the education needed for American kids to be prepared to participate in the economy.

  2. Standards – develop voluntary national standards, expand national accountability, and press for adequate and equitable funding across the states. Increase assistance to low-performing schools/districts and promote school construction and modernization. No more goofy un-funded setups like the disgraceful “No Child Left Behind” scam offered up by the Republicans – we need to ensure that the American kids growing up are able to do more than work in McDonald’s or as diamond-tipped cane polishers for members of the Republican “base”.

  3. Recruit and retain good administrators and teachers – Improve the training for teachers and administrators and set up market-oriented and accountable compensation structures. Make teacher and administrator salary and promotion responsive to market forces.

  4. Connecting schools with families and communities – Improved support for struggling families, encouraging greater involvement of parents with their kids’ education.

Free Trade – Democrats support free trade. There are cranks on both sides of the aisle who don’t like it, but NAFTA and WTO are key parts of U.S. policy.

Foreign Policy – I don’t understand why on earth you would support “staying the course” in Iran, given the complete failure of Bush’s policies there. If you meant “Iraq”, then doubly so. However, the Dems will do what the Republicans have so far shunned – we’ll work with other powers to mobilize increased pressure on the countries trying to get or retain weapons of mass destruction, we’ll use accountability and leadership to ensure we can again serve as a desirable example and standard-setter for the world.

NATO – Nato ought to become as flexible as possible, but perhaps we ought to consider the purpose of the organization given that it no longer exists as a counterpart to the Warsaw Pact nations. It’s doing good work in Afghanistan and has done good work in the past to keep the Serbs from launching forth on more execution sprees.

Welfare Reform – Up for worker retraining and other projects intended to get people out of dead-end industries and into jobs where they can contribute to the economy again.

Late-term/partial abortions – Unlike your position in which you stand categorically against all such abortions, I support the right of doctors to take steps to safeguard the lives of mothers. I’m personally against abortion, but then I don’t know any Dems (or other people, really) who are “pro-abortion” in any sense.

Privatization – I’m in favor of privatization anytime it makes economic sense to do so. If privatizing garbage collection in New Jersey forces us as a society to spend more resources to monitor the awarding of the contracts in a fair, non-corrupt way, then so be it. We don’t want to run any mafia entitlement programs here, but we can watch out for that. However, if this is just going to be the setting up of crony-run, no-bid arrangements for Republican donors, then I’m not up for it. Regarding Amtrak, I’d scrap that cobbled-together system of freight tracks and put together a superfast system with routing and schedules that make sense for passengers – set up a BOT or other mechanism by which to get this moving forward into the private sector ultimately. Current offers to “privatize” social security amount to a Republican-led scam that’s gone over like a lead balloon despite Bush’s packed “town-hall” meetings screened to ensure only party faithful get to attend and ask questions.

Bridges to Nowhere – I think nobody’s in favor of this. Furthermore, Democrats are against awarding no-bid, multi-year, multi-billion-$ contracts to cronies – something that’s become a Republican policy in recent years. Although the “spend, don’t tax” deficit-driven policies of the GOP has created a huge problem for the nation, the Democrats will be there again to push for sane fiscal policies. I’d like to see smaller government, and that can start by the Dems putting a stop to the Republican efforts to stick the long arm of the law up every American keister.

Abolition of government departments – This might sound or feel good to folks who dislike the federal government, but several of the listed issues frankly have effects on interstate commerce that make it unrealistic to think your personal laundry list of departments is ever going to go away. Frankly, this is a bit like hearing a guy with no knowledge of anatomy talking about what organs he can do without: “Salivary gland? Hell, I don’t need that! Pancreas? Unnecessary!” As far as I can tell, this is a viewpoint so far not even endorsed by the GOP and I haven’t seen any Democrat position on this. The Republicans have been in charge of the house, senate and executive for years now, and they haven’t done this. Why would they?

Privitization of Social Security – Raising the retirement age in line with demographics (increased lifespan, improved health, etc.) makes sense. However, the GOP plans for social security so far appear to be a scam. Democrats want to close the loopholes that allow companies to under-fund their pensions and protect Social Security from privatization so American workers receive the benefits they have earned through a lifetime of hard work. If you want it, there’s plenty of “privatization” for those who have the money to invest for retirement – it’s called “buying a house,” “investing in an IRA” or even “buying stocks, bonds and mutual funds.” Given that the Dems tend to give a crap about our society, why would they buy into anything that screws our average citizens?

Agricultural subsidies – I’d like to see an end to these as well. However, neither party is going to do it no matter how much they all say that they “favor” free trade. A few farmers benefit, but all our consumers lose out from agricultural subsidies. It’s also a big source of anti-American sentiment among agrarian nations who know we’re blocking them out of our markets.

Tax – The Dems want tax policies that make sense for Americans, and that means pandering to the 99.9% of Americans who are not billionaires and not pandering to those who wish to create multi-generational inherited empires of the sorts of ne’er-do-wells featured in certain reality shows. Under such circumstances, it’s highly unlikely that the Dems (or I myself) would ever support the notion of a flat tax no matter how wonderful it sounds to be able to fill out a tax form in 5 minutes. (By the way, isn’t filling out tax forms quickly and cheaply precisely why we have access to Mumbai-based accounting firms? The way things are going, I’m going to be spending no time filling out tax forms!) Most of the policies currently center on trying to offer tax relief to what remains of our middle class.

Civil Liberties – Books will be written about what the Bush administration has done to stripmine the landscape of our civil liberties. The Dems absolutely stand against the destruction of American privacy and rights. As Truman and Kennedy realized very well, we would only win the greater war of ideas against communism by fostering a better society at home. Likewise, our best route for beating the terrorists is not to forego all our freedoms but to use it as our strength. Our use of indefinite detentions and torture is a disgrace.

Problem Solving – The Dems listen to experts, seek them out, try to understand complex problems and reach solutions based on nonpartisan and bipartisan data and sources. If Solomon had been a Republican, he’d have actually split the baby in two. Had Abraham been a Republican, he’d have still sacrificed his son just to show he was willing to “stick it through to the end.” At the EPA, the Republicans have made a concerted effort to override any research from scientists because facts, time and again, are inconvenient for the Republicans. Working without facts and without any desire to reach consensus across the aisle, the Republicans keep reaching solutions that ultimately fail.

Nation First – The Dems stand strongly against the Republican policy of putting their party above the national interest. Exposing key weapons-proliferation intelligence officer Valerie Plame as part of a political sucker-punching of Joseph Wilson is beyond the pale. However, it’s routine among the GOP set who feel it’s their entitlement to hand out key Homeland Security posts to Arabian horse pals like FEMA head Brownie. Hekuva job, GOP!

MFGR:

Finally, something to look at. Will read over and get back to you on Monday.

Fred

Back for short time… so to speak…

Fred – some quick notes on how the Dem positions have been evolving. My own thoughts are indicated, although they are not strictly relevant to a discussion of Dem preparations:

I have no idea what you mean by this. Also, are you aware of the fact that the total share of taxes paid by the richest 1 percent and richest 10 percent has increased as a proportion of the total even though tax rates have been cut… How do you explain that if these tax policies are all about soaking the poor to reward the rich? Also, given that so many rich can afford the best tax lawyers and accountants, why not just simplify the system so everyone benefits. Then, keep an eye on what percentage of the total taxes are coming from the top 1 percent and top 10 percent to see if things are becoming too uneven.

Such as?

This is a to my knowledge a Republican policy, was it not? Roth and regular IRAs? The present administration discussed expanding the personal efforts in these areas by allowing people to invest some of the money that was going to Social Security taxes. Currently, SS gives a return of about 1 percent while the lowest for even money markets is around 3.5 percent. If ALL of the social security money was invested in money markets etc. the return rate would at the very minimum deliver 3.5 times as much. What about raising the retirement age? Where is it set in stone that people must retire at 65? If people are living longer and healthier lives, let them work longer, say to age 72. That would wipe out the problem of funding right then and there. Also, anyone that would not be able to work would still be able to use the “disability” funds. So where is the big beef? Democrats are the ones fighting social security reform. Or does Bush have some secret trick to steal from the poor to give to the rich in all of these efforts?

for teachers for books and supplies often paid for out-of-pocket, 

Oh dear. What a load of hooey. Go to our big discussion on how teachers are “underpaid” and schools are “underfunded” and then come back to me. Teachers on average make more than many other professions, have longer vacations and enjoy better benefits. It is all in the other thread. Feel free to comment on any areas where you feel the conversation has gone off the rails.

So more funding for those who are going to drop out of college and not repay their student loans is a good idea or should we tighten the standards?

How and in what way? More IRA and Roth IRA contributions? the ceiling to be raised? Seems that you are awfully Republican on your retirement programs.

So before the invasion of Iraq, the Democrats did not vote to support the invasion? Before Bush was elected, the Democrats never wanted to invade Iraq or “get tough” with Saddam? Now, then, what do you propose doing? Leaving the troops or pulling them out? Be brave. Tell us exactly what to do.

I will believe it when I see it. There is that embarrassing history from Roosevelt to Clinton, a sort of paper trail if you will that makes your statement laughable despite all the Republican funding excesses of the past administration.

Nice PR tag but what do you mean exactly? how will you do it?

So, er which party generally supports higher defense budgets? Which party generally commands the vast majority of support from the troops? Interesting anomaly if the Democrats are perceived as “caring” so much. Also, have you ever proved that Bush or any other administration official lied about wmds and Iraq? Have you ever explained why the same Democrats that are now criticizing the Bush administration were so vocal in their demands that something be done about Saddam under the Clinton administration? I mean what changed?

You just cut and pasted this from the official web site didn’t you? What does all this blather mean? What VA cutting measures are you talking about? What health benefits have been denied to our troops? What kind of income security are you talking about? Do you suggest funding more for pay increases for the troops? Welcome to Republican World. Do you want the soldiers to get more benefits? Then welcome to the Republican Party. Traditionally, you do realize that the Democrats have been the party of butter and not bullets so despite all these wonderful appeals to the military to vote Democrat, are you sure that any administration when elected would actually folllow through with these promises? Also, how are you going to pay for them? raise taxes? If so by how much and on whom?

Back on Monday…

It’s so funny that in a thread about 2006, you’re wringing your hands that nobody’s buying the GOP hogwash anymore. You can sit there in your flopsweat wondering what’s happening to the GOP, but at its heart it’s that in the slimy, oily world of politics and politicians the Republicans somehow spent 12 years proving they could be slimier and oilier than anybody else. Congratulations! Rove and Abramoff did it, and you now have the fruits of their success!

Sorry if I don’t buy into your unsubstantiated stats, as I’ve yet to see you actually be right about any of them. But do go ahead and keep telling yourself that the GOP policies should be popular … just like the kid who keeps thinking if people would only just realize that his clip-on bowtie is “cool”.

As to the troops, I’d be careful in assuming that the GOP has a lock on them anymore after the disgraceful way that they’ve been treated. I’m a bit tired of the GOP efforts to slash VA care for them – the legacy of this war has also been a huge number of severely wounded amputees and soldiers with facio-cranial injuries. Too bad that the only Republican response so far has been to try to ensure that their treatment is delayed or denied – but of course crapping on the downtrodden is what the Republicans do best. Probably makes Ike roll in his grave to think of what’s happened to his party.

So perhaps it’s time to open up a thread on how the GOP is preparing for 2006 elections. Have you already put together your lists of blacks with names similar to those of felons? Check. Got your phone diallers ready to jam the Democrat Party lines? Check. Got your “register to vote” contractors tossing out any applications belonging to Democrats? Check. Got those contractors submitting names of dead people? Check. Ready to “push-poll” folks with false racially charged questions? (“Would it affect your vote if you knew that [insert name] had fathered a bi-racial love child? Oh… it would. Just asking…”)? Check. Got plenty of events scheduled at conservative Christian colleges that don’t tolerate race-mixing? Check. OK, the GOP is ready to go!

[quote]

  1. Expand time in school – The 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. school day with lengthy summer breaks was set in an agrarian age in American history, when kids were expected to come back to their farms to help out with chores. However, this doesn’t match in with what we now know about how kids learn and retain information and it doesn’t match in with the education needed for American kids to be prepared to participate in the economy. [/quote]

That can be one option but I think that the parochial and private schools in inner cities are doing fine without necessarily changing school times but hey, if it works, I would support it.

Cute but irrelevant. Go to the education thread. We have discussed this in detail. More money is not the answer, but more reform.

good.

So that worked pretty well with those 17 UN resolutions calling for Saddam to comply. He did not.

And we are now three plus years into “negotiations” with Iran. How’s that working out for you?

agreed.

Welfare reform has been a huge success but work requirements need to be tightened. This Republican policy has been a huge huge success and has lowered black child poverty from 45 percent to 30 percent. How about that? And I thought the Democrats were the ones trying to help the Blacks haha.

I’ll go along with that. An oversight on my part.

Works for me.

Good. WE agree.

Agreed.

So Social Security does not need to be reformed? And how is this a Republican led scam?

Great. I agree but you will have to give me a few examples where Democrats have led the charge to cut spending. Sorry but no relevant example comes to mind. Maybe you can help?

Okay. I will bite. Explain to me how this would not work. What would the problems be. You are really amusing with the chatter but you often fail to address the point. I am amused however but please do get to the point.

Agreed.

Yeah, you are great with the soundbites that you memorized from the official Party site but why specifically is it a scam and why is it a bad idea? and what are the alternatives? higher taxes?

???

Glad you agree, but why don’t you think we can axe them?

Fine, you talk in tags and soundbites about “what makes sense” but you never actually say what that is.

Yet despite all those supposed abuses, Freedom House has continuously ranked the US as FREE with perfect scores in political freedom and civil liberties, why? Maybe these abuses are not so serious after all.

More palabrum. Democrats “listen to experts” zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz losing will to type zzzzzzzz

Who are you Goebbels? Do you think that if you repeat a lie 1,000 times everyone will believe it? There is a thread on Plamegate and last time I checked you came up short with the facts and the Wilson Plame duo have become a laughing stock except among the True Believers.

Fair point. BUT the federal response to Katrina was actually faster than the federal response to Andrew in 1992. AND we have seen that the primary blame should go to local and state authorities. Do you disagree? The FEMA statutes requires states to be primarily responsible for response for the first 72 to 96 hours, right? So where exactly was the big breakdown?

Let me reiterate key points…

  1. Agricultural subsidies should be ended (we both agree)
  2. Privatization and outsourcing should be encouraged and implemented where appropriate (we both agree). No comments regarding the post office? ports? power generation and transmission?
  3. Educate (we disagree). I suggest that you take any criticisms to the integration thread for followup.
  4. Social security reform could be a separate thread if and when you specify what your opposition to the Bush reform plan is.
  5. National defense, NATO, military transformation (we are broadly in agreement)
  6. Iraq and Iran and the Middle East and the fight on terrorism (we are broadly in disagreement but we have covered these points to no avail in so many other threads that rehashing is pointless).
  7. Ditto for “loss of rights” under Bush and Plamegate.
  8. Welfare reform (I think that we agree). Correct me if wrong.
  9. Abortion (we agree)
  10. Devolving power. I would like to discuss this more. Maybe a separate thread.