Saturday, March 03, 2007

Democrat is as Democrat does

As I fully expected prior to last year’s election, the Democrats have made moves towards cutting military spending a few days ago. I would hardly rate my pre-election post as a prediction as knowing what the Democrats will do is not terribly difficult. Nevertheless, they managed to convince millions of pro-military Americans otherwise and so here we are. The Democrats plan was to reduce $20 billion from President Bush’s $140 billion supplemental bill. To lessen the political hit they would take they promised to increase funding over the next few years; a promise that could and would be easily forgotten. I could go on about why the $20 billion is needed for new equipment and supplies this year not next year but since the Democrats quickly backtracked there isn’t much point. It seems only the realization that a Republican President and Senate filibuster would prevent the reduction while not preventing the political damage caused them to hide their true colors. This does show however what the military will have to deal with while the Democrats have any political power. The Democrats can consider defeat desirable, deem sacrifice for one’s country to be a waste, and think people in our military are the dregs of society whether they are in power or not, but they can only make it happen if they are in power. Though we have, we shouldn’t be adding to our soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen’s hardships and worries like this. We’re stuck for now but I can only hope that barring a near miraculous change of heart by the modern Left the American people will see fit to correct, or at least not compound, this situation in 2008.


  1. I second that opinion. I didn't understand why the voters were so easily fooled by all the veterans the Dems sought out to run last election. The party is run by hard left anti-military types and they will pass what they want, if theres no Republican interference. It must be true what they say, you can fool the people some of the time. I also hope that some of the time ends as soon as possible.

  2. We voted in a Socialist left wing Government and 10 years later they are more right wing than the ones they replaced. You need a left & a right to have balance so at least one reflects your views. At least you have that, we need it.

  3. Well I am partial to our partitioned form of government that allows for varying levels of left/right power at different levels of government. I just wish we could go back to the pre-1970 days when both parties had basically the same goals in the foreign policy and military arenas so the military and our allies didn't have to worry about being undercut everytime the Democrats take power. Fortunately, despite their wins last november (in part by promising to be pro-military and running safe looking veterans) they can't do much yet except show their cards.

    I'd disagree with calling Blair a right winger, I'd certainly never consider voting for him (William Hague was more to my liking, until his recent anti-America streak). I would say it's strange system over there, one year you have a union loving socialist who is taking Britain down to third world banana republic living standards and the next year one of the most conservative leaders in the world who takes Britain back to the top of Europe. As much as I would like the latter, better to have a system that doesn't risk the former in the process. Thanks to both of you for the comments.