I have no love for either party, but confess I find the fundamentals of the DNC entrenched in Marxist thought (read the Communist Manifesto first, before you argue otherwise). Politicians on either side are going to make statements that sound good when you say it fast -- its what they do best, and I am going to call attention to some of their thinking:
BO claims tax breaks for 95% of Americans -- who only pay 40% of the tax bill. A full 33% pay nothing, another 17% only pay 4%. The one-third do not get tax breaks, because they do not pay taxes -- they might, under BO, get redistributed income, which immediately makes them wards of the state. Why would they vote to change such a system? Taxing the other 5%: they already pay 60% of the tax bill -- only the small-minded would say they are not paying their share already. Go out to dinner with 20 friends, and tell one they MUST pay 60% of the bill for everyone. and if they think that is unfair, the other 19 are considering voting to make them pay more! Raise your hand if you want to be that one with 19 friends like that!
Failed economic policy? Until the screw-up banks making loans to people who historically would not have qualified (why they violated tried and true rules of lending I cannot say for a fact; I have heard merely greed to Congress complaints that the rules were socio-economically biased and the banks had to demonstrate otherwise -- the truth is probably somewhere in between), we were at record highs in the stock market, which fuels businesses, jobs, and retirement funds, and unemployment was under 5%. What is so failed about that? And besides, business is the business of business, not government.
Yes, further investment in offshore drilling is a stop-gap, but necessary to keep energy prices in line with inflation WHILE other energy alternatives are developed. Today though, Democrats have blocked any kind of comprehensive energy plan, crying it only supports "Big Oil", which is not for what Bush has been calling since 2003 (and I am no Bush apologist, this is just a fact). "Comprehensive" means fossil fuels, nuclear energy, solar, hydraulic, co-gen, and wind. The "natural" solutions, which I have followed since my college days almost 30 years ago, remain horrifically expensive. They are only affordable with government tax breaks or subsidies -- which is OUR tax money anyway, so WHY take it from us in the first place? The fact of the matter is this: the "natural" solutions offer low output for high investment, this has been their history. If we want to keep energy prices in check while these are made affordable on the open market for everyone (which I support), then we need to drill in these other areas for the next 10-15 years while these alternatives are developed.
"Restore the United States' reputation in the world": Why do we care? The UN does nothing well unless we are involved. Bush's policy of freedom is the same as JFK's (listen to JFK's inauguration speech). George Washington said, "Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth." Who on the planet does not deserve that? You say some cannot govern themselves (Ted Kennedy said this)? The words of Thomas Jefferson, "I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion."
Health care? "Free" for everyone? ALL Canadians pay 25% of their income for "free universal health care", whether they use it or not. This is a fact. BUT, the distribution of that health care is not "on demand". You are a number, and you queue for health care, no matter what your condition. Tear your ACL, expect to wait months to get it fixed. Have cancer and need treatment? Wait your turn, even if it kills you. I hear this not from the news, but from Canadians themselves. Same experience in the UK and France.
Then there is Al Gore, who swears things would have been different had he been President. The WTC was bombed under his watch, its instigator (Bin Laden) offered up, and he stood by and did nothing. He has never spoken against Clinton for this egregious failure, like a statesman would have done. He would have done nothing except to say it was our fault. Al also proposed taxing gasoline to a nationwide average of $4/gal to encourage conservation, which would have hurt the 95% he purports to protect. But the free market takes prices to that level, and he says it is wrong. Al "I invented the Internet" Gore is an idiot. Why people listen to him supports the notion that critical thinking among the masses is dead.
When McCain makes his speech, I will likewise comment. They both make stupid and untrue statements, and neither party is fit to govern, IMHO. Viva the third and more parties!
