Dem hawks urge militaristic policy, go easy on Bush administration

In the Washington Post:

Democratic hawks said yesterday that their party can win a war of ideas with the Republicans over national security, but only if Democrats move beyond simply criticizing President Bush's policies and convince voters they support strategies to defeat Islamic jihadists.

First of all, why are these bozos feeding into, amplifying, and echoing the false Republican talking point that Dems have no plan, no ideas, and can only offer criticism? With friends like these, who needs enemies?

These centrist Democrats argued that voters are more receptive to the Democrats because of Bush's mistakes in Iraq. [No kidding?] But they warned against calls to launch investigations into past administration decisions if Democrats gain control of the House or Senate in the November elections.

WHY?? Who's side are they on? They think that we need to let these crooks and thieves walk away without a peep of protest or attempt to hold them accountable? Who are they afraid of offending? The Bushies?

Instead, they said, Democrats should concentrate on charting alternative policies for fighting terrorism and succeeding in Iraq.

Oh I see. Kind of the "let bygones be bygones" school of thought. No use crying over spilt blood, or squandered and pilfered billions I guess.

"We still have a hurdle to cross with the American people in convincing them we can be both tough and smart when it comes to securing America," said Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.). Voters may have more confidence in Democrats on the economy or education, he said, but, "they're not going to trust us on those things if they don't first us trust us with their lives."

And they're going to trust us with their lives .... if we don't investigate any wrong-doing by Republicans? Help me out here.

Bayh and others spoke at the launch of a collection of essays on national security policy published by the Progressive Policy Institute, the think tank associated with the Democratic Leadership Council. The sponsors challenged Democrats to resist policies advocated by what they called the "non-interventionist left" wing of their party while vigorously challenging what they call the "neo-imperial right" viewpoint of many in the Bush administration.

Advocating the "neither here nor there" wing of the party, I guess. The mushy middle. The very sort of Dem that got creamed at the poles by right wingers who were wrong, but unequivacal in their views, even thought they were quite radical. These folks want more of the mushy, say-anything, flip-floppy Dem that the voters thoroughly rejected.

Yesterday's unveiling underscored again the division within the Democratic Party between elected officials such as Bayh, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who have resisted calls for setting timetables for withdrawal of U.S. forces in Iraq, and those such as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), Sen. Russell Feingold (Wis.) and Rep. John P. Murtha (Pa.), who have embraced such timetables.

Bayh said Republicans have been "better at national security politics than at national security."

Very true.

Former Virginia governor Mark R. Warner (D), noting that he was elected just two months after the attacks, said he and other Democrats are keenly aware of the new threats. "I don't need to be lectured by Karl Rove and the record of this administration about what is needed to keep America safe," Warner said.

Despite these indignant words, Democratic centrists remain sharply at odds with most voices on the party's left, whose opposition to the Iraq war has fueled calls for party leaders to offer more vigorous resistance to the president.

Pelosi has said Democrats will investigate how the United States went to war in Iraq if they gain control of the House, but pollster Jeremy Rosner said yesterday that this represents a backward-looking approach that will make it more difficult for Democrats to define their security agenda.

"Many of us are disturbed by the calls for investigations or even impeachment as the defining vision for our party for what we would do if we get back into office," he said.

Um... I think Mr. Rosner may be playing for the other side. NO ONE, to my knowledge, has been calling for "investigations or even impeachment" to be the "defining vision for our party for what we would do if we get back into office".

That sounds like something from a Republican pundit's mouth, not a Dem. Why is he perpetuating right wing spin? No one says that investigating criminal conduct should be the "defining vision" for the Dem party! Get real.

But calling for taking investigations off the table is simply bizarre. It's irresponsible, abdictating their vital oversight role, as well as failing in their duty to serve as a check and balance on the executive branch. And sheilding the Bushies from investigation will NOT be any magic bullet that helps propel Dems into a majority.

The incompetent in the White House is sitting at around 30% approval and going down faster than Ann Coulter at a Federalist Society weekend retreat, and these DLC guys say hands off? Are they afraid of offending the dwindling pockets of right wing zealots who would follow Bush off a cliff?

Hell, all of the Dem base and two thirds of Republicans would LOVE to see some of these crooks, incompetents, and hare-brained ideologues do a perp walk. Are these DLC types nuts? More gung-ho militarism and let the crooks walk? Who are they working for?

It's as if they're saying that we can't turn this ship around too quickly, or people might get ruffled. We need to "stay the course" on the disasterous track Bush and the Republicans have set us on and then maybe think about turning just a little sometime in the future. The American people can't take that much change.

When things have been this botched, when there's been this amount of damage done to our very system of government and global stability, I'd say that not only can the American people take it, it's irresponsible to NOT call for a substantial change in direction.

The Bushies and the right have dug us into an enormously deep hole and they're digging it deeper as fast as they can. It's time to stop the digging, not sort of slow down.