The View From 1776

Democratic Party Strategy: Forget the Truth

Democrats, dominated by their liberal-socialist wing, have swallowed whole the socialistic and pragmatist philosophy doctrine that truth is simply whatever opinion wins in the media marketplace.  Whether it is right or wrong is immaterial.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 09/29 at 09:53 PM
  1. How well has socialism worked? In Europe its failure has been delayed by their not having to provide their own defense. The U.S. taxpayer and armed services have protected them from the Russians and are trying to protect them from radical Islam.
    As to pragmatism, that means using what works. The liberal brand of pragmatism will not work in the long term.
    But, unfortunately, most of Old Europe and many in the U.S. do not perceive that we are in World War IV with radical Islam. If we lose, all the nice socialist cradle to the grave schemes will be gone.
    Posted by Donald W. Bales  on  09/29  at  10:44 PM
  2. Great article except for the reference to Darwin. Darwin boils down to this: organisms which pass on more of their DNA to the next generations over time overwhelm organisms which don't.

    Regards
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/30  at  04:17 AM
  3. In reference to the opening comment, it was the United States that chose to pay for Europe's defense after WWII. In that way the U.S. retained control and influence over Europe's development. The U.S. did not want to repeat the mistake of abandoning Europe as it did after WWl. letting Germany spiral into economic chaos, which allowed for the emergence of Hitler. Also, in this way Europe could concentrate its resources on developing its economies instead of wasting them on remilitarizing. This was a good tactic because eventually it was the strength of European and Western economies that ultimately brought down communism and the the Soviet Union, not military action. This is a good example of ideas and pragmatism prevailing over force. Other examples of this type of pragmatism employed by the U.S. are seen in Japan and South Korea.

    United States policy in Europe was intended to contain communism and the Soviet Union without a military conflict, and it worked. Conservatives at the time were wanting to use military force to defeat communism. War, as we now know from experience, would not have been a prudent alternative. It would have been a waste and would have defeated the intellectual alternatives which have advance humankind. Thank God for the pragmatists of those days and the Cold War.

    People who are against pragmatism are against Democracy. Pragmatism has developed the secular state in which Democracy can truly flourish and function.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/30  at  10:59 AM
  4. But now the Europeans do not have the will or the means to defend themselves. They have not joined with us to combat the radical Muslims. They seem to want to coddle the Muslims they have in their countries, and to appease those without. Talk about a fifth column. It makes the previous one in Spain in the late 30's look very puny.
    Posted by Donald W. Bales  on  09/30  at  11:30 AM
  5. Image, as Daniel Henninger puts it, soldiers in Iraq reading in the paper that " everything you
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/30  at  12:04 PM
  6. "But now the Europeans do not have the will or the means to defend themselves. "

    This is something the Europeans have to learn and will learn as America's influence diminishes in the world. In the past the United States did not really like or care for Europe developing its own, home ground means of dealing with its "enemies''. That was the domain of the U.S. because it wanted to hold onto power and influence over Europe. One of the problems of Europe coping on its own in foreign policy is that the United States has made Europe reliant on it, like a child, for so long.

    One thing Europe has right over the U.S. is the "war on terrorism" is more a policing action than a military one. In this Europe has had more experience that the U.S. If the U.S. had dealt with terrorism abroad more as a police action the war on terror would be more successful. Alas, the cat of failure is out of the bag.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/30  at  12:25 PM
  7. They did not prevent the blowing up of the trains in Spain and they changed their government in response to the attack.
    Granted mistakes have been made. Do you think that withdrawal will help? Do you think the Democrats can do better? What plan have they advanced?
    The Europeans have not shown any wish to have military power. They did not act in their own backyard-the Balkans. By hindsight we may have been on the wrong side there.
    The Europeans have shown a great desire to have a welfare state.
    The radical Muslims wanted to hit the U.S. first allowing the Europeans to believe that they would not be hit. But if the U.S. goes down, Europe will be next.
    Posted by Donald W. Bales  on  09/30  at  12:55 PM
  8. This is interesting, what Fred wrote, "Organisms which pass on more of their DNA to the next generations over time overwhelm organisms which don
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/30  at  01:05 PM
  9. Donald,

    I don't think you understand. The war in Iraq is now about incompetence. This administration has been incompetent and compounding it, and distorted its meaning beyond real. The only way to improve the situation is to remove this administration or diminish its role. I don't think withdrawal is the answer. America can not abandon Iraq after the mess it has made, militarily and contractually. A new administration may develop a better collision for Iraq, which could save it.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/30  at  01:23 PM
  10. "They did not prevent the blowing up of the trains in Spain and they changed their government in response to the attack."

    They changed the government because the government did not tell the truth about who had perpetrated the attack. The Spanish government said the Basques were the terrorists of the Madrid bombings.

    One could argue that the Madrid and London terrorist acts were the product of the U.S. war on terrorism. Bush has said that we are fighting terrorism abroad so we don't have to fight it at home. That 'abroad' he is talking about could include Madrid and London. Why have terrorism in the U.S. when you can have it Europe.

    This administration has dumped its headache and incompetence onto others by blaming everybody else but itself (the media and liberals). Talk about pragmatism, a convenient pragmatism tailored for neocons.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  09/30  at  01:48 PM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.