Democrats - Nothing to Admire

Democrat Role Models

Posted on July29,2009

Full disclosure demands that I admit to being a Democrat in my younger days. My first vote went to Lyndon Johnson. I thought Nixon was despicable and was glad he had to resign. Looking at my pay-stub back in the day, I could see the increase in taxes withheld, but I never made the connection with those deductions to the welfare state that was blossoming under my nose. The war in Viet Nam was happening and to me the taxes were needed for our defense, road construction, and because I was employed by a major shipbuilder, building new ships for the U.S. Navy. Nixon instituted the wage and price freeze just before I was to get a promotion and I held the loss of my pay increase against him. I was a supporter of George McGovern in 1972. But as they say, things change.

It was after Nixon's resignation that I found out why Nixon had the offices of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist and the DNC Headquarters at the Watergate burglarized. I definitely did not approve of the illegal actions of burglary, but there was scant attention paid to the motives for the break-ins. Not to rehash the ordeal of the Nixon era, but I was surprised to learn that Nixon was interested in the capture and conviction of Ellsberg. Daniel Ellsberg gave most of the Pentagon Papers to New York Times reporter Neil Sheehan, with Ellsberg's friend Anthony Russo assisting in their copying. Divulging the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times harmed our efforts in Viet Nam. Whether or not you believe that the Viet Nam war was justified, making public, top-secret documents is a treasonable act. The Pentagon Papers were an assessment without political frills about our involvement in Viet Nam. Robert McNamara, the Secretary of Defense at the time, commissioned the study to find where we needed to make changes with our strategy. By leaking the Pentagon Papers to the press, Ellsberg not only embarrassed the United States, but also gave a propaganda victory to our enemies.

The Democrats used the break-in and subsequent cover-up as a hammer to force Nixon to resign. Ellsberg and Russo turned themselves in, but the Judge dismissed the charges for technical reasons, not for any question of guilt or innocence. The prosecution bungled, violated wiretapping rules, and failed to provide evidence that would have convicted Ellsberg and Russo. Because of the gross misconduct by the prosecution, the judge dismissed the charges. For those who might be interested in the Nixon resignation , there are many good sources on the internet. A good place to start is this wikipedia article about Ellsberg. More information is available from wikipedia article about the Pentagon papers . If Wikipedia is not your cup of tea, there are many other sources listed by Google.

I was disappointed that the Democrats would not pursue those who hurt this country. The Liberal Supreme Court paved the way for the Times and other papers to print top-secret material. The Supreme Court fully understood the implication of making those documents public, but they chose to give the press a pass, citing 1st amendment issues. For the first time, the Supreme Court allowed someone to harm the United States and not hold them accountable. Because of the ruling, Democrats busied themselves reveling in the misery of the Republicans. The Democrats piled on in such a mean spirited way that even now, the two parties cannot find mutual grounds on such basic issues as National Defense. Nixon became the whipping boy of the press and they created the atmosphere for Jimmy Carter's election. The two-party system has always been contentious, but never like the era that began with the resignation of Richard Nixon.

The conclusions I have drawn about the Democratic Party are scary. No matter the stakes, Democrats only embrace an issue if it helps them to become politically more powerful. Cases in point:

• 1.) In the Viet Nam War era, the Democrats decided to enhance their fortunes by embracing the cause of the anti-war crowd. Of course, that occurred when a Republican president was in office. It was not an issue under John Kennedy and Johnson, even though Johnson was the president who greatly expanded the war. Democrats gave full support to Johnson.
• 2.) The Democrats defended Bill Clinton vigorously over his indiscretions. What you heard from them was, "It is only about sex." But they had an attack of piousness when Mark Foley of Florida sent improper emails to some office pages.
• 3.) The Democrats have also lost their ability to clamor for decency over the multiple affairs of Democrat Tim Mahoney who replaced Mark Foley for the Florida seat. While running for the office, Mahoney focused his campaign on "family values".
• 4.) When the idea was popular, the Democrats demanded and rushed to sponsor and pass the War Resolution over Iraq. But true to form, when the going got tough, the Democrats retreated from their votes and advocated surrender. A victorious Republican president was not in their interest. What the Democrats wanted was to force the U.S. to surrender while George W. Bush was in the Whitehouse. The fact that the Democrats publically criticized the war, gave hope and inspiration to our enemies in Iraq. The consequences of retreat did not bother them in the least.
• 5.) Barney Frank gave Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac a vigorous defense when the Republicans tried to reign in those two goliaths. What he wasn't sharing was that he was having a gay relationship with Mr. Herb Moses of Fannie Mae. The Democrats just turn a blind eye to the very offensive actions of other Democrats.

The large over-arching lesson about Democrats is one that you should take to heart; their only motives are self-interest and the acquisition of power. They will take no position with regard to a fellow Democrat. Their defensive trigger kicks in no matter how egregious or offensive the act by a fellow Democrat.

The economic policies adopted by the modern Democratic Party, including the former Clinton administration, may also be referred to as the "Third Way". The party believes that the government should play the instrumental role in alleviating poverty even if such action ruins the private sector through increased taxation. Democrats believe in a government that punishes achievers by taking their earnings and redistributing those earnings to non-achievers. That position is not tenable. Their taxation policies destroy the engine of real progress that creates the jobs and opportunities for everybody. The people in Detroit can attest to this failed notion. General Motors and the rest of the American owned auto manufacturers are victims of both liberal policies and labor unions. A global economy requires meeting and beating the competition. But that is impossible when our businesses are saddled with crushing taxes and unreasonable and costly demands from labor unions.

Speaking of General Motors, are you aware that General Motors sells more cars in China than the U.S.? There is nothing to prevent General Motors from moving their manufacturing facilities to China. If that happens, "What do you think will happen to your good paying union jobs then, Mr. Democrat?" We would be powerless to prevent such a move because China owns a good part of the American economy and by extension, our way of life.

While we still have the ability to refuse those far-left policies proposed by the leftist elites in congress. Their policies and proposals need to be defeated. If you support ideas such as taking over our healthcare system, you need to rethink your position. When it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is. What I never will understand is why we can't just fix the known problems that are in the system. I keep hearing about all the fraud and cheating by hospitals and insurance companies. Somebody has to explain to me why we don't already have a system in place to catch and punish those violators. If the perpetrators are able to swindle us out of billions a year, somebody has to dropping the ball. Does the government have to take over the whole system to catch crooks? Some of the other gripes I have about the medical system is the way they charge for goods and services. Drug companies can charge whatever they need for the profit margin they want, but why isn't the cost for the same drug the same to their many users?

Personal health costs run into the same pricing problems. On a recent stay in the hospital, (for one day) if I were to have paid cash, the bill would have been $28,000. But they settled with my insurance company for $7,000. My question is - If my stay was only worth $7,000, then why in the world would they need to charge me $28,000 on a cash basis. Can't hospitals figure out how much it actually cost for a patient and just charge the patient or the insurance company that amount? $75.00 for a Tylenol? Absurd!

The point is, we don't need a government takeover of the health system to fix the problems. A lesson in ethics, tort reform, prosecution of wrongdoing, and increasing the number of doctors from our medical schools would go a long way to fixing the ills of the medical system. The reason we can't fix the system is that the Democrats want to control it; they have no interest in just fixing the problems.

Our good jobs and manufacturing base have been drifting away like a slow bleed due to the Democratic policies of 'sharing the wealth' by the redistribution of wealth. The only shared wealth is the transfer of our wealth to other countries. We buy the cheaper goods produced by other countries and send more of our wealth overseas. Labor Unions and taxes will make sure that this trend continues. The Democrats desire for the poor to own a home almost brought us to our knees. We can't afford Liberalism anymore. My question for you is, "What will it take for you to realize that the Democrats are ruining this country?" There is no free lunch! We can help those in need through private institutions like churches and charitable organizations. Democratic policies have made wards of the state out of our poor. For shame! If you are not too afraid, visit the public housing that you are paying for. Take a good look at what the Democrats have created! Then ask yourself, "Is this the way we really want to treat people?"

Most Americans want to help others. We are hard-wired for it. But letting the Federal Government take over our responsibilities in that endeavor has created a monster. Our society looks for the easy way out. We have become like the classic churchgoers who just want to throw a dollar in the plate and hope for the best. The best way to help others is with your participation. The lazy way out for most is to throw money at the problem and hope it goes away. And by the way, Democrats are always handy-dandy there to take your money and allow themselves the luxury of who to help (including themselves) and how much. The largest recipients of the taxpayer's money go to whoever is the biggest help with Democrat power acquisition and maintenance of power. That money that you send to Washington to divest yourself of any personal responsibility, gets distributed according to the rankings of who helps the Democrats stay in power.

All you have to do is say no to every Democrat on your ballot (and Liberal Republicans). They will get the message.

Cheers,
Robert

Unique Visitors