Text 4867, 132 rader
Skriven 2007-08-10 05:51:00 av TIM RICHARDSON
Ärende: Homeschoolers Score High
================================
Speaking of Limbaugh;


Democrats' Radical Prescriptions for America


By David Limbaugh


Friday, August 10, 2007

The 2008 election is shaping up to be one of the most important in decades.

With every passing day we are seeing a greater contrast between the
Democratic Party platform and the national interest -- as witnessed by the
positions of the leading Democratic presidential candidates in their debates.


Indeed, the unpopularity of the war in Iraq has fueled a remarkable boldness
by these candidates in bringing their liberalism out of the closet. Whether
the candidates are sincere in advocating some of their radical positions or
merely sucking up to the various interest groups, they are parading their
extremism on national television.


The Democrats rail against lobbying, as if to suggest they abhor special
interest politics and the undue influence of these interests on policymakers.


Yet they are nothing if not beholden to a collection of special interest
groups, from labor unions, to gay activists, to race-baiting civil rights
leaders, to illegal immigrants, to feminists, to global warming alarmists to
antiwar, antimilitary groups to outright class-warfare-waging socialists.


While the Democrats claim to be uniters, virtually every demand of these
groups of their puppet-stringed candidates is inherently divisive. The
consequent message the candidates carry forward is one of an alienated,
polarized, divided and perpetually agitated America.


A disturbing theme coursing through every policy they promote is that almost
every problem in America is caused by a wrong action or inaction of the
federal government, which Democrats obviously believe is responsible for
everything from people's jobs to their health care to global warming -- even
their happiness.


Read the transcript of the AFL-CIO debate and you'll find that Democratic
leaders squarely place responsibility for almost every calamity in America --
whether caused by natural forces, human negligence or imperfection, or even
excess government intermeddling in the first place -- on the federal
government or evil corporations. This is scary stuff.


Hillary Clinton exploited the Minneapolis bridge collapse to tell us we need
the federal government to invest in infrastructure -- "to protect us" and to
"create jobs." How would she improve the recovery in New Orleans? Simple,
"The first thing I would do is put somebody in charge who actually cared
about the people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast," as if Republicans don't
care and as if caring is all that matters -- vintage liberalism.


John Edwards agreed on Minneapolis and also seemed to blame the Utah mining
accident on the federal government. To Edwards, these disasters are not only
the fault of the federal government, but of insider, lobby-driven Beltway
politics ignoring the needs of "working men and women." But Edwards outdid
himself when he suggested that 51-year-old James Lowe's speech-impairing
cleft palate is the fault of the federal government in failing to provide
sufficient health care and the evil "drug companies and insurance companies."


Barack Obama complained that employers are exploiting "undocumented workers."


That's right, he said the illegals aren't being paid enough or receiving
enough benefits.


Joe Biden said the government ought to give us "100,000 new nurses." Oh, boy.


When the candidates were not promoting a paternalistic government or
demonizing corporations, they were either telling tall tales about taxes and
deficits or waxing recklessly about the Iraq War and the Global War on Terror
(GWOT).


They never tire of mischaracterizing President Bush's tax cuts as being
skewed for the benefit of the wealthy, when the cuts actually made the income
tax slightly more progressive and caused the wealthy to pay a higher share of
taxes.


Hillary Clinton led the charge in misrepresenting that the federal budget
deficit is growing when it has been cut in half as President Bush promised --
primarily because of his revenue-generating tax cuts.


All the candidates are now tied to the position that we must withdraw our
troops from Iraq -- yesterday, success of the current "surge"
notwithstanding. Several of them imply our exit will miraculously cause a
wonderful peace to descend on the region. Those who don't and even some that
do, like Obama, take the ridiculous position that though we must "redeploy"
our troops, we should either leave enough there or close by to "make sure
they (Al Qaeda) don't establish long-term bases there." Isn't that what we're
doing now?


Whether heartfelt or mandated by their collection of malcontent special
interest groups, the Democrats' vision for America is one of surrender in
Iraq, denial and appeasement in the GWOT, constitutional rights for enemy
combatants, socialized, inferior and rationed medical care, obstruction of
entitlement reform, tax code-administered punishment of producers, a
command-control economy with the government creating jobs, balkanization of
America along ethnic and racial lines in the name of diversity, government
intervention to erode traditional values, suppression of speech of those who
don't toe the liberal line and more.


I only wish more people were tuning in.


David Limbaugh, brother of radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, is an expert
in law and politics and author of Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral
Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party.



---
*Durango b301 #PE* 
 * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)