« Casual Fridays | Main | Idiot Conservative Pundits »

31 May 2010

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b39369e20134824fd98e970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Many Dems - Not Smart on National Security Either:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Between conservatives and liberals, defense policy is treated the same way as drug legalization: As a realm of political opportunism and posturing.

Examples:
Democratic candidate for president says: We should decriminalize some or all drugs.

Republican establishment would respond: You're soft on crime, you libertine hippy!

Republican candidate(with a libertarian streak) says: We should decriminalize some or all drugs.

Democratic opponent responds: You heartless Republicans don't care about what's happening in our inner cities. Drug abuse disproportionately affects minorities! RAAAAACIST!!!

Now lets look at national defense:

Democratic candidate: We need to reduce our military presence overseas and make deep cuts in our unsustainable defense spending.

Republican responds: You Dems are so weak on national security! If you were in charge, al-Qaeda would be occupying the eastern seaboard within a year!

Republican Candidate: We need to reduce our military presence overseas and make deep cuts in our unsustainable defense spending.

Democrat responds: Ha! You want to weaken America's military and I won't stand for it! You're an isolationist! You don't care about human rights! Democrats are the REAL Party of National Security!

Political divisions keep anything important from getting done before it's too late. Look, you probably loath Glenn Beck, right? I'm not a fan myself. He seems like a choad even when he says something I agree with. He's our Keith Olbermann. But read this piece he wrote on reducing defense spending and military interventionism and then tell me what you actually disagree with him about on the topic.

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/39209/

The comments to this entry are closed.

May 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        

Daily Thoughts


What I'm Reading

Countering WMDs

National Security

General Military Links

National Security Thinktanks

My Photo

Sigger's Law

  • Sigger's Law: "As any discussion on terrorism grows longer, the probability of attributing terrorists with nuclear weapons (or similar destructive capabilities) approaches 1." Corollary to Sigger's Law: "Once such an observation is made, the discussion is finished and whoever mentioned terrorist possession of nuclear weapons has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress."

CBRND Wiki Project

  • CBRND/CWMD in the Wikipedia
    This post is dedicated as a reference site for Wikipedia entries relating to CBRN defense or WMD issues. Some of them badly need improvements and/or references.

Google Search

  • Google

    WWW
    armchairgeneralist.typepad.com

Armed Forces Press Service

Political and Social Commentary Blogs

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Blog Directories

Notable

Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 12/2004