One of the more commented-upon posts I did over at Armed Liberal was this one on patriotism and the Democratic Party.
It is an issue I feel strongly about, and one that is behind my comfort with blogging alongside Joe, Trent, Adil, and Celeste, who I imagine are somewhat more conservative than I am (it may have something to do with why Joe invited me, as well).
Well, I saw some good news today, and thought I'd share it.
In the Atlantic (that wonderful, thoughtful magazine that was kind enough to mention me!) this month is an article on:
"A lot of Democrats seem to regard foreign-policy and national security issues as distractions that, with luck, will soon go away. On Iraq, the party snapped back - with whiplash speed, seemingly as if Clinton had never happened - to the pacifism and confusion of the McGovern and Mondale years. That makes Democrats not only wrong but, in national races, unelectable.Yay-hah!"We have reached the point where this has metastasized into a crisis in the party," says Bergreen. "What I would like is to have a Democrat be comfortable reading the words that were in John F. Kennedy's inaugural. Have you read that recently? That's tough stuff. That liberty and freedom are something worth fighting for, worth bearing a burden for. Just because there's no Soviet Union doesn't make these things less relevant."
And so Bergreen is pounding the pavements of Washington, looking for money and support for a new organization, to be called Democrats for National Security. "The problem," says Doug Wilson, a former Clinton Pentagon official who counts himself among Bergreen's supporters, "is to be able to say 'Democrats for national security' and not have people think it's an oxymoron."
How can I support Mr. Bergreen? I have become increasingly disillusioned with the trend in the Democratic Party. They seem to have been taken over by radical 60's hippies who find define everything American as bad. People like Mr. Bergreen and armed liberal need to take back our party!
If it's "our" party, how about stepping in yourself and providing a bit of covering fire for our friends? Won't happen by magic, you know.
A.L., this is indeed good news. Leaving the field of serious national security debate to the Right is not good for the republic in the long run. In the short run, it also produces poorer solutions.
You've got a lot of work ahead of you. Good luck!
The Democrats seem to refrain from any use of the military when it involves national interests. Their record is clear. The military is to be used for social experiments rather than as a fighting force. It is a meals on wheels program rather than to be used to break things and kill people. When the Democrats support a new weapons program, increase the defense budget, or stand up to a real enemy (as opposed to an ally the Dems do not cotton to) I'll believe the Democrat Party has changed till then its a haven for knee walking surrender monkeys like Clinton and Kerry.
Points worth noting. If Adil has any political views beyond dislike of Islamism, I'm unaware of them. And yes, I did want an intelligent liberal viewpoint here on Winds of Change.NET. I asked A.L. for nominations, and when he told me he wanted to throttle back a bit I invited him outright.
Glad I did.