« Home | Fun with statistics » | UVa destroys Gonzaga; Final Four in their future? » | UVa is producing some leaders » | What are they smoking? » | Gerald Ford, RIP » | Merry Christmas! » | Goode, Democrats, and Muslims » | Ethics in politics may be entering a whole new era... » | Somebody call the WAAAAAAAmbulance » | What to do in Iraq »

January 12, 2007

100 hours of hypocrisy and obnoxiousness

Democrats planned big things for their first 100 hours; unsurprisingly, they have shown little class and have had some difficulty keeping their promises.

First off, their simple promise of getting things done in the first 100 hours. Little did we know that they would define what 100 hours meant (sound familiar?). When I went to the polls, I did not expect that the new leaders would take a whole day off to see a football game played that night. I am pretty sure that that was a wasted 24 hours. The AP article referenced above suggests that Democrats are on pace to finish their promised legislation on time, but counting Championship Friday (as should be done), they are clearly behind.

The Democrats made a big deal about minimum wage hikes (something that will cause more problems for a strong economy and many people right now then it will fix), but apparently only for those whom do not represent some interest. Democrats accuse Republicans of being "for big business", but when Nancy Pelosi allows American Samoa to be ignored because Del Monte is among her representation (Del Monte has a large portion of employees in American Samoa), she shows there is little to trust when it comes to the new leadership.

And then, there is, as Bill O'Reilly might put it, "the most ridiculous item of the day." In a tasteless attack, she hit Condoleeza Rice for not having children. Suddenly, having children is a prerequisite for assuming some form of leadership in the federal government.

I do not pretend to know Condi's feelings, but I would not at all be surprised if this greatly hurt her. Say what you want about the war, but when the Democrats, who claim to be the party of the minority and claim to support non-traditional families, go after someone because they do not have a traditional family, they show they do not have the moral high ground. And they can complain of the war "hurting families", but last I checked, our military was still meant for volunteers. My father, a man in the military himself, always had this to say: "if you do not think you will be going to war when you join the military, you should not join at all." War is not a given at any point in history, but if you are a soldier, you know that it can happen at any time, and this should likewise be understood by the family of a soldier.

Once again, the only Democrat who seems to show any class is Joseph Lieberman.
I applaud the president for rejecting the fatalism of failure and pursuing a new course to achieve success in Iraq
While so many are criticizing President Bush for a plan that has not even been tested yet, Senator Lieberman still stands for national defense.

But his comrades (if they can be called that after the recent election cycle) have continued to show that why Republicans would have been the better choice. 2008 is not too far away, and some new blood in the Republican party should reinvigorate the base and bring back the leadership that this country deserves.