Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Democrats To Roll Out Plan?

From the SF Chronicle comes this article about a forthcoming plan. Where have we heard this before? John "I have a plan" Kerry. He actually had a plan before he didn't have a plan, or is it the other way around? I can't keep up.

Let's look at this plan a little closer shall we?

Democrats will introduce a domestic agenda for the 2006 campaign this week, confident that their opportunity to pick up seats is the best in a generation, yet divided over how much an agenda will matter.

They are divided over an agenda. That means there are a significant number that say, "Agenda? We don't need no stinking agenda.". Evidently, they think their present course of attacking Bush is enough. It wasn't enough in 2002 or 2004, but somehow, miraculously it will be enough in 2006.

Solomon once said, "Where there is no vision, the people perish.". That statement is certainly applicable, in this case.

The Democratic program will consist of bread-and-butter priorities: increasing the minimum wage, cutting costs of prescription drugs, reducing interest rates on student loans, rolling back subsidies for oil companies, and pay-as-you-go budgeting, according to party officials.

Sounds like the same old plans from yesteryear (and the years before that too). It didn't help them then and likely will not help them now. They lose these arguments everytime, they bring them up. There's nothing new here.

They want to raise minumum wage, so that small business owners will be forced to lay off or cut other benefits. They want to set prices on drugs for the drug companies. Never mind that the drug companies spend lots of money to find new drugs and deserve to recuperate their massive investments. (Chemists do not work cheap.) To stop them from setting their prices, would slow research and therefore, new drugs would not be rolled out at the rate they currently are today. Incentive is what drives the market.

No. the more I hear from the Democrats the more I think about the old central planning economy that drove the Soviet bloc into oblivion. It didn't work for them, what makes them think it will work for us, now?


All_I_Can_Stands said...

Yeah, I heard they were going to release the plan months ago after having it delayed prior to that.

They keep complaining that their agenda can't be boiled down to soundbites. I guess it is hard to boil down a modern version of The Communist Manifesto to a few quick soundbites.

Actually their continuous delay states one or more of the following:

- They don't really know what they want to propose. They know what they want to do, but that won't sell.
- They are taking time to craft a slick marketing campaign in order to fool voters into voting for them.
- They are standing in front of the mirror practicing religious sounding statements and they just can't get it right. They keep sounding more like the Bashwan Rashnish than Jesus.
- They keep presenting their plans to test polling groups and keep getting a thumbs down
- There is too much infighting between the classic Dems and the new fringe kook patronizers
- Every time they want to come out with it some event happens that makes them look stupid. (Like John Kerry apologizing for his Iraq authorization right after nailing Zarqawi)

No matter which one(s) the Dems cannot keep from looking foolish and incompetent. I think they stand more of a chance just keeping silent. Here is the link to my favorite all time post at the Logic Lifeline that talks about this dilemma:

Shah Alexander said...

A "trackback" for you.

LASunsett said...


I think one word sums up your assessment of the Dems, disarray.

LASunsett said...

Thanks Shah,

I don't have trackbacks, but will read your post.

Mustang said...

Yeah, it sounds like a dynamite way to win votes -- from morons. Let's see now:

Increase the minimum wage so that unemployment will increase among that group of people who need a job most. Good plan. Also, an increase in wages equates to an almost immediate increase in the cost of living.

Reducing the cost of prescription drugs -- now let's examine this a moment. Personally, I wish everything was free, but honestly, how does one reduce the cost of drugs? Do they have any idea what it takes to produce a beneficial drug from start to finish? Apparently not . . . so then are the drug manufacturers (there are only a couple left in the USA) supposed to take a loss? Yes, the Dems have thought this out really well. But actually, what they are doing is pandering to the "welfare" generation and those who are living on fixed incomes and who need medications to sustain their health. Rather than reducing the "cost of drugs," how about tax credits to senior citizens to help compensate them for prescription medications? Oh, sorry . . . that makes too much sense.

Reducing interest rates on student loans -- And how does this benefit America? No, it rather benefits the Democraps because again, they are pandering for votes from among college aged people, most of whom haven't a clue. Hell, they've been in school all of their lives.

Hmmm. Rolling back subsidies for oil companies. And how will that affect the consumer's cost for oil? Are these people brainless, or what?

Pay as you go budgeting . . . which means what, exactly? Budgeting is something you do BEFORE spending, so I'm not sure what in the hell this means. One thing is for certain, however. Members of Congress can be counted on to vote themselves another hefty pay raise, no matter how many homeless people live inside the Beltway -- and, they'll feel good about it, too.

Gosh I hate politicians. Spineless bastards.

Always On Watch said...

Gosh I hate politicians. Spineless bastards.

I used to think that politicians were a necessary evil. I'm disgusted with the lot of them these days.

VARepublicMan said...

"Division is a GOOD thing!" he said from behind his 'Abraham Lincoln' facemask.