Democrats try to come up with an idea, any idea, other than "Bush is bad, mkay?"

Despondent over why no one to the right of eco-commie-hippies votes for them, Democratic leadership has tried their best to come up with a strategy that will get them elected in November. Unfortunately (for them) it's pretty much the same ideas (or lack thereof) they were recycling back in 2004. Emboldened by President Bush's declining approval ratings, Democrats unveiled a national security platform yesterday for the midterm elections that stresses renewed focus on capturing Osama bin Laden, reducing the U.S. presence in Iraq and stepped up protection at home. And how is that different from what the Bush administration is doing? Dubya's looking for all al Qaeda leadership (remember the drone missile attack in Pakistan that was supposed to have gotten Zawahiri? Obviously we're looking), reducing US presence in Iraq (we were discussing this at the end of 2005 and for much off this year as Iraqi forces have begun to take the lead in operations), and the Republican controlled House just sent up a strict immigration reform bill including building a real wall at our border. Of course McCain (RINO) and Kennedy (flaming liberal) are taking the bill and dumbing it down... I'm still waiting for this great, new idea they've got. The new strategy, which comes after months of deliberations and several false starts, aims to neutralize the advantage Republicans have held on national security and terrorism issues, that Democrats acknowledge were critical in the GOP's midterm gains in 2002 and in Bush's reelection victory over Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) in 2004. I would think to do that they'd need new ideas. Something to say other than "We're for the opposite of whatever Bush says." Flanked by former secretary of state Madeleine K. Albright and retired Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark, Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi vowed that Democrats could do a better job of defending the country than the administration has done since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. If they could do that, maybe they'd have picked up seats in 2002 or 2004. Apparently, the country doesn't agree. Declaring that the administration's "dangerous incompetence has made America less safe," Reid said, "We are uniting behind a national security agenda that is tough and smart, an agenda that will provide the real security President Bush has promised, but failed to deliver." Incompetence... they've been beating that drum everyday since 9/11. They say they'll be tough and smart, well since 9/11 they've been neither. And who really buys that they'll provide real security? As opposed to what... the fake security we have now? I'm sorry, did I miss a terrorist attack on US soil during the past 4 years? I thought they said they had something new. Republicans immediately attacked the Democratic plan, with Vice President Cheney arguing that Democrats' "behavior has been totally inconsistent with what they're now promising they're going to do." Uhoh. The antidote to any liberal idea... common sense. It's like pouring salt on a snail. Are they for the Terrorist Surveillance Program now? Are the for a wall at the border and strict enforcement of immigration laws? Will they actively pursue the GWOT and not just talk about it? Are they all of a sudden fans of the Patriot Act? Not likely... Many of the items in the Democratic statement echo themes Kerry advanced in the 2004 presidential campaign, but party strategists believe that they are now in position to capitalize on public disenchantment with the war in Iraq and with declining confidence in Bush as a wartime leader. See recycling ideas that didn't work 2 years ago, and hoping they'll work now. Isn't the definition of insanity "repeating the same action and expecting a different outcome"? Maybe they're really just trying to prove they really are crazy... Among the proposals in the "Real Security" plan: eliminate bin Laden and his al-Qaeda terrorist network, implement in full the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, and work to make 2006 a year of "significant transition" in Iraq. Eliminate al Qaeda? Already doing that... Significant transition in Iraq? Already doing that (and if they're elected in November, how do they plan to make that a priority for 2006? Total withdrawal in December?)... Implement 9/11 commission in full. I'm pretty sure the full recommendations haven't been implemented, but I'd hazard a guess and say a good chunk of the important ones have been. On terrorism, the Democrats call for doubling the size of U.S. Special Forces and eliminating terrorist breeding grounds by "combating the economic, social and political conditions that allow extremism to thrive." More Special Forces are good, but pointless if you don't use them. And as for elimintating terrorist breeding grounds, did they miss the war in Afghanistan? Plus, how do they plan to combat "social conditions"? Allow the printing of Mohammed cartoons? Give them money, because poverty causes terrorism in their view? Democrats have been badly divided over Iraq. The new strategy urges Iraqis to assume responsibility for their own security, recommends "responsible redeployment" of U.S. forces without specifying a timetable and blames the administration for poor planning and manipulating prewar intelligence. Everything in there up to the blaming Bush part could have come directly from one of Dubya's speeches! And do we really need to get into prewar intelligence and the Iraq-al Qaeda connection again? The statement contains language -- voiced by Pelosi, Reid and others yesterday -- that the Democrats' security agenda will be both "tough and smart" in contrast to the "dangerous incompetence" the Bush administration has shown -- language that has been tested by the Democrats in anticipation of the fall campaign. Tough and smart? The Democrats? That's an oxymoron if I've ever heard one... So basically the Democrats' strategy? Same shit, different day. UPDATE @2:05pm: As for the smart part of all this, Expose the Left has this priceless pic. She's holding her "Real Security" sign upsidedown. Duh.