Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Political Calculus

Al-Gore-rithm, n, ‘A mathematical operation which is repeated many times until it converges to the desired result, especially in Florida.’ (The Grapevine)

Ok, no one would confuse Algore with a mathematician, though he is a famous calculator who during the 90s would say just about anything any time it could please a voting audience. Then he was the toady par excellence who actually believed he “invented” the Internet and served as the model for Love Story. Now he’s scary (“BUSH BETRAYED THIS COUNTRY!!”) and huge; there’s a guy who never passes up a cheeseburger. But he’s part of the Democratic Party calculus, a huge factor in the denominator.

Another huge divisor is Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (what’s with these rotund Democrats?) who recently struck a Capital policeman, and not for the first time. According to her lawyer, McKinney’s only offense was “being a member of Congress while black.” She must be an embarrassment to rational Democratic Party leaders (Is that an oxymoron?) and she’s a pill of poison. Without 85% support among blacks, the Democrats have no chance for the presidency, and the NAACP and the Reverends Sharpton and Jackson love Cynthia dearly.

So where are the Democratic numerators? Who's got the props? Hillary Clinton, she’s the King (er Queen) isn’t she? And who loves the Clintons best? Why Hollywood, of course. But wait, depending on whom you talk to in Hollywood these days, Hillary Clinton is either too conservative, too polarizing, too famous, too stiff or — keep this to yourself! — too sexy.

I particularly love that last one, attributable to Ms. Sharon Stone, whose recent sex thriller ("Basic Instinct 2") is bombing faster than Cynthia McKinney. I think Hillary's fantastic, Stone said. But I think it's too soon for Hillary to run. This may sound odd, but a woman should be past her sexuality when she runs. She still has sexual power, and I don't think people will accept that. It's too threatening. I do agree that Hill's is scary, but it’s not her sexiness that has me worried.

Back in Washington the mood has been sour lately so thoughtful Democrats provided a little levity by issuing their
National Security Strategy.

The Democratic Plan to Protect America and Restore Our Leadership in the World is three pages long including a cover page. However, it is repeated in Spanish. Impressive! (Remember Dukakis)

The first Democratic strategy element is to: Rebuild a state-of-the-art military by making the needed investments in equipment and manpower so that we can project power to protect America wherever and whenever necessary. Sounds good so far since it is exactly what the Republicans have been doing. But for Democrats it is a substantial change for the Party that voted against virtually every major weapons system (the M1 tank, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the Patriot missile, the B-2 bomber) that brought us victory in the Cold War, the Gulf War, and the march to Baghdad.

The Democrats pledge to Eliminate Osama bin Laden, destroy terrorist networks like al Qaida, finish the job in Afghanistan, and end the threat posed by the Taliban. Democrats pledge also to increase our human intelligence capabilities, again a welcome departure from past Democratic practices.

But the problem with the Democratic strategy is that it is no more than a set of goals, essentially the same as the Republican goals, but bereft of an actual strategy to achieve those goals. The Dem’s have nothing to offer in defense of the country or anything else; nothing, that is, but Al-Gore-rithms.


Anonymous Anonymous said...


The usual cheap shots at the Democrats, but it won't stop us from the enjoying the true excitement of the day, as we celebrate the demise of Tom Delay, finally drowning in his own sleaze (now there's a guy who enjoys Grecian 2000 on his cheeseburgers!)

It seems a little hard to blame the Dems for not having a comprehensive military strategy. Their pledges to eliminate Osama bin Laden, destroy terrorist networks, finish the job in Afghanistan and end the threat posed by the Taliban are exceedingly good ones. The tragedy of the current administration is that these were pledges it too made, but which were quickly subsumed by the obsession with invading Iraq.

Incidentally, are you sure the photo is of Dukakis, and not Bush at the time of his "Mission Accomplished" speech? The headgear's different, but the principal of scoring political points on the back of the military is the same.

And "victory in the march to Baghdad". Are you writing this into the annals of our military triumphs? It seems a little hollow right now.

This post reads like a guy lying in a cess-pit criticizing his wife for not combing her hair!


5:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My favorite algorerithm was when he was campaigning and trying to court union voters, and he made the statement that he fondly remembered his mother rocking him to sleep in her arms while singing the “Union Label” song; too bad that song came out when he was in his 20s. As opposed to bill clinton, who was once called (by a fellow democrat no less) “a particularly good liar,” gore is a particularly bad liar.


7:09 PM  
Blogger Bill Lama said...

I can blame the Democrats for not having any strategy at all. Have you read their pathetic document? Have you seen any elements of a strategy? "Pledges" are not strategy and the Dem pledges, refreshingly, are the same as the GOP pledges.

The Dems complain but offer no new ideas. Every once in a while a senile one like Murtha says we must withdraw immediately but the rest of the Dems run away from him as fast as possible, all the while praising his bravery.

Your Party is pathetic.

ps. Since you disagree with everything I say, why do you keep coming back? Surely it's an effort to read my lengthy pieces and to construct some semblance of a counter argument. Not that I'm complaining, just curious.

7:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm with Bill on this one. This is what democrats stand for...abortion on demand, allowing terrorists into our country, "global warming", "evolution", and losing the war in iraq. Mission was accomplished when Bush landed on the carrier! You democrats have no endurance. We're just breaking a sweat! We need to take back the classrooms (from the "scientists"), ensure that our security services take a closer look at our loony liberal friends, and spread democracy throughout the Middle East. What do you stand for, Tex? Yeah, that's what I thought.

8:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...



4:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Why do I return to your blog?

Because you address some important issues and your views are so extreme that they are often provide excellent LOL material. You also get a range of interesting responses, varying from the religious right nutcases to the very sensible. It makes for an entertaining half hour each week.

On average I probably disagree with about 75% of what you say.


9:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let's see Tex....Fighting the crusade against the terrorists is extreme? I suggest you reread your Bible. America is a Christian nation, and to suggest that we who walk in the light are extreme is dangerous. We are not nutcases, we are the majority. Once we get rid of the judicial activists, you and your ilk will then be judged by BIBILICAL law, not the the law of the relativists. Our security services will then keep close watch on you terrorist loving fiends and bring you to justice. Bill and I and the rest of the MAJORITY will finally realize the dream of a wholesome nation built on REAL VALUES. Jesus is our Savior, and if you cannot accept that, then maybe you should move to Iran.

11:05 AM  
Blogger Bill Lama said...

Tex, old friend,

If you agree with 25% of what I say that's great. But I am curious, what 25% is it? Where do we find common ground?

I'm afraid, I'm really afraid, when a lefty agrees with me.

3:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you really think it's worth the effort for anyone to talk about Democratic party strategy for November, when the Republicans are protected by audit-free electronic voting? They are going to rig the outcome in their favor.

The Democrats have no chance of retaking the house or the senate while there is no ability to verify election outcomes. If you want to talk about Rovian misdirection, this is the biggest one of all - while the Democrats get gleeful about polls, he sits back and gets ready to pick the next Supreme Court justices.

And when people do grumble about this in November, it will be way too late.

They do not need to rig every district. Just enough to make the small difference they need.

(Or do you think the Republican party can be trusted with the elections process?)

3:14 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home