Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Careful what you wish for

The Democrats took the House last night, and are ever-so-slightly favored to prevail in the Senate as well. I have mixed feelings about the results, as I would have probably preferred split control (I'm all about government gridlock.) If there was any doubt that I'd vote for John McCain in 2008, a fully Democratic congress will remove the last vestige of uncertainty.

The big positive, I hope, is that Bush and Republicans take a message from this election. Stop being the party of corrupt knuckle-draggers, and get back to being the party of small government and lower taxes. Stop focusing on a spiteful right-wing social agenda and start focusing on a right-wing fiscal agenda. While I have little faith in the Democrats to actually accomplish anything with their newfound power, I am (perhaps naively) hoping that this loss will cause the GOP to have a "come to Jesus" moment, where they re-examine their hateful, uncompromising, and miserably failing social platform of the last six years.

But anyway, Dems, while you're in office, let's try to undo some of the damage caused by the Bushies. Here are some ideas for your first 100 days in power:


  • Reinstate the ban on assault weapons, now. I know that deer can be pretty tricky to shoot with high-powered, merely semi-automatic rifles, but a small increase in the deer population is a risk I'm willing to take if it means that criminals won't have AK-47s.
  • Pass a balanced budget bill. Government needs to be smaller.
  • Fund stem cell research. Science > mysticism.
  • Extend (or make permanent) the Bush tax cuts. In six years, he did a single thing right. Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
  • Come up with a new plan for Iraq. I'm not expert enough to know what the right path should be, but I'm smart enough to know that the current path we're on is leading to disaster. Nuke the place, set a timetable to pull out our troops, divide it into three countries...I don't know, but do something different.


Most of all, try to remember this: You got elected because the Bushies strayed too far from the center. You have a chance to claim the center for yourselves now and keep the Republicans on the margins. If you reject that opportunity, and fall back on your liberal leftist leanings, you're going to be on the sidelines, again, in two short years.

Speaking of leftists, Vermont elected a socialist to the Senate. Nice work, idiots. There's a place for intellectual midgets like you, but it's not in this country. Go join the rest of your socialist buddies in the unemployment lines in France. But quit living in my country, the one that's given you the wealth and free time to sip latte in your BMW as you rail against the horrible injustices of free markets.

California voters, at least, did the right thing and rejected both communist propositions on their ballot. Maybe I'll stop referring to them as a communist state now, and welcome them back into the U.S.A. (in place of Vermont, of course.)

3 Comments:

At 10:50 AM, Blogger sparrowlegs said...

Will the ban on assault weapons do anything? This a real question. I'm wondering if there are statistics that support this ban.

Freakonomics documented no correlation between weapon bans and violent crime rates.

In related news: I don't see why anyone would need an assault weapon. Well, anyone who isn't defending their religious cult.

 
At 12:08 PM, Blogger Sweet Tea said...

Actually, there's no evidence that the 1994 assault weapons ban lowered violent crime rates. That particular piece of legislation defined assault weapons narrowly and incompletely, so that gun manufacturers could make cosmetic modifications and sell equally powerful weapons that bypassed the ban.

So perhaps it was disingenuous for me to phrase it this way: 'reinstate the assault weapons ban' when really what I want is a much more comprehensive and effective measure of gun control to reduce the number and lethality of guns available to criminals who would like to kill me and my children.

The law itself was ineffective. But allowing it to expire, without replacing it with a more effective law, was irresponsible of Bush. It's something that should be corrected.

 
At 1:20 PM, Anonymous Jennnnnnn said...

Actually, I find this whole discussion difficult to pursue because of the misinformation of what "violent crime" actual is. Violent crime is not solely about gun crime. Weapon bans definitely reduce the number of homicides by guns.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home