|
|
|
|
8/28/04 New (Democrat) Math I don't know whether Kerry is a "New Democrat" (he seems just like a plain old Democrat to me), and I never understood "New Math" (what was wrong with the old one?), but the latest DNC talking points, as faithfully parroted by the careless media, are clearly not based on any math I ever learned. The Census Bureau has released data on poverty in 2003, showing that the poverty rate increased from 12.1% in 2002 to 12.5% in 2003. The Democrats and many headlines and reports touting the data have been focusing on how many people are now living in poverty. They apparently use different math or a different calendar, since the last time I checked it was 2004, and the poverty rate in 2003 tells us very little about how many people are in poverty in 2004. They're trotting out the tired old "jobless recovery" line again, as if 2004 never happened. (You know, the year when Bush's tax cuts started paying dividends in the form of hundreds of thousands of jobs created almost every successive month of the year.) Perhaps data for 2003 is just a convenient opportunity for Democrats to pretend that 2004 never happened. I guess, if 2004 never happened, the same number of people would be in poverty today as were in 2003. Thus the Democrats' and media's math would not be suspect. If 2004 never happened, then all that job growth would not have happened. In short, if 2004 had never happened, it would be 2003 (or perhaps 2005--but no, let us not muddy the water)! Perhaps I am beginning to understand what it is to think like a Democrat: "If the international coalition Bush built up before attacking Iraq had been bigger and included more liberal socialist nations, then Bush would have done the right thing and built up an international coalition before attacking Iraq. If it hadn't been for Clinton bypassing the U.N. and building up a quasi-Republican non-international non-coalition to attack the Serbs for fighting terrorists in Kosovo, we Democrats would have an unblemished record of building bigger coalitions including more liberal socialist nations, which makes our international coalitions are just more international and more coalition...ary. "And don't tell us about economic growth. If the administrations of Clinton and Carter had never happened, we would have an unblemished record since the Ford administration of surrendering an economy to our Republican predecessors that was healthier than it was when we inherited it from our Republican forebears. The economy would, therefore, obviously be growing faster and better under a Democratic administration. "And if it weren't for the crazy Bush doctrine of pre-emptive war, the attacks of 9/11 would never have happened! If WWII had never happened, it would be clear that the Chamberlainian doctrine of pre-emptive appeasement is a superior form of diplomacy. After all, if you wait until your avowed enemies have the military capability to defeat you in war, no one will think of you as a bully and instead will see you as a victim, and be much more willing to bail you out while you are being slaughtered. Who would bother attacking a weak and powerless nation?" I guess the Democratic doctrine is the doctrine of pre-emptive denial of reality. Just pretend that all the economic news of the day proves that Republicans are destroying jobs, pretend that Democratic economic policies haven't been disastrous every time they've been tried outside of a depression or a war, pretend that Democrats have at any time since WWII fought a strategically beneficial war and won it, pretend that Democrats who consistently say things that are demonstrably false are honest, well-intentioned saints and Republicans who say things that cannot be proven false are liars. And as long as the media goes along, the polls will show that the more you obfuscate reality before the people, the less they know about the truth. And as long as it's a Democrat whose hiding the truth, that's a very good thing. Right. Modified: 09/10/2004 |
|
|
All Original Content (C) 2003, 2004, 2005 SoothSeeker.Com
SoothSeeker Welcomes your Comments at letters@soothseeker.com Report problems to webmaster@soothseeker.com
Hits on this site:
|