Blue on Blue: Comments on the Blue Force Blog
by Armed Liberal on February 6, 2006 03:56 PM

I've been watching the 'Blue Force' blog for a while, figuring "hey, maybe theres an ally here."

I'm not thrilled so far, because the emphasis seems to be less on how to develop a genuine Democratic set of policies around the conflict we're in (the one that's broader than the war in Iraq), than in figuring out 'framing' exercises for Democratic candidates that inoculate them against the issue - i.e. the Iraq and Afghanistan vets running for office as Democrats.

John Kerry was a genuine soldier - whether you think he was a hero or not, he certainly served credibly - and his handlers made the same mistake, thinking that a service record alone would wrap a Democratic lack of coherent policy in a uniform and make it look strong.

That's kind of like putting a big spoiler on an economy car and thinking that makes it a race car.

What's needed is an independent effort by Democrats to think through and create a set of policies to address the challenges we're facing today. These policies need to go past the Jimmy Carter apologetics, to some understanding of how we address the simple fact that people in the world are perfectly prepared to use force and violence against us.

What's also needed - both from a policy perspective, and a politics one - is to make it clear that these policies are being identified and proposed not for partisan advantage, but because we think they are the best policies to follow.

Which is why I was so deeply disappointed today to see this post:

Unnecessary Worrying About Iran's Nukes Submitted by Jason Sigger on Mon, 02/06/2006 - 3:50am. One might understand the right wing's concern about Iran's nuclear weapons and the Bush administration's rhetoric about not being able to accept a nuclear-armed Iran, but the question has to be asked. Why are the left-wing bloggers at Washington Monthly and Daily Kos echoing the administration's lines?

Boy, this is wrong on just so many levels.

On a basic one, let me propose this: if the core of Democratic foreign policy and military policy is to be devised to oppose Bush, and make him look bad - as opposed to opposing our enemies and making them look bad - the right-wing point that the progressives see Bush as a bigger enemy than Bin laden is just proved again. By the same people who have taken on themselves the nominal responsibility of creating a national-security policy for the Democratic Party.

I'm working on a longer post about just such a policy, but somehow I don't think I'll be quite as interested in what these guys have to say about it. I know commenter Chris won't be happy about that...


« ok, I'm done now

Direct Link | Comments (10) | TrackBacks (0) | Printer-Friendly | E-mail This!