Thomas Sowell column in the Spokesman-Review Nov. 8, 2006
Democrats hiding extreme agenda ß
There is no real question that Democrats are more skilled
at politics than the Republicans are. Democrats are more
articulate, not to say glib, and they know how to stick together.
You don't see individual Democrats in the Senate going off
to do their own thing in concert with the opposition and against the
interest of their own party, as Sen. John McCain has done with
so-called "campaign finance reform" co-sponsored with ultra-liberal
Senator Russ Feingold, and as he attempted to do on immigration with
liberal icon Ted Kennedy.
Democrats know better than to betray their base of
supporters - welfare state beneficiaries, the teachers' unions,
environmental zealots, the ACLU and tort lawyers - the way the elder
President Bush betrayed his supporters who relied on his "no new taxes"
pledge and the way the current President Bush betrayed them by
attempting to create amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants.
Republicans have too often forgotten the old-time
admonition to the girl going to a party, to always remember to "dance
with the one who brung you."
Even some Republicans have said privately that the
Democrats have the edge in playing the game of politics. Given
the greater political shrewdness of the Democrats and the overwhelming
bias of the media in their favor, it is remarkable that Republicans
have had any political success at all.
That the Republicans are still a viable party is one
measure of how far the Democrats' policies and values differ from those
of most Americans.
Nowhere is that difference greater than when it comes to
defending the American people against crime at home and against
military and terrorist threats from abroad. Liberal Democrats -
which is to say, most Democratic politicians and all of their leaders -
are ready to try almost any "alternatives to incarceration" of
criminals and almost any alternative to maintaining military strength
as a deterrent to enemy nations.
More is involved than an unwillingness to face unpleasant
facts of life. There is 'a coherent ideology behind these positions.
That ideology goes back more than two centuries - and has failed in
country after country over those centuries. But it is an ideology
that sounds good and flatters the vanity of those who consider
themselves part of a wise and compassionate elite.
Republicans have too eclectic a collection of beliefs to
beat the Democrats on a purely ideological basis. Moreover, the
liberal vision is a more attractive vision because it assumes away many
of the painful even brutal aspects of human life especially the fatal
dangers of relying on words when dealing with people who only respect
force, that is backed up by a willingness to use it.
Facts are the only real antidote to a seductive
vision. But facts do not "speak for themselves." Somebody has to
articulate those facts and explain their implications. The liberal
media will certainly not do it and too often the Republicans do it
badly or not at all.
How many people are aware that the black-white income
difference and the male-female income difference both narrowed during
the 1980's - that is, during the Reagan administration? Democrats
talked a better game on both fronts and to this day are widely regarded
as the best hope, if not. the only hope, for minorities and women.
How many people are aware that crime rates soared
when liberal ideas became part' of the criminal justice system in the
1960s and only began declining in the 1980s after more criminals were
put behind bars and kept there a longer time?
Democrats have learned to avoid admitting to being
liberals and this year are running a number of moderate candidates.
If these new moderate candidates are elected arid
give the Democrats control of Congress, that control will be exercised
by senior Democrats who will hold leadership positions - and all of
them are liberal extremists, whether people like Nancy Pelosi in the
House Or Ted Kennedy and John Kerry in the Senate.
Getting people to vote for moderates, in order to
put extremists in power, may be the newest and biggest voter fraud.
Thomas Sowell's column is distributed by Creators Syndicate.
Letter to Editor
From: Bryan Bremner <CurlewKeep@rcabletv.com>
Subject: Letter to Editor: Thomas Sowell Column
I give you permission to print this letter in the Spokesman-Review.
A Little Honesty Would Help
I have seldom read anything so filled with half-truths,
outright lies, slanted reporting, hate, and prejudicial adjectives as
the column by Thomas Sowell, on Nov. 8. My allowed 200 words
don’t match his 700 words so I can’t refute each statement,
but perhaps I can comment on two.
“Given … the overwhelming bias of the media
in their (Democrats) favor.” Really? Where? For the
last 20-30 years (or more) wealthy conservatives have been buying media
outlets and funding think tanks to pay for columnists to push their
conservative agenda. If you want to cheA weekly column penned by
AWB President Don BrunellA weekly column penned by AWB President Don
BrunellA weekly column penned by AWB President Don BrunellA weekly
column penned by AWB President Don BrunellA weekly column penned by AWB
President Don Brunellck the political bias of
media examine the political contributions of those who make the highest
salaries and have the most stock in such companies.
Sowell states that crime rates soared when liberal ideas
controlled the criminal justice system and fell when harsher sentences
were given out. Funny, this isn’t quite what noted
economist Steven J. Levitt found. His research showed that only
three factors had the effect of decreasing the crime rate; these were
an increase in prisons, additional police, and changes in the crack and
other drug markets. No other factors could be shown to have any
effect on crime rates.
Please, ask your columnists to check their facts and be civil before you print their words.
Phone (509) 775-0162
1 Bremner Lane
Republic, WA 99166