Tuesday, February 20, 2007

I must have a fever

While it doesn't do much to mitigate his other radical stands, there is apparently at least one reason to find Al Gore tolerable.

UPDATE [2/20/2007 - 19:07]: Link was broken, now fixed.


Aakash said...

A lot of the positioning (by both Democrats and Republicans) is staked based upon whether their party, or the opposing party, is in the White House... (something I've discussed several times before) - and also, by what the popular (or unpopular) position is, during the current time.

Democrats are non anti-war, and Republicans are not pro-war... In most cases, it is the other way around. But depending on who is executing the action often determines the public position that many leaders - and candidates! - will take. And when said policies become exceptionally unpopular, it is even easier for said public figures to take their strategic stances.

RFTR said...

1)I think the phrase "non anti-war" is a nonsense phrase and particularly worthless in this context.

2)Of course there have been points in history where the Democrats were for war and the Republicans were against it—how you can pretend to extrapolate this into a "most cases" scenario is beyond me. Your link certainly doesn't appear to present any supporting evidence.

3)For the past 35-40 years (i.e. since Vietnam), it has been pretty obvious that the Democratic Party is uncomfortable with armed conflict except in some very specific cases; certainly it is more uncomfortable with armed conflict than the Republican Party. In this historical context, it is irrelevant what the Democrats thought about war under Wilson—unless you also want to say that the Democratic Party in most cases defends slavery in the South.

In other words, party positions change, and right now the Democrats are the anti-war party—like it or not.

Furthermore, I have no idea what your comment has to do with the content of my post.

For one thing, it is not comparing Republicans and Democrats, it is a look at the various positions of key Democrats, shedding a favorable light on one of them.

So, would you like to clarify your point?