History Forum / General / General Topics / February 2004

I had made some whole wheat pancakes, and was eating these with omellete and
good old black Russian bread.

I started thinking about the current state of the Democratic party. Before I
go any further, let me state that I have encountered severe abuse, racial
insinuations, etc. from a lot of people on various NG's for opposing the
Iraq war as I thought the case made was incomplete, and something was wrong
somewhere. Well, nearly a year down the road, we hear of terms like
"massive intelligence failure", "did Bush lie ?", etc. I have also been a
long time critic of Bush's environmental policy of studied lies and
suppression of scientific truth. One might think it could all be sweet
music to my ears as a ray of hope opens up for the Democrats. But I often
find myself pensive at the table in the morning.

Whom did the Democrats nominate (I know its not over but Kerry is a
prohibitive favourite) ? Is is a straight shooter like the extreme
left-winger Kucinich or centrist Dean ? Or even a 4 star General whom fate
had handed to the Democrats on a platter ? Or for heaven's sake, even a
soft spoken conservative like Lieberman who has never wavered in his
convictions, with whom I strongly disagree one some issues (most notably
Iraq) ?

But no, we have the spectre of the candidate with the weakest record of the
initial field, representing nearly half of the American populace in the
election. A candidate whose own positions are the biggest contradiction to
his words.

Let us see.

An anti-Iraq war person who voted for the Iraq war.

An anti-NCLB person who voted for the NCLB.

A proponent of the position that Vietnam included war crimes who today poses
as a war hero. ( A war hero in a war he claims included genocide ? When did
that last happen in 20th century history ?)

A Senator who promises to fight special interests in Washington and yet has
taken more special interest money than any other Senator.

A strong environmentalist who voted against Kyoto and has been recently
reported telling his union backers that he intends to drill like never
before.

A supporter of gay rights who recently told NPR that he would support a ban
on gay marriage.

A proponent of "offering his gut" who has been absent for 72 % of his votes
in the Senate.

An opponent of the Patriot Act who not only voted for it but also wrote a
book in which some of the suggested measures are eerily similar to the
provisions of the Patriot Act.

A self-described supporter of a strong national defense who has tried to cut
the budget of the CIA repeatedly as well as against some weapon systems.
Much as one may correctly point out that many of these expensive systems
were cold war driven in a post cold war era, I find his vote against the B2
especially troubling. Its stealth technology actually makes it less
necessary for the US to maintain a large non-stealth air force. The
addition of smart weapons reduces civilian damage, which even the most
committed peacenik would grant, is a merciful and ethical way of conducting
war.

A person who assails his prospective opponent's tax policy and yet has voted
for some of it.

I am sure the list is longer than this.

Just when I had stopped making this list, I looked at the Hodgson Mill box
(my favourite brand). At the back, it says "Brown both sides, turning only
once". I felt ashamed about comparing Senator Kerry's flip flops with those
of my humble maple syrup laden pancakes.

You flip a pancake over only once.