Democrats Love to Lose Wars

The Democrats' attitude towards war is that it's a needless expense that drains money from domestic vote buying, I mean valid domestic needs. Part of the reason they can get away with this is that there were no "recriminations'" after the Vietnam defeat. Congressional Democrats cut off all of the money for supplying the South Vietnamese military while they were being attacked in 1975. This betrayal lead directly to the fall of Saigon and the infamous helicopter evacuation of the American Embassy there. While 500,000 Vietnamese fled the communists in leaky boats, and tens of thousands died in Vietnam and millions died in Cambodia, the left was proclaiming that there should be no recriminations. Now the Democrats are repeating their war losing strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Political Hack in Chief bugged out of Iraq as quickly as possible. He is also on his way out of Afghanistan. Once defeat is assured, the Democrats can argue that defense spending is futile, because it doesn't win wars. This argument justifies cuts in military spending which can enable satisfying more domestic needs to buy more votes. The right should learn that there should be the maximum amount of recriminations possible from this scandalous behavior. Swift boating selected candidates is not enough retribution to stop this liberal/progressive/Democrat strategy. 

Vote Early, Vote Often With No ID

The debates on voter ID seem ridiculous to me.   As a long time observer of Chicago politics, it seems absurd for anyone to argue that vote fraud is not a problem. Here "Vote early, vote often" is a cliche.  Liberals often say requiring ID to vote is racist.  Are they trying to make the US safe for vote fraud? If not, are Liberals willing to have heavy federal supervision of inner city voting places where the fraud by political machines is often rampant? Just one example: Harold Washington was elected mayor of Chicago by a lot of Indiana voters who crossed state lines to register at friends' addresses.

Sell Federal Land, Balance the Budget

The way to open the West is to sell off federal land and use the proceeds to balance the budget. Compromise with liberals on spending as long as any spending in excess of revenue will be paid for by land sales which will specifically include timber and mineral rights. This would pay off in lots of ways. Sale proceeds would balance the budget. Liberals would have to make a tradeoff between spending and preventing more land sales. Once the land was in private hands, it would become much more productive than it is now under the Bureau of Land Management or the Forest Service. It would create jobs when the land is developed. It also will sound reasonable to everyone who is not a mean green.

Buy Your Own Birth Control

Whether women can control themselves or not, contraception is cheap. Why can't whoever wants to use it buy it for themselves? Why can't people who believe in everyone having access to contraception create charities to fund it for the small percentage of women who can't afford it? Refusing to force employers to purchase contraception is not the same as outlawing contraception! /Sarc on/ Why not make a law to require any man having sex with a women to pay for the contraception? It would at least place the cost on the same people who were enjoying the benefits. /Sarc off/  The reaction to this post said marriage forces the men to pay for contraception, among other things.