No Buts

Back to politics for a second, more post-election analysis seems to talk about the need to rethink the Democrat strategy. (See kausfiles. Scroll down to “kf is Stupid III”, I have yet to figure out how to trackback Mickey.) kf makes a similar point I have been trying to make; that he does not get this talk. This was not a major blow, just a lost election. As I argued below, the Democrats do not have to give up their ideals to win the next election.

But to reiterate, they do need to nominate a candidate that embraces “but”. They need more “Sister Souljah” moments. I have no problem voting for a Democrat and there are plenty of them that could get that vote. But nothing grates on me more then the way the party has institutionalized the lunatic fringe. Any party that allows Al Sharpton to be considered a serious candidate is not a serious party. Michael Moore in the president’s box at the convention – give me a break. The party has got to impose some limits on its acceptance of behavior, or at least ACT like it has that ability.

Banning the Declaration of Independence from the classroom because it refers to God? No limits at any time for any one to have an abortion? (And your tax dollars fund it to boot!) At what point can I NOT embrace the gay life style? Where are the limits?

This is some of what I want to hear from a Democratic presidential candidate:

The mere mention of God does not constitute “an establishment of religion.”

I support the right of a woman to choose, but with certain limits respecting the rights of her family (spouse or guardian) and the rights of the viable, unborn child.

All citizens, regardless of sexual orientation, are equal under the law, but marriage is a sacrament to be bestowed by religious institutions and they will not be compelled to do so.

I support the right of private groups, such as the Boy Scouts, to determine the qualifications of membership and participation. Further the use of public property by private groups, so long as all private groups have similar access, does not constitute government endorsement of the group.

I believe education is the foundation of a vibrant democracy and support the ability of parents to choose which schools their children attend.

I believe the creation of laws is the sole responsibility of the elected legislature, not the responsibility of the appointed judiciary.

Can this happen?