More on the Democrat Alternative

Or, more specifically, the lack thereof.

First, Michael Barone, writing at RealClearPolitics[*1] :

Their pit bull attacks on Bush, their constant references to the AbuGhraib abuses as if they were typical, their opposition to letting theNSA listen to conversations from al-Qaida suspects to persons in theUnited States and to letting interrogators of unlawful combatants usetechniques that have helped us foil those plotting violence against us– these amount to a strategy of rule or ruin. You must let us rulethis country, or we won’t regard it as “our” country anymore. So muchfor the first person plural.

Next, writing in the Washington Post[*2] , Sebastian Mallaby:

I’m not saying that Republicans are at all better, and of courseelections breed some policy timidity. But the infuriating thing aboutthe Democrats is that, just a decade ago, they knew how to empathizewith voters’ economic insecurities without collapsing intoirresponsibility; they combined attractively progressive socialpolicies with sensible pro-market fiscal responsibility. Now many inthe party have lost interest in this necessary balance. If theDemocrats win a measure of power next month, it’s hard to see what theywill do with it.

Hat tip:  Instapundit[*3] .

We’re all quite well aware (painfully, tediously aware, reminded day after day, hour after hour) of what Democrats are against.  What are you for, other than raw political power?