1. One need not be a Nostradamus. It is only logical, if they intentd to win elections: the Democrats need to re-establish themselves as an American party. The forerunner may be Maher, who regularly points out the insanity in the current Democrats. But this week, David Boies really sets the correct tone.
Check out his article in the WSJ.
2. "Partisanship on Iran Is Dangerous for America
Every past president since Bill Clinton, Republican and Democrat alike, has declared that Iran couldn’t be permitted to develop nuclear weapons. Not one acted to prevent it. Every president since Ronald Reagan has condemned Iran’s role in terrorism against American citizens, interests and allies. Not one acted to stop it. Instead each president left his successor with a more dangerous Iran and a more complicated threat to address.
If he hadn’t acted, his successor would have been left with an even more dangerous choice than his predecessors left him.
(Is it) simply to permit religious madmen who swear “death to America” and back up their threats with terrorism to secure nuclear weapons and the capability to deliver them. The scope and scale of Iran’s response show how much its military capabilities have progressed, and how dangerous it would have been to permit them to increase further.
4. I also understand—and deplore—the fringes of both parties that apparently hate Israel and Jews so much that they oppose any action to neutralize Israel’s enemies.
5. What is harder to understand, and particularly troubling for our country, is opposition rooted simply in antipathy toward Mr. Trump himself."
It is time for the great re-birth of the Democrat Party.
Check out his article in the WSJ.
2. "Partisanship on Iran Is Dangerous for America
Trump is doing the right thing for the U.S., and we Democrats should judge the war on the merits.
Every past president since Bill Clinton, Republican and Democrat alike, has declared that Iran couldn’t be permitted to develop nuclear weapons. Not one acted to prevent it. Every president since Ronald Reagan has condemned Iran’s role in terrorism against American citizens, interests and allies. Not one acted to stop it. Instead each president left his successor with a more dangerous Iran and a more complicated threat to address.
3. In the face of Iran’s refusal to forswear nuclear weapons and evidence that it was rapidly increasing the number, sophistication and range of its missiles, Mr. Trump began the current military campaign.If he hadn’t acted, his successor would have been left with an even more dangerous choice than his predecessors left him.
(Is it) simply to permit religious madmen who swear “death to America” and back up their threats with terrorism to secure nuclear weapons and the capability to deliver them. The scope and scale of Iran’s response show how much its military capabilities have progressed, and how dangerous it would have been to permit them to increase further.
4. I also understand—and deplore—the fringes of both parties that apparently hate Israel and Jews so much that they oppose any action to neutralize Israel’s enemies.
5. What is harder to understand, and particularly troubling for our country, is opposition rooted simply in antipathy toward Mr. Trump himself."
It is time for the great re-birth of the Democrat Party.
