Democrats on National Security

Well Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney started the debate off well. She attacked a Capitol Hill PD officer with her cell phone when he didn't recognize her and she refused to stop or answer questions. No word yet if she got the idea from Naomi Campbell. When Democrats say they're tough on security, I didn't think they meant beating up cops.

But the Dems have been rolling out their security platform and it is not without some merit. It is not without it's problems either. National Review has a breakdown:

• The initial explanation: "I went to Democrats.org to look at the plan. Sadly, it’s not a 'plan.' It’s a 'wish list.'"
On North Korea: "While the headlines are bold, the proposals are vague, mild, and not terribly different from the current policies." Some proposals are self-contradictory (like blaming Bush for not stifling dissent enough). Others show lots of carrot and stick with no intention of using the stick.
• On Iran: Give them an offer they can't rationally refuse, which assumes they are rational. Also they blame Bush for being too multilateral about Iran. Thats a new one, Bush isn't unilateral enough?
• On Russian nuclear stockpiles: This section also has proposals that sound like they came out of a Dilbert comic strip mocking empty business blather talk.
• On foreign oil dependence: Same old energy policy, but now it is dressed up as a national security policy. It still stresses conservation too much and alternatives not enough.

The last part is a bad sign. I'd rather not see the Democrats taking a wholistic approach to national security that includes sending federal agents around to see that my car's tires are inflated properly. Yes that could drop US oil consumption by 2.2% a year. Of course consumption grew by almost that much in 2005 so you aren't getting anywhere...