to Main Page

Daniel W Kauffman Jr's Profile
Daniel W Kauffman Jr's Facebook profile
Create Your Badge



to Main Page
Opposing Views Heinlein Centennial web site This site is Gunny Approved
Heard the
Word of Blog?

Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.

Open Trackback Alliance

Check out our Frappr!

Patterico's Pledge

If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues,

I will not obey those rules.

« August 2005 »
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31

View blog reactions

Who Links Here

Free counter and web stats

eXTReMe Tracker

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by

Listed on BlogShares

Saturday, 27 August 2005
Americans Willing to Foot Bill for Larger Military
Topic: Iraq War

But NO Draft.

That is according to the August

Zogby REAL America Report.

I wish I could supply a source URL here, but it is in PDF form. I have access to it because I am a Zogby Pollee. Actually its a lot of fun and quite interesting to see some of the stranger questions

What Ice cream do you like? Do you eat eggs?

I also enjoy thinking about how I complicate their demographic distributions.

I am a Cherokee-Irish, Scots, Welsh, English, Platt Deutch, Jacksonian America.

I belong to a Union AND the Investor Class, and live in a City of over 100K. I place my Religious orientation as Spiritual but sometimes I wonder how they would handle it if I listed it as Pagan.

So it would appear that 2/3 of the US want spending INCREASED. A tad more want that to decrease the need to call up Reservists.

There are the usual distributions along Party lines.
This concept is supported by 88% of Republicans, 59% of Independents and 52% of Democrats. Leaving the ones who oppose it, way out on the extreme fringes of both orientations and the middle solidly for it as well.

While only half the Liberals support increased spending, two thirds of moderates and 90% of conservatives do.

The Solid South supports it by 71%, the Central/Great Lakes by 70%, while the East lags at 60%, y'al in the West should be offended, they do not even mention you.

No real impact by Religious outlook, with the exception that the Born Again are 81% for it, which is close to the number who think, "Rock and Roll is Here to Stay" one would think the Evangelicals would be Gospel and CW fans so I doubt there is any correlation . ;-)

Big Cities, the seat of power for the Democratic Party favor it least, big surprise that, but DO favor it by 62%, small cities 72%, 68% Suburbanites favor increased spending as do 71% of the Rural population.

Only 25% of Americans want the Draft back, more DEMOCRATS want it back than Republicans. All holds are barred in the case of an actual attack on US soil, in that scenario, 65% of Americans want it back 21% would not.

So it is pretty plain that any Political Figures who are thinking in Vietnam Era Peace Dividend terms, and bring the boys home so we can spend that money on Pork are heading for a steep precipice.

One wonders what they think a desire on the part of the American Public to INCREASE Defense Spending MEANS?

That we want to watch marches in pretty uniforms and listen to John Phillips Sousa?

Maybe it means that the majority of Americans really think we are at WAR. War with implacable foes who desire our total destruction and is global and amorphous in nature.

This might explain WHY as Zogby reports,
Democrats fail to gain traction from Bush slip...

The Washington Times - (8/19/2005)
Democrats hoped they would be scoring political points in this year's election cycle as a result of increasing terrorist violence in Iraq and skyrocketing gasoline prices that have combined to send President Bush's job-approval ratings plunging into the low 40s. But things are not turning out as they hoped. The Democrats are beset by internal division over the lack of an agenda, carping from liberals who say party leaders are not aggressive enough in challenging Mr. Bush's nomination of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to the Supreme Court, bitterness among abortion rights activists after criticism by Democratic leaders that forced them to pull a TV advertisement attacking Judge Roberts, and complaints from pollsters that they have no coherent message to take into the 2006 elections. Independent pollster John Zogby says that although Mr. Bush is not doing well in the polls, the Democrats aren't doing any better. "The Democrats aren't scoring points in terms of landing any significant punches on Bush or in terms of saying anything meaningful to the American people," Mr. Zogby said. In a slap at his party, Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg said earlier this month that his surveys show that "one of the biggest doubts about Democrats is that they don't stand for anything."

The Political Battle lines are drawn. It is indeed a New Era, those who think in the paradigms of the past generation will be left behind by the Wave of the Future. They have made attempts to wave the Bloody Flag of thirty years ago, but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. The American People seems not to be tempted by the Bait of an Illusory Peace Dividend, but the promise of Temporary Security. They want a Strong National Defense.
They want the Enemies of Freedom, Liberty and the Rights of the Individual Defeated, and they want Leaders who stand FOR something.

It's like the song.

You have to Stand for Something or You'll Fall for Anything.


Posted by ky/kentuckydan at 8:46 PM CDT
| Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Updated: Sunday, 3 June 2007 7:01 AM CDT

View Latest Entries