Brooks-Beinart

Wingnut Times columnist David Brooks cites Peter Beinart's, "A Fighting Faith: An Argument for a New Liberalism" in the New Republic as one of the most important essays of the post-election period. Explaining his choice,Brooks writes:

[Beinart] argues that Democrats lost this election because they have not developed a modern version of liberal anti-communism. They have no strategy to defeat Islamic totalitarianism: "When liberals talk about America's new era, the discussion is largely negative - against the Iraq war, against restrictions on civil liberties, against America's worsening reputation in the world."

Beinart says that Democratic "hards" must reclaim their party from the MoveOn-type "softs." He's started a debate on the left that mirrors the one Fukuyama and Krauthammer are having on the right.

Here's my question: If Democrats have no strategy, that presumes Republicans do. What would that be? Bombing countries that had no connection to 9/11 and sinking a large portion of our active duty and reserve troops in a war without end while bin Laden continues to make more videos than Britney Spears?

Perhaps I could suggest a campaign theme for Democrats in 2006. Repeat after me, "Where is bin Laden Mr. President?"