Tag: Democrats


Why the Democratic Party Doesn’t Represent Most Democrats

The Democratic Leadership over the last several years has bailed on everything that its members supposedly hold dear, especially in terms of their distaste for corporatism, power mongering, and fear tactics.

What Democrats Believe

Based on lots of conversations with those who consider themselves “liberal,” I’ve come to the conclusion that most people who consider themselves “liberal” (or “progressive” or “Democrat”) really don’t buy into a lot of the nonsense that many on the right accuse them of: Most Democrats I know are not communists; they’re not supporters of tyrannical government; and they’re certainly not all peaceniks.

However, many of them do, like many of us, instinctively vote for assholes based on the letter beside their name. Their assumption (and ours) is that if they have that letter, then there are some basic beliefs that they hold dear and fight for, and AT LEAST they’ll do those things and we don’t have to worry about the evil schmucks from that OTHER party getting in there and screwing things up.

So, since there are a plethora of conservative Republicans out there who are probably tired of hearing from rebels that they’re fighting a losing battle trying to make the GOP the party of limited and enumerated Constitutional government, I felt it important to turn our attention to Democrats/progressives/liberals….at least for a while..

So Conservatives/Republicans/Tea partiers…you know who you are. Talk amongst yourselves.

Are they gone? Great.

OK, look, we don’t agree on a lot, but let’s just put our differences in ideology aside just for a minute and talk about what YOU believe. If I’m to understand the progressive narrative (and let me tell you…we all know it…media bias and all.)

a) Greedy corporations are a huge part of our problem, in that they don’t pay enough taxes, don’t pay their employees enough, and seek to rip off the American populace in general through their corrupt connections and raw power.

b) Meanwhile, some of the worst are the oil, development, and defense companies who seek to not only rip off the American populace like any Big Corporation bully (see above), but they also deign to use the American military as a tool to boost their stocks through military deployments and securing cheap oil by bombing brown people all over the world.

(Am I right, so far?)

c) Meanwhile, the Republicans in Congress seek to distract us. They speak of “freedom” but what they really want to do is simply keep us all focused on “economic growth” (see above Corporations) while the working class suffers under their negligence in looking at the “big picture” of the economy and how it effects REAL PEOPLE.

Obviously there are fair points to counter all of this. But since we’ve put aside our disagreements, let’s just focus on what the Democratic leadership (meaning, the Obama Administration, and Democrats in Congress) are doing about these things.

What Elected Democrats Do

One could list…a very long list…all the ways in which the Democratic Party has been not only negligent, but complicit, in all of these areas. “Green Energy” corporations getting kickbacks based on political contributions. Car dealerships getting special treatment during the car bailouts based on political connections. Don’t get me started on who gets the most money from health insurance and financial firms. Financial regulatory reform? “Too Big to Fail?” It’s pretty a steep climb to wash the Democratic Party’s hands of corporatism and corruption.

But what I want to focus is on is JUST THE LAST 6 MONTHS, and only the THREE BIGGEST betrayals of the Democratic Party to the things that YOU really care about. These are what I would consider the MOST egregious, the most blatant, and the most disappointing to those who believe in and equity and good and sound government:

It’s not worth it…

I recently had a discussion with a fellow traveler in the “limited government” movement on Facebook about a particular aspect of the upcoming battle for the White House in 2012.President Obama boarding Air Force One

We should face this topic head on, because I think it strikes at the core, the heart, the essence, the raison d’etre of the Conservative movement and why we should think about things critically, not just politically, but philosophically and indeed pragmatically.

The particular aspect that I’m referring to is the concept of: “Anyone but Obama”

First, let me say that, as everyone knows, I’m not a fan of Obama.  I feel that in his policies, his stances, his beliefs, and his actions he represents everything in the area of public administration and Government that I stand against, and the mere fact that he’s in the White House believing what he believes should leave all of us with restless nights.

Second, since I haven’t posted on it explicitly it may or may not be surprising that I am very underwhelmed (not overwhelmed, and not even…whelmed) by the current field of candidates rounding out the GOP field of 2012 contenders.  My hope was that Daniels would get into the race so at least we’d see the POSSIBILITY of the right kind of candidate (and no, the fact that Bush likes him does not automatically cause me to dislike him), even though I was not thoroughly convinced that when it came platform plank and debate time that he would have fulfilled all of my dreamy expectations…the potential was there.

Nevertheless, the conversation with my friend started with this basic premise put forth by her:

“I don’t care who the GOP puts forth; as long as they can beat Obama.”

To cut to the chase, when we got more specific, Newt Gingrich was brought up as a shining example (by me) of THE most Progressive Republican in the field, and she would STILL support him.

My question…why?

Because he wouldn’t put Communists in the administration.

OK…so what? So that he could put people who AREN’T communists but still push big government policies in the administration.

Well it’ll give us some time to regroup and at least “live”?

Live? So the communists are going to kill us if we have Obama for four more years? Live for what? Live with the knowledge that a) half the limited government movement is going to go back to sleep, and b) the other half is going to have to fight people who AREN’T obvious communists when they continue to overreach their Constitutional boundaries?

And what are we fighting for anyway? Are we fighting for a “kinder gentler” Toquevillian type of tyranny, or are we fighting to finally rid ourselves of tyranny.  All you have to do is ask yourself this:

If you look forward 20 years from now, which situation would have been worse: Barack Obama being president for 8 years, or Newt Gingrich being President for 8 years, followed by some other nimby pamby Progressive (from either party) being President for another 8.

Because let me tell you…if Barack Obama is President for 8 years, this country will be BEGGING for some SERIOUS damn “change”.

This is not a battle that will be won in November of 2012; it will be won EVERY DAY for the next 20 years.  That battle will be EVEN HARDER with a Progressive Republican in the White House than it is with Obama in the White House.  It will be much easier to fight it with an administration that continues to overstep and misstep and is being fought tooth and nail by States that are turning increasingly against him.  Half those battle will STOP with a Republican in the White House (for a variety of very obvious reasons), so we BETTER make sure if we’re going to put an “R” in there, it’s the right guy.

Now all that being said, I DO believe we can replace Obama with someone who will fight for limited Government.  I DO believe it would be PREFERABLE for Obama to be defeated after his first term so that stories cannot be invented about his legacy (Noone pretends that Jimmy Carter was some great savior, but they can pretend that Clinton was…why? Because he won his second term. People like winners.)  So make no mistake, I want Obama defeated. But he HAS to be defeated by limited government ideas, not “compassionate conservatism”…or our Republic may be lost forever.

Don’t give up.

Blame game may be irrelevant, but it should at least be accurate.

To save Johnny the trouble of navigating the perilous waters (no pun intended) of embedding a YouTube Video.

This is very disturbing, but illustrates volumes. Watch it to the very end and see President Clinton admit the obvious:

Hopefully, as Johnny put it, this will mean the beginning of the end of Barack Obama, given that Frank Raines is one of his top financial advisors.

Democrats need a lesson in humility and respect.

These are a couple of excellent articles (here and here, registration required and recommended) from Clive Crook at the Financial Times.  He points out how obviously the Liberal Elite and the Democratic party hold in low regard the very people they purportedly are so ardently representing.  A couple of excerpts:

Democrats speak up for the less prosperous; they have well-intentioned policies to help them; they are disturbed by inequality, and want to do something about it. Their concern is real and admirable. The trouble is, they lack respect for the objects of their solicitude. Their sympathy comes mixed with disdain, and even contempt.

Democrats regard their policies as self-evidently in the interests of the US working and middle classes. Yet those wide segments of US society keep helping to elect Republican presidents. How is one to account for this? Are those people idiots? Frankly, yes – or so many liberals are driven to conclude. Either that or bigots, clinging to guns, God and white supremacy; or else pathetic dupes, ever at the disposal of Republican strategists. If they only had the brains to vote in their interests, Democrats think, the party would never be out of power. But again and again, the Republicans tell their lies, and those stupid damned voters buy it.


Efforts to smear the governor proceed at a frantic pace. My guess would be that there are now more journalists on assignment in Alaska than bothered to turn up for the Republican convention in St Paul, sifting through dustbins, interrogating Palin family acquaintances (extra credit for those with a grievance) and subjecting Ms Palin’s expenses claims to a fanatical scrutiny which I dare say their own record-keeping, or that of most senators, might not withstand.

Of course, they will find things. They may even find something important. But the sheer swarming zeal for trivial malfeasance and family embarrassments is rapidly raising the bar for impropriety. I think that many voters – and not just committed Republicans – find this whole spectacle disgusting, so on top of everything else Ms Palin is now getting a sympathy vote.

I, like the author, can’t help but laugh at the trap that the Democrats have walked into here.  It’s very simply a microcosm and expose on their attitudes in general.  It’s particularly amazing to me when I have conversations with supporters of Obama (you know who you are) who accuse McCain and Palin (and all their EVIL minions) of deliberately and consistently manipulating and fooling the American people into following them.  As if their beliefs have absolutely no value in and of themselves, it’s simply the Republican machine grabbing power.  You can’t simply disagree with the Liberal viewpoint, you simply must be too dense and stupid to grasp it.  There’s an astounding sense of intellectual snobbery matched by a decided lack of intellectual depth that continually boggles the mind.

The further irony (as Mr. Crook adeptly points out) is that Obama himself would never abide by this nonsense.  If his latest book is any indication, he seeths at the concept of insulting an entire group of people based on their beliefs.  And even though his campaign has eventually made its way into a predictable and depressing class warfare stump speech, I believe as the author does that his initial reaction to Palin was the right one, and it was a sincere one.  Unfortunately, the undeniable support he receives from the media is not matched by a solid control of it, and he couldn’t stop them from descending on Wasila like a pack of wild Banshees trying to find crazy preachers and 2nd grade classmates of Palin who would talk bad about her.

Obama the Uniter.

This doesn’t really surprise me, because I read “Audacity of Hope.”  In the book it is very evident that Obama has made his Christian affiliation based on convenience and politics (he essentially says it).  It didn’t really disturb me too much, but I’ve made it evident before (can’t find the post–but I’m sure I did…really) that it wasn’t my favorite thing about him.

But to be a member of this Church goes a little beyond the pail.

As someone who has recently (admittedly cautiously–and so far unsuccessfully) confronted the racist tendencies of his own Church back home, it disturbs me that someone with as good of a chance to be President as Senator Obama would be a member of a Church with so much racist dogma that it would give Lewis Farrakhan an award for “Person of the Year.”

My good friend, Jimmy, constantly tells me:  Satan is a divider.  Anyone who not only visits, talks to, acknowledges, but is a member of such a divisive and racist congregation is going to have a hard time convincing me that he’s really a uniter.

You see, I’m beginning to think that Senator Obama thought that if he wrote this cool book, that people would just stop paying attention and trust him.  The problem I suppose is that the book made many START to pay attention to him.  And that hasn’t been good for him.

There’s only one question for me really:

If a high-profile Presidential Candidate belonged to or closely affiliated with a WHITE racialist Church, would we hear about in the press?

And the corollary: And what if they were a pro-choice, Universal Health Care-supporting, anti-war, Democrat that belonged to a WHITE racialist Church?

In other words:  Is Obama getting a free pass on this relationship because he’s a Democrat or because he’s Black?  Or both?