Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats Just Don't Get It - (can they survive this blockbuster killer new exposť article?)

Posted on 05/12/2005 9:12:21 PM PDT by CHARLITE

The Democrats made huge errors in tactics and judgment during the last presidential campaign. But they thought that the patronizing contempt they held – and continue to hold – for the electorate would go unnoticed.

Heady with the multimillions pouring into their coffers, with a monopoly on an old media that historically and unfailingly back leftists, and by mistaking their candidate's verbal contortions for substantive policy, they deluded themselves into thinking that the Oval office – as well as the Congress, Senate and a good many governorships – were theirs for the taking.

What they failed to grasp was that the public was watching and listening to:

Every one of their contradictory statements.

Every rehearsed and endlessly regurgitated DNC talking point.

Every transparent attempt to transform a bellicosely anti-war candidate into a war hero.

Every phony so-called documentary.

Every strategically scheduled anti-incumbent TV "news" show.

Every allusion against the incumbent embedded in TV situation "comedies."

Every so-called "objective" anti-incumbent book.

Every stacked-with-partisans panel.

Every attempt to camouflage their candidate's do-nothing 20-year record in the senate.

Every pretense of the contender's leadership skills.

Every negative sentiment and doomsday scenario they spewed forth. The net result, of course, was that 2,500 out of 3,000 counties in our country voted for the incumbent and returned President George W. Bush to office.

Doomed to Repeat the Mistakes of the Past

Wounded, depressed and in a deep state of rage at their humiliating losses, the Democrats – and their compatriots in the equally injured, demoralized and angry old media – decided to do what they always do: NOT look at the facts but look at themselves!

"We couldn't have been wrong!" they, in essence, said to themselves. "Our tactics, our strategy, our philosophy rule!" But they didn't.

The Democrats simply couldn't accept that the optimistic, "dumb" Yale- and Harvard-educated president whose visionary policies had just liberated 50 million people had handed them a defeat that, in magnitude, equaled the plainspoken haberdasher Harry Truman's trouncing of the elitist Thomas Dewey in 1948.

And where did they lay the blame? With the dumb electorate, of course! The same electorate that was watching and listening to them then – and is watching and listening to them now.

‘No' Rules!

And so, taking a page from the wife of their other nemesis, Ronald Reagan, Democrats decided on a new strategy: Just Say No!

Using the limits of what appears to be their limited imaginations, Democrats – with the last-gasp help of the old media – have said "no" to virtually every major initiative President Bush has put forth since taking the reins of office for the second time.

No to private accounts for Social Security reform.

No to the president's appellate-court nominees.

No to the president's choice for U.N. ambassador, John Bolton, of whom the has said: "Last time we checked, being a tough boss was actually a good quality in a bureaucrat – especially if the bureaucrat gets paid to stare down the representatives of terrorist states and despotic regimes."

No to dropping the bogus "ethics" charges against House Majority Leader Tom DeLay vis-a-vis his trip to Korea 10 years ago, although nearly two dozen Democrats, so far, have admitted to identical travel habits.

No to acknowledging – with any sense of joy or patriotism – the "domino effect" of the president's foreign policy, which has succeeded in spreading freedom and democracy throughout the Middle East and the Baltic states.

No to applauding the president's steadfastness in reinforcing that the "axis of evil" he named in his first term indeed comprises not only the dictators he has already toppled but also the mullahs in Iran and the madman in North Korea. Kennedy, Reid, Dean, Kerry and Pelosi on Parade

Day after day, week after week, month after month – in fact, since the day she ascended to her lofty position of House minority leader – Nancy Pelosi has become the Queen of No, not only embodying the endemic negativity of her fellow party members but also demonstrating that she has no idea what to do about any issue, either foreign or domestic.

While feminists like her once stood for affirming equality and righting social wrongs, Pelosi's rise to power has become the arch example of everything that is wrong with this wrong-headed woman and her ilk.

Then there is Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, who, speaking recently to a group of high school juniors, called the President of the United States a "loser." And this from a guy who has the temerity to say that John Bolton is diplomatically challenged!

But Pelosi and Reid are not alone in their carping, complaining, obstructionist tactics, negative niggling and character assassinations.

The public has also been treated to the predictable fulminations of Ted Kennedy and his escalating and floridly irrational tirades; the self-important but hollow cavils of Joseph Biden; a pathetic "the voters were disenfranchised" John Kerry, who is still running around the country sowing sour grapes; and the ever-hostile ranting of DNC chairman Howard Dean (who has raised a measly $13 million in funds since assuming his position, compared to more than twice that amount raised by Republicans).

And that is not to omit the sheep that bleat after them or, for that matter, Hillary Clinton, whose contempt for the "little people" is so unparalleled that she actually believes her verbal pyrotechnics and slick policy shifts will fool the electorate into believing that the far-left woman who tried her best to bring socialized medicine to America has magically been transformed into a palatable "moderate" politician.

Who was it who said "When pigs fly!"

Cheerleaders for Defeat

As the TV host and columnist Pat Sajak writes in "Rooting Against America," "A distasteful glee emanates from the Left upon the arrival of any bad news from the Middle East ... [and] as bad news is welcomed as an indictment of the President and his policies, good news (and there has been plenty) must be minimized or ignored. It's one thing to oppose an Administration's foreign policy, but it's another to publicly gloat over and appear to smugly enjoy any of its setbacks."

But gloat and appear to smugly enjoy any setbacks is exactly what the Democrats – again, abetted by the old media – do routinely.

And in painting the stark contrast between Republicans and Democrats, Sajak adds, "There may have been widespread resistance to America's entry into World War II, but once we were in it, there wasn't much doubt about whom Americans were pulling for."

Which is why Sajak concludes: "Democrats continue to puzzle over their losses. They blame them on people who are too addlebrained to know they are voting against their own interests. Then they go to these same voters they've trashed and ask for their support. They seem to revel in any American setbacks overseas and yet protest when they are characterized as ‘weak' on defense issues. They stereotype Christians but cry foul when they are accused of not sharing their ‘values.'"

Shedding a Tear for the Real Losers

Writer Joe Mariani, ( says he has sympathy for liberals. He cites how depressed they must be over the massive and metastasizing scandals in their favorite "one-world" cesspool, the United Nations: Oil-for-Food, forced prostitution by U.N. "peacekeepers" in Bosnia, sex-for-aid in Darfur, "and outright rape perpetrated by U.N. workers throughout Africa (150 reports in Congo alone!)"

The Democrats have been "thwarted at every turn over the last several years," Mariani says. "Every prediction they've made, every hope they've held has been broken on the Rocks of Reality, sliced by the Razor of Logic, and smashed by the, uh, Potato Masher of Common Sense."

And contrary to the belief of liberals that the goal of toppling dictators and spreading democracy was and remains misguided, Mariani reminds his readers that "all major coalition nations that have stood for reelection since Iraq have been returned to office but one – President Bush won in America, Prime Minister Howard in Australia, Prime Minister Berlusconi in Italy [and] Prime Minister Tony Blair in Great Britain." Only Spain, which capitulated to terrorists, is not included.

Mariani adds it all up: "Score: Coalition leaders 4, terrorists and Liberals 1."

Looking for Help in All the Wrong Places

Jeremiah (5:21) said: "Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes and see not; which have ears, and hear not." And Matthew (13:13) said, "Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand."

Unfortunately, the party that has fought to ban public prayer, wants to banish the Ten Commandments from our institutions, and supports left-wing judicial activists who embrace abortion and euthanasia will never – except during campaign season – look to the Bible to gain the insight, wisdom and humility it needs to regain the public's trust or to have a chance of winning elections in 2006 and 2008.

What Democrats have failed to learn since they lost power over 11 years ago is that the electorate they consider so stupid has eyes that can see and ears that can hear; that the voters in our nation have been watching and listening carefully, and that the votes they've cast speak volumes about their preferences, beliefs, philosophies and desires.

And they're still at it – watching and listening to all the Democrat obstructionists, all the negativity, all the vituperative name-calling, and the shocking dearth of ideas.

At this point, the Democrats are all figurative Rumpelstiltskins, the little man who was so enraged when the queen guessed his name correctly that he stomped his right foot so deeply into the ground that the dirt reached his waist, and when he tried to extricate it, he seized his left foot with both hands and tore himself in two.

The Democrats are fond of saying that President Bush has divided our country. In truth, they have split themselves in two, with the true moderates of the party leaving in droves (as they did during the last election), and the extremists that remain looking for help – and potential votes – in all the wrong places.

Joan Swirsky, a New York-based journalist and author, can be reached at

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 109th; agenda; antibush; bushvictory; democrats; elections; empty; failures; harryreid; issues; losers; lostdems; media; message; nancypelosi; sourgrapes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 05/12/2005 9:12:21 PM PDT by CHARLITE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]


Spending over 500 million dollars in a losing effort..


2 posted on 05/12/2005 9:14:02 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... The War on Terrorism is the ultimate 'faith-based' initiative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


3 posted on 05/12/2005 9:21:37 PM PDT by Jaysun (No matter how hot she is, some man, somewhere, is tired of her sh*t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


The Democrats are fond of saying that President Bush has divided our country.
Two sides to this one -- Bush has proliferated the division (balkanization) of America between illegal Mexicans and real American citizens...but when it comes to the Dems saying the above, they always accuse their opponents of doing EXACTLY WHAT THEY DO. One of the first pages right out of the old lame Dem playbook.

4 posted on 05/12/2005 9:39:07 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThreePuttinDude; Beth528; Billthedrill; HonestConservative; SMARTY; CyberAnt; ...

"Extremists" won the election

5 posted on 05/12/2005 9:40:11 PM PDT by CHARLITE (Not gonna be happy until the Hillster is sent packing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Yes the Dems are in meltdown. But it should not lead to complacency. The traditionally hardest political test is coming up fast - the off year congressional elections in a president's second term. We need several things for them to go well, besides opponents fit to be tied.

(1) the war. It is the number 1 issue still. But having already won an election on it, Bush is not going to get additional credit for it, not really. He is now expected to simply win. Make it so, that is a requirement. All is going well, just don't stumble anywhere on this one.

(2) the picked issues of today that the pols are all fighting over. That means confirmations fights and social security. Frankly, these are deep inside baseball to most of the electorate.

(2a) The SS stuff is good policy that needs to be done. But don't expect political reward for it in the short term. It will be a draw on the politics, a win on policy but one that takes a long time to pay off.

(2b) As for judges, they also matter in the long run and are worth fighting hard over. But pols are much more exercised about their friends getting jobs than average Americans are. The base will cheer if you fight for judges, that is all it can bring in.

(3) the populist issues that the pols are paying enough attention to, that will really decide the upcoming elections. This is where we need to do a lot more. There are exactly two of these, and not liking one or the other of them won't help. It is the people's concerns, not the pols, that matter on these.

(3a) First are energy prices, oil and especially gas at the pump. They are absurdly high, enough so that they are effecting the stock market and the real economy. They are a serious tax, felt and resented. If the oil price is $35 next November, the Republicans are in good shape. If it is $60, they aren't.

(3b) Second is the host of issues around immigration and trade. The populist rage on the subject is building, and pointing toward unsound policies. Serious things have to be done, that combined sound policy with a real acknowledgement of public concern.

And I say this as a free trader in economics. The politics of the issue are simply explosive at this point, since the populist position has been consistently denied articulation by pols of both parties for eons. To start with, there is a widespread sense that our laws are a laughingstock on the matter, that what happens on the ground is not controlled even by elites, let alone by the people, but is simply out of control.

The election will not turn on the rage of the left, that is impotent. But the rage of ordinary people about gas prices and the apparent contempt held for their populist views on trade economy and illegal immigration is not impotent. I am not suggestion protection, it is a perennial political loser. But fair trade noises have to be made, and the more strategically obnoxious states we deal with should go to the woodshed, visibly.

And some sense of law abidingness about immigration law is needed desperately. Long run support for assimilationist immigration depends on public support, which in turn depends on orderliness, lawfulness, respect and yes graditude, that are all lacking today.

What all of these issues have in common is simple patriotism and dislike for elites sneering at it as lowbrow. That is the poison of the political day, and the left is drinking deep. To draw the line between Republicans and Dems brightly, Republicans have to avoid any similar whiff of hoity-toity.

One man's advice. Don't get cocky, pay attention to the people. They are the ones that fire political parties, not the lame media or lamer hard left activist crowd.

6 posted on 05/12/2005 9:45:31 PM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


We need to remove more of them from the Congress and replace them with true God fearing American Constitutionalist!

7 posted on 05/12/2005 10:01:47 PM PDT by 26lemoncharlie ('Cuntas haereses tu sola interemisti in universo mundo!')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JasonC

Regarding 3(a); define "absurdly high"

8 posted on 05/12/2005 10:08:39 PM PDT by Fledermaus (Rats theme song: "Whatever it is...I'm AGAINST it!!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE; Neets; Darksheare; scott0347; timpad; Conspiracy Guy; NYC GOP Chick; MeekOneGOP; ...

great article

9 posted on 05/13/2005 1:26:22 AM PDT by King Prout (blast and char it among fetid buzzard guts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

10 posted on 05/13/2005 2:30:03 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP (There is only one GOOD 'RAT: one that has been voted OUT of POWER !! Straight ticket GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

Thanks for the ping there!

11 posted on 05/13/2005 3:14:48 AM PDT by expatguy (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


I agree with this writer in principle, but I'm not quite so optimistic. The RATS and the MSM are still able to steal elections and block judicial appointments.

12 posted on 05/13/2005 3:17:03 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Wow!! This is an excellent and devastating analysis of the state of the two political parties in America today.

Joan, take two gold stars and go to the head of the class.

13 posted on 05/13/2005 3:22:04 AM PDT by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
When prices double without any shortage, stockpiles rising the entire time, new supply continually outstriping demand - on the back of political concerns that do not pan out and ongoing speculative fever - then prices get absurdly high. $1.50 gas and $35 oil might be justified by the weak dollar and modest amounts of new demand, worldwide. $2.50 gas and $55 oil are not.
14 posted on 05/13/2005 5:13:16 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
Too many administration types are off in deep wonk-land assessing only policy. Sometimes you have to notice a major issue, see your own need to defend on it and the opponents' weaknesses, and go for the political jugular.

The left is deeply committed to utterly nonsensical energy policies by their alliance with radical green activists and big government socialist ideas. If the administration is associated with high oil prices, it will pay a political price. If the left is, that price will be split. If the administration is credited with lowering oil prices through forceful energy policies, over screaming opposition from the left, then the left will get all the blame for them having been high, and the people will be delighted that the admininstration ignored those screams and lowered them.

Here is how you go about doing that. Declare a stable supply of oil at reasonable prices a critical strategic need of the US at this time, and a definite enemy target for terrorist and political disruption in time of actual war. Say that extreme measures are required as a matter of national security to remove this weapon from the enemy arsenal and defeat his strategy. Override all objections and legal niceties in the way of the remainder of this program. Legislate what you need to and can, but do not allow a single measure to fail to be implimented by any degree of political opposition. Run right over them, in implimentation, calling them names and questioning their patriotism the entire time.

Then the actual measures are - drill in Alaska. Expediate all new power plant construction. Allow new coal plants, new nuke plants. Grant "regulatory waivers" all over the place to make it so. Waive fines due.

Sell oil from the stockpile, saying the treasury is not helped by paying $50 for oil it expects to stockpile in any desired quantities at prices a third to half that within 2-3 years. Cut national gasoline taxes 25 cents a gallon (how they will howl! Let them howl. Put a mike with an amplifier next to their howling).

Negotiate long term fixed price contracts with Nigeria and Mexico to deliver on the order of 1 million barrels a day for $40 for ten years; justify it by the need to reduce wild price shock swings in their emerging economies. (If they don't want the deals, their lose). Let the Dems oppose you; call them insensitive to minorities and the less fortunate.

Let OPEC know, quietly, not to shame them but as a promise and threat, that any attempt to cut production will lead to the immediate seizure of all OPEC flagged vessels on the high seas, and their oil will not move again without paying a "transit tax" to the US Navy. And assets in the US will be seized. If they keep production as it is, no changes, they can operate as normally and keep all their profits.

Court a knock down drag out fight with the greens over their nonsense energy red tape, run right over them when they try to fight, lower prices dramatically as a result, blame them for having kept them so high for so long. Let the left enter the by-election in a towering rage strapped to the mast of radical environmentalism, baying for US defeat to Save the World, receive the appreciation of happy motorists paying $1.50 a gallon again, and murder the Dems at the polls.

Policy wonkiness will take care of itself in the aftermath. Don't sweat the details.

15 posted on 05/13/2005 7:56:18 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JasonC
Some finer points to add - pass a tax credit for conversions of oil heaters to gas, a few hundred dollars, whether people itemize or not. One time deal for a few years only. Will help reduce demand in the NE and shift energy use to more efficient fuels.

The left will counterattack the oil companies and try to marry us to them. Resist by going to the oil execs and telling them all the recent profit increases have to go into new refining capacity and new exploration efforts. The alternative is not a big share buyback, it is a windfall profits tax, so get on board or get run over.

16 posted on 05/13/2005 9:07:14 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JasonC
Thanks for your thoughts, Jason. Really very profound thinking. Are you a professional in the petroleum markets?

Char :)

17 posted on 05/13/2005 9:16:35 AM PDT by CHARLITE (Not gonna be happy until the Hillster is sent packing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JasonC
issues around immigration and trade. The populist rage on the subject is building, and pointing toward unsound policies.

Define "Unsound policies." The populist perspective is to close the borders, fine and/or jail employers of illegals and send illegals home. Those are hardly "unsound policies."

18 posted on 05/13/2005 9:20:13 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (First you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women (HJ Simpson))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Are you long?

Isn't this fun? Pointless, but entertaining.

19 posted on 05/13/2005 10:56:39 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Outstanding article!!!!!!!!!!!!

20 posted on 05/13/2005 10:59:39 AM PDT by Gator113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson