Wednesday, January 27, 2010

The Problem with Democrats

After the 2008 elections, in which Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats were swept into power in landslide victories, there was much talk of a new era of liberal domination in Washington. Just one year later. Obama's approval rating hovers at just over 50%, the party's lost Ted Kennedy's Massachusetts Senate seat to an unknown Republican, and there's now talk of a 1994 Gingrich-like Republican revolution in this year's November midterm elections. I can't think of anything to say but...what the fuck happened?

What's happened is that, true to form, Democrats can't seem to get out of their own way. Unlike their counterparts on the right, the party leadership, from Obama on down the Congressional line, is comprised of a bunch of spineless, visionless, disorganized, pseudo-intellectual sailors sinking in a sea of their own delusion and denial. If you don't believe me, just consider this: Obama's health-care reform bill is just about dead all because one new Republican Senator, Scott Brown, is headed to DC. According to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and other party leaders, no super-majority, no reform. That's it. Despite owning the White House, a 78 seat edge in the House and a 59-41 majority in the Senate, health-care is dead because of Sen. Phil A. Buster, Scott Brown. I mean, how lame can Democrats be? When the GOP feared losing Texas, it rushed into action and former House Leader Tom DeLay redrew the lines to give Republicans more votes in order to win. Democrats lose one Senate seat and its whole agenda is thrown into a coma.

Here's another example of why Democrats seem destined for failure. Consider what one leftie on Facebook wrote today about the recent Massachusetts special election: "Anyone who doesn't really work to get a job like that doesn't deserve and she (Martha Coakley) sat this one out. Brown, on the other hand, despite the President's foolish comments about his truck, worked his buns off." And more: "Hey hang on just a second before you all go off on us MA folks. I voted for Obama b/c we needed change & action, & I live in MA & proudly voted for Scott Brown last week b/c I believe again we need change & action!"

For Pete's sake, how much friggin' change do you need? How about voting for change and then giving those elected enough damn time to actually effect change before you toss 'em aside for more change? I'm no Obama groupie, and I've certainly done my fair share of criticizing him and the party. But he's not a miracle worker, and deserves more than one year to undue to massive damage caused this country during eight years of the Bush administration.

I'm sorry, but this "let's change again and vote for Brown" logic is shockingly convoluted. This isn't about the man's work ethic. Its about his politics, and where he stands on the key issues, and whether or not they align with yours. You don't vote for people because they work hard, or because someone else didn't. This is exactly the kind of misguided thinking and priorities that's wrong with Democrats and why they find it hard to obtain and hold power. While Republicans like to win elections, Democrats like to send messages. Call me crazy, but I'll vote any day for a lazy-ass pro-choice, pro-gay-marriage, pro-health-care-reform, pro-gun-control, peace-loving, Wall Street reformin' Democrat than a hard workin' Republican with the exact opposite viewpoints.

I'm tired of Democrats sending messages, like the one they sent back in 2000 with their votes for Ralph Nader. The message then and remains, "Dear George Bush, welcome to the White House for eight years." The problem with Democrats is that they over-analyze and over-intellectualize everything to the point of defeat. And, they lack focus, unity and resolve. And when battling a ruthless opposition like the GOP, this is a recipe for disaster.

In this day and age, given the highly-charged partisan climate and what's at stake, if anyone puts work ethic before positions, they should be ashamed of themselves. People should be more concerned that Mr. Hard-Working Brown is now headed to D.C. to work hard at killing everything Liberals stand for.

On another note, we could use your help at The The Adrienne Shelly Foundation. We're a 501 c 3 tax-exempt, non-profit organization dedicated in my late wife's honor, and with a simple mission: supporting women filmmakers. Adrienne, who wrote, directed and starred in the hit film WAITRESS, was killed November 1, 2006. Through the Foundation, her commitment to filmmaking lives on. We've established scholarships, grants, finishing funds, screenwriting fellowships and living stipends at NYU's Tisch School of the Arts/Kanbar Institute of Film; Columbia University; American Film Institute; Women in Film; IFP; the Nantucket Film Festival; the Tribeca Film Institute; and the Sundance Institute. Your generous contribution will go a long way towards helping us achieve this very important mission. Please click here to make a donation. Thank you.


Unknown said...

Funny how it didn't seem to bother the righties that Brown is pro-choice on abortion. I guess that's some preogress!

Realist said...

We've had our differences over health care reform, but I have to say that if I lived in Massachusetts, I would have been tempted to vote for Brown. I would have talked myself out of it because I cannot forgive the GOP for destroying the America I grew up in and replacing it with a cheap B-movie version of the Third Reich.

But to return to Brown, he ran against many of the same items that I have real concerns about: Obama's coddling of the banks while allowing blue collar employment to wither, then imposing an expensive insurance plan which will only enhance industry profits (with taxpayer dollars if the "beneficiaries" can't afford the premiums) while Americans are (to this day) still losing jobs in record numbers. These points had much to do with Brown's victory. These points would have made Coakley work for her victory had she been an ace campaigner, but because she was not she made things that much simpler for Brown.

Those points aside, just what has Obama done that directly benefits the people of Main Street? Several people who voted for Brown raised the point that their were unemployed for extended periods, or were upside down in their mortgages. I haven't seen enough job creation to hold that up to the light of justification.

But I can comment on the mortgage problem. A friend of mine spent literally a year and a day getting her mortgage redone. She isn't very pleased that it took so long and required a great deal of communication with the banks involved and the various government agencies, and if she didn't feel about Republicans as I do, she would be very tempted to vote Republican this fall.

Obama still has time to change, but it has to begin with the State of the Union speech. As I write this, it hasn't started yet. I don't know what Obama's going to say. But if I don't like what I hear, then he's on his own as far as I'm concerned. I can only forgive so much. Not learning from one's repeated mistakes is one such reason why I will abandon Obama to his fate, so if he goes the wrong ways in the speech, it's because he hasn't learned a thing.

We as a nation have little to lose if we let Obama go now that the Supreme Court ended democracy in America, so I don't want to hear how I'm willing to abandon the nation to the GOP. They have already taken it. Obama cannot win re-election now even if he deserved it.

Anonymous said...

I think the reason the Dems are mad at the Dems in Washington is that Obama ran on certain platforms and when he got into office tossed them out the window and continued Bush's policies. Regarding Massachusetts, the Dems didn't go vote in huge numbers for Brown, they just didn't vote at all because why bother? For one thing, they've already got universal health care so they don't have a dog in that fight. On top of that, they did their part in the last election, we all did, we voted for Obama for hope and change, and didn't get what was bargained for (transparency, and the issues surrounding the war are the first things that spring to mind). And the Senate Dems have an entire arsenal of weapons to use but refuse to go to the armory. They'd rather lose the war than be criticized for not being bipartisan enough. They don't understand that this is a war, not a dinner party, and you have to fight to win. And about these mortgages, isn't the way it works is that these mortgages were sold and resold and resold and split up and repackaged and then when people started defaulting on them didn't the government pay the owners of the repackaged mortgages 100 cents on the dollar by funneling it through AIG? Isn't that what the whole Geithner mess is about? Well doesn't that mean that the mortgages have been paid off now by us the taxpayers on the back-end so the ultimate owner of the mortgages now has his money? So why are people even bothering to pay their mortgages anymore? They're already paid off!!! They got paid off on the back end, by us!! Say, for example, you are a kid and you buy a bike on credit at the local bike store. Say that for your birthday your dad goes into the store and pays off your bike. Do you still make payments to the bike store? NO, it was paid off by someone else! And the lousy communications strategy - the Dems speak as though EVERYBODY has a college education and a reasonable attention span. No, that's not the way you speak to voters - short bumper-sticker slogans are all the masses appear to be able to understand. "Yes We Can" won. "I Like Ike" won. And there has to be an enemy - why not say we have to do wind and solar power because "we don't need no stinkin' A-Rab oil" (for example). That is something the masses would understand and the oil companies would find hard to counter. Sorry to go on and on. Best wishes, Andy.

Anonymous said...

Mortgage problems: Many folks I know were told to stop making payments. Unless you are behind, there is no help. So after a few months (I think 3) then you can get help. I know folks who walked away from their homes only to by them back at a much lower price.

Obama can't win??? The Repubs do not have such great numbers either. But Obama has to give those of us who took him to the dance a reason to come out and vote again. Finally, the Repubs better have the answers, because the mood of the country will not stand for their craziness.