The Real Democratic Party

Power Line brought a fantastic piece in the Weekly Standard to my attention, it shows the real face of the Democrats. In this column Noemie Emery puts this events of the last year into perspective,
Republicans want to win wars and spread freedom; Democrats want to save their rear ends. Bush thinks freedom is better than terror and tyranny; Democrats think they themselves are better than Bush. In 2004, Bush made it clear he was willing to lose on the basis of his convictions--and won in spite or more likely because of this. Democrats had no convictions beyond the end goal of winning, and therefore quite properly lost.
When a party has a majority for so long like the Democrats have a couple of things happen, all of which we are seeing the effects of. First, they fail to recognize when power starts to slip away. Think back to the 1994 mid-term elections, the Republican groundswell that took over the House should have signaled to the donks that something was afoot. Instead they took heart in Clinton's reelection over a weak Republican candidate and ignored what was coming.

Second, as a result of the first they dismissed the Republican threat and continued to fight the same fights as always, running plays from the same book. All the while the unrecognized backbone of the party, longtime Democrats and everyday Americans in the South and Midwest were slowly slipping away from the party, and as this happened the liberal fringe groups and money started to take their place. Pretty soon the Democrats could be characterized as the party of eco-wackos, abortionists, and pro-tax semi-socialists. Needless to say this did not play well with John Q. Public. This in addition to abandoning the legislative process for the judicial system in pursuit of their agenda has left them weak and unable to fight back when it matters.

Third, when power has completely slipped from their they stubbornly refuse to adapt, and this is what Ms. Emery has pointed out in her column, this party cannot play the game anymore.
For mysterious reasons best known to themselves, a small diehard clique of old-line insurgents hiding out in the depths of the U.S. Senate decided to make confirmation hearings for Condoleezza Rice the venue of a bomb-throwing session, on the basis of two cherished liberal theories: one, that the war in Iraq is an utter catastrophe; and two, that while criticism of liberal nonwhites and women is always racist and sexist in nature, nonwhites and women who are right-wing or centrist are less than "authentic," and therefore deserve what they get. Thus, Margaret Carlson in the Los Angeles Times found nothing amiss in Boxer's calling Rice a liar and a lackey, but insisted Boxer's critics were somehow attacking all women.

This followed by weeks an unprecedented onslaught from liberal cartoonists and columnists, who compared Rice to a parrot, a house slave, Aunt Jemima (with one hell of a weight loss), and Prissy in Gone With the Wind.

They pick the wrong battles, and they lose them. Sen. Boxer used her attacks to raise funds for her PAC, and the other Dems got plenty of face time on the nightly news, but what did it accomplish. I am sure that the Democrats of the '60's who fought so hard in the civil rights movement were proud of their party members standing on the floor of the Senate and opposing the appointment of an extremely well qualified black female Secretary of State. They just don't get it. And did you hear a defense coming from NOW or the NAACP? Not that I am aware of.

The Democrats have to fix this problem for their own sake, yet I think we won't see it until it is too late. I will not be surprised if their party goes into an long-term exile from power and has to reshape and craft their basic beliefs, because this incarnation to the Democratic is dead.

TrackBack URL for this post:


What do you think?

Comment Policy

<< Home