Thursday, January 21, 2010
The must-read post of the morning is this anonymous letter from a veteran Democratic Senate staffer (trustworthy, insofar as the writer is known to the credible lefty blogger Josh Marshall). Here's the nut graph, but read the whole thing for its apparently sincere version of the last 20 years in Congress from the perspective of a Democratic insider.
The worst is that I can't help but feel like the main emotion people in the caucus are feeling is relief at this turn of events. Now they have a ready excuse for not getting anything done. While I always thought we had the better ideas but the weaker messaging, it feels like somewhere along the line Members internalized a belief that we actually have weaker ideas. They're afraid to actually implement them and face the judgement of the voters. That's the scariest dynamic and what makes me think this will all come crashing down around us in November.
Or read it for the schadenfreude. That works, too.
"I came to DC, from a far superior climate and quality of life, because I wanted to save the world." This sets up the whole piece. He sounds like he thinks he's a crusader telling a war story. Nothing positive about the other side, 'fighting valiantly to stop them,' everything the enemy did was evil, and everything we did was for the cause of good 'that would help people.' A complete ideologue.
"midnight basketball" as a crime prevention measure (something with is widely approved of today and is completely noncontroversial)." Hahaha!
Concerning John Kerry: "We nominated a war hero." Are you fucking serious?
Concerning the Stimulus: "In the face of a historic economic crisis, Democrats negotiated against themselves at the outset and subsequently yielded to absurd demands from self-described "moderates" to trim the package to a clearly inadequate level." The freakishly massive and mis-directed stimulus obviously failed because it wasn't big enough.
"This is my life and I simply can't answer the fundamental question: "what do Democrats stand for?"
"Just in case I'm wrong and there is more good to do yet."
What a deluded, self-righteous fool. No wonder Washington is a dysfunctional political warzone.
What do Democrats stand for? Exactly.
Show the American people the Grand Design, explain in detail what it is that you want to accomplish and let them vote on it. Stop with the smoke and mirrors, we're onto the scams, stop trying to pass tax bills as "health care reform" or "cap and trade". Let us vote on the Grand Design itself.
"I came to DC, from a far superior climate and quality of life, because I wanted to save the world." -- There's your problem, right there.
Most of us out here in Flyover Country don't want you to "save the world." We want you to govern wisely and well. Until you abandon your messianic dreams and do the job that you and your bosses in Congress were actually given, you will continue to be an Enemy of Freedom and Liberty.
Start TRUSTING THE PEOPLE-- I mean really trusting the people, by returning to them a measure of the liberty you have worked diligently for so long to steal from them, and you may yet save your sorry political ass.
But you see the people are stupid, and too easily swayed by the clever lies of Republicans. Americans need to accept government from the benevolent educated class, just as Plato suggested. Nate Silver practically comes right out and says this today, and it's practically the editorial position of the NYT. The Democrat party leadership feels this way too, just ask Barney Frank. Filbert, can't you just learn to trust your betters?!
The stimulus bill in the spring showed us what was coming. In the face of a historic economic crisis, Democrats negotiated against themselves at the outset and subsequently yielded to absurd demands from self-described "moderates" to trim the package to a clearly inadequate level. No one made any rational argument about why a lower level was better.
Whatever this staffer is smoking, it must be powerful stuff. By far the largest pent-up wish list of pork ever assembled at one time by any governmnet in quite probably the history of the world, and it was "clearly inadequate?"
What can you say?
I'm reading and thinking that here we have a fairly senior and tenured democrat believer who has just been told that the vacancy he wanted has been filled by a person from the hood who is a distant friend of Michelle's.
The Obama turn to the jobs problem involves demonizing anyone who can produce wealth as a prelude to winning the 2010 elections. Even normally balance Juan Wiliams thinks this is a reasonable approach.