The Democratic Party, Liberalism, and November 2010

I am having a great time watching and listening to liberal commentators and friends who seem to be in a free fall of despair as they begin to face the reality of the impending mid-term elections. Much like a rabid animal, they have begun to snap at invisible demons that surround them. Of course, blaming Bush for all of our country's ailments remains a perennial favorite but; they've now added the GOP and the Tea Party to their list. Noticeably absent for blame are the actions of Congress under the tutelage of Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid since 2006, as well as, the efforts of President Obama and his staff since 2008. Seems to me like a convenient justification for avoiding a bit of self analysis.

Unemployment remained at or near 5% for seven out of eight years during the presidency of George W. Bush. The democrats took control of congress in 2006 and the economy went belly up in 2007. Is this a coincidence or, may the Democrats bear some of the blame for our economic calamity? I sure didn't see much willingness from Reid or Pelosi to work with the Bush administration during their final two years in office. Now, all we hear from the Left is that the Republicans are merely the party of "no" and have been nothing more than obstructionists. Their accusations come across as hypocritical. It is dumbfounding to me that they cannot accept responsibility for the ineffectiveness of the democratically led Congress and presidency. They try to protect their position by saying that Bush had so screwed things up that there is simply no way that this triumvirate of Democrat leaders could repair the damage in two years. Newsflash: The American public isn't buying into their excuse.

At the risk of plagiarism, let me provide those on the Left with an "Inconvenient Truth". Under their watch the economy has worsened. Government has expanded and the lot of the common man has shown no improvement. According to the Obama team, unemployment would cap out at 8%. Guess what, it still hovers at close to 10%. It was recently disclosed by a non-partisanship group that 1 in 7 Americans now live below the poverty line. Home foreclosures are at an all time high. Government stimulus dollars have been largely ineffectual. For example, Los Angeles received close to 8.5 million dollars in federal aid and yet, they've created only 55 jobs. The Democrats have been in power for 4 years in Congress and 2 years in the White House. The floodlight of reality has exposed for all to see that their policies have done almost nothing to pull us out of this recession. You can run but you cannot hide from the trail of useless breadcrumbs that you've left in your wake.

Americans are a notoriously restless people and we do not quietly accept failure. Thanks to the failures of Reid, Pelosi, and President Obama, we've seen the rise of the Tea Party and the ascendancy of the increasingly boisterous Independent voter. The Democratic Party has had more than enough time to get things right and they simply haven't gotten it done so, much like the Republicans in 2006, many of them will be seeking new employment this November. Our democratic republic might be a messy process but, it is strangely effectual at making things right. We are a nation of the people, by the people, and for the people so, if you are left of center stop complaining if your ideas have started to fall on deaf ears for we've already seen enough. If you are to the right of center and should you get elected, don't become over confident because the masses despise it when our nation drifts too far in either ideological direction.

De Oppresso Liber

Liberalism in 2010

I spent a good part of the Labor Day weekend trading political jibes with my sister in law. Like me, she is on Facebook and she often uses that platform to proudly proclaim her admiration of liberal political philosophies. She believes in her heart that she is progressive, open minded, and socially inclusive yet, when challenged, her actions betray the very essence of her supposed belief system. She becomes arrogant, aggressive, and often condescending with her replies to challenges from a conservative point of view. Therein lies the problem with the "hypothetical" view of open armed liberalism. In reality, the staunch liberal is no more open to opposing philosophies than their opponent which they often label as the "close minded" conservative. I've spent the last few days contemplating our miniature war of words and I've come to a couple of conclusions.

Liberals are running scared. As the elections of November 2010 come ever closer, the ardent believers in liberalism are speaking out in a shotgun like fashion by spraying unfounded accusations against the American public. They are doing so because they cannot understand why their point of view has not been met with total agreement. They truly believe that President Obama was elected with an open ended mandate to change the social landscape of our nation. Such a belief is erroneous. Barack Obama was elected to fix the economy and after 20 months we've traveled nowhere so it is not surprising that the public is pissed off. We didn't elect him to tackle health care. We wanted jobs, not social re-engineering. We wanted leadership, not political vacillation. The impending recession worried people in 2008 and guess what, we're still worried. Contrary to the editorial observations of the Atlanta Constitution's Cynthia Tucker, we're not frightened by the "browning" of America. It seems to me that a high percentage of liberals are the primary individuals who are totally trapped within their own sphere of racial isolationism. The people that I know who are opposed to the President's ideas never even think about these philosophies in relation to the color of his skin. We want spending reined in, some idea of what our long term income tax rates will be, and a sense that the President and Congress are more interested in country than self. Unfortunately, none of these are evident at this time. These beliefs are not liberal or conservative in nature; they are merely human responses to the world around us. Liberals would do well to consider reality before they condemn nonbelievers like me.

President Obama was elected with 53% of the popular vote. He earned a mandate from the American public to fix our economic plight. His administration gave us an imprecise stimulus package and a promise that unemployment would not exceed 8%. Last time I checked, unemployment still hovers at just under 10%. Under the leadership of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the Congress has given President Obama almost every penny he has asked for. Yes my liberal friends, I did say that Congress gave President Obama almost every penny he has asked for. I find it convenient that liberals remain enamored with the whole idea of blaming George W. Bush for all of our country's ailments. Of course he must bear some of the blame but as the old saying goes, it takes two to tangle. This Congress took power in 2006 thus, they bear much of the blame for our current economic predicament. You see, our constitution is a prickly thorn for either side of the political spectrum. The Democrats, and liberals in general would have us believe that President Bush bears sole responsibility for this recession. Section 9, Article I, of the Constitution of the United States states otherwise. Presidents offer annual budgets to Congress however; Congress controls the purse strings. The paragraph outlining this reads as follows:

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

As you read this paragraph, it is almost impossible to believe that Senator Harry Reid recently stated that he bears no responsibility for our economic downturn. The Congress elected in 2006 has spent money like there is no end to it and by the way, they were in control in 2007 when our economy turned upside down so, they bear a large portion of the blame for being ineffective legislators in a time of action. It is no small wonder that John Q. Public is irritated with Washington D.C.

So, what is really going on here? Liberal thinkers, politicians, and progressive media commentators are in a frenzy of self absorbed disbelief. While it is common for a president to incur mid-term election losses in the Congress, most polls indicate that this administration will suffer a calamitous rejection of their endeavors. According to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, the President's popularity now hovers at 46%. 57% of poll respondents disapprove of the President's handling of the economy while, 58% are critical of our nation's massive deficit and yet; the administration seems oblivious. None of us should be surprised by this. My sister in law accused the Republicans of being the party of "no". She threw independent conservatives into the same pool. Does this charge hold merit? According to her, President Obama has more than reached out to his opposition in order to get bipartisan legislative measures passed. Unless he has turned over a new leaf, and nothing I've seen has shown me that he has, our President has been everything but bipartisan. A quick study of his actions while serving as a senator can be found at www.votesmart.org. He hardly ever crossed political lines to forge partnerships for the national good. As the junior senator from Illinois, he was a strait party line hack and in my opinion, he has run his administration in like fashion.

When your political opponent is weak and backed up against the ropes, you needn't do anything more than say no for it will only be a matter of time before your opponent self implodes. It seems that this will come to fruition in November. If it comes to pass, the Republicans will only be provided with a limited amount of time to act. Hopefully, just saying no will no longer suffice and our nation's see saw attempt at checks and balances will once again function properly. The ball will then be in the President's side of the court. Will he choose to extend a hand to the opposition and lead or will he become yet again, just another lame duck in the White House?

De Oppresso Liber