Friday, March 17, 2006

Hot Air

There's a couple of interesting opinion pieces over at today. Sen Feingold's censure/impeachment talk doesn't seem to be gaining any traction, which is great for Kos Kidz and the like, who consider it a victory to make wild accusations and lose elections. Feingold will likely not not run again for Senator so he can throw his hat in the ring for the 2008 Presidential nominataion, anyway; which is convenient, because he then can't lose his seat in an election. (Although that might build his liberal cred.)

I have a musing about this, though. I know both Democrats and Republicans are concerned with strategy and being able to communicate to people what they are all about so they can decide to vote for them. But it seems to me like the Democrat agenda is all about tricking people into voting for them, while the Republicans espouse principles. Generally speaking, I think they stick to it, though individually there are exceptions to each. Republicans do lose their way and Democrats occassionally believe in something.

Anyway, James said, "The play is this: accountability and oversight. They could use this a national call to Congressional oversight and calling congress and the administration to be accountable for security, the budget, the war, domestic issues, an energy policy and a host of others. Use it a means to say Republicans control every branch of government and look at the mess we have. And why is that - because there is no checks and balance in government."

I'm really glad James has been frequenting PCIF lately, he's been offering some great insight into the minds of people that I have difficulty getting into. But, dude, it's a play, a scheme, a slimy sales pitch. The Boston Globe has some analysis today which in three pages, essentially says as much. As long as the Democrat Party says what the moonbats like, they'll vote for them. With Republicans, it seems voters can disagree on points and still agree on the overall principles by which the elected representatives govern.

"Look," say the Democrats. "They suck much worse than we suck." Didn't they try that, "We're the lesser of two evils!" approach in 2004? You're talking about how they can spin it. If they could develop some steadfast, unwavering principles and some leadership maybe they'd have something people can latch on to. Dean Barnett at the Daily Standard has an interesting look at Markos "Screw 'em" Moulitsas and Jerome Armstrong's new book, an attempt to provide some guidance to a rudderless party.

"Crashing the Gate is a candid (indeed, shockingly candid) look into the morally vacant motivations of the movement that Moulitsas and Armstrong represent. In spite of confessing that the Democratic party stands for very little, Armstrong and Moulitsas fight for it passionately."
This analysis is nothing new, but I think the fact that it comes from the moonbat base of the Democrat Party, it's somewhat meaningful.
"The authors conclude that the Democrats' big tent is crammed with special interest groups is because the party has no unifying principles or goals. Moulitsas and Armstrong declare, "It is difficult to overstate the need for the Democratic Party to develop its own ideas, not just argue against the Republican ones."
Of course, there's nothing more exhilirating than pointing out the shortcomings of others, but it's another thing altogether to come up with a solution. If these two schmucks want to give their party some direction, they ought to think about that.

Even if they would just stand back and let the GOP loose, they'd probably pick up a couple seats, maybe a majority somewhere. As it stands, I think that most folks just feel manipulated by this crop of Dems and I'd be surprised if Feingold's attempts to out-crazy Howard Dean go anywhere. But I also think James is right, the Silly Season will be interesting.

Given the choice between a slick marketing campaign and principle-based leadership, I'll go with principles.

Opinion Journal's Naomi Schaefer Riley: The Conspiracy - A view from the inside.

Bizarro World


Blogger James Manning bloody well said...

I'll keep it real. It is a game and I wouldn't disagree with much of what you said, except I don't think the GOP actually believe in those principles, they just run for office on them.

Honestly, I've tried to give my Dems a hand in forming a message but they seem content on silliness. Dems have no unifying message or guiding principle (actually we do but they articulate it in a way that makes sense to the average person). I don't see that changing.

Here's what the Dems should do:

1. Focus on government accountablity and transparency.

2. Present a clear plan on security issues.

3. Leave Bush bashing to folks like me and lefty-wackos. Not that I'm a wacko, but the truth is no one really gives a stank-egg what I think.

4. Every time you focus on a GOP flaw, present a viable alternative.

5. Tell Howard Dean to shut the F*&% up and raise some money.

6. Let Roe v Wade go and support programs that help reduce the number of abortions.

7. Don't do class warfare - Hell, I'd vote for a tax cut too to keep you bastards out of my wallet.

8. Present some core principles and stand firm on them. Everything else should be open to civil debate.

9. Put Barak Obama out front and tell Hillary and Ted to shut the F*&% up.

10. Bush is done, stop fighting the 2004 election and concentrate on the next three presidential elections.

Bonus tip: Tell Howard Dean to SHUT THE F&^% UP AND GET THAT MONEY!!!

20 March, 2006 16:50  
Blogger Robosquirrel bloody well said...

It's funny how much you and I fundamentally agree. I know it's a treated as a game by everyone, but I would like to see the strategery backed up by a foundation of core principles.

I wouldn't dispute a single point you've made; in fact, I'll go one futher and say that much of the GOPs trouble springs from the lack of a viable opponent. I'd like to see the two parties in the two-party system actually keep each other accountable and competitive. I think if the Democrat followed your plan they give the Republicans a run for their money, and that's something I'd like to see.

Unfortunately, as always, the way I'd like things to be and the way things are are two entirely different things.

20 March, 2006 17:39  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home