Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Warnings to the Democrats

Dave Lindorff warns the Democrats (emphasis in red; see also Frank Rich):

“The dire situation facing Democrats is masked currently by the fake ‘excitement’ being generated by all the corporate media coverage of the so-called ‘race’ for the Democratic presidential nomination – coverage that is artificially skewed towards just two or perhaps three of the candidates, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards. This coverage creates the illusion of some kind of groundswell of public excitement about the Democratic candidates. In fact none of them fares particularly well against Republican candidates, At this point, given the disastrous history of seven years of Republican rule in Washington, with the economy staggering, the dollar in freefall, oil prices at record levels, the country $8 trillion in debt, mortgage defaults at depression levels and the war in Iraq still without an end in sight, any Democrat should be trouncing any Republican candidate in the polls. Instead, the so-called ‘leading’ Democrats are all neck-and-neck with their potential Republican opponents. (Evidence of how out-of-whack the corporate media coverage of the Democratic campaign is was provided at the CNN debate in Nevada last Sunday, when even in an auditorium packed with supporters of Clinton and Obama, the biggest applause came when Dennis Kucinich, a candidate almost ignored by the moderator Wolf Blitzer, when he called for impeachment, and for ending the war immediately.)

The reason for this disconnect from reality is that while Democratic voters, as always, can be expected to go dutifully to the polls next November and cast their votes for whatever compromised and weak candidate their party puts up to run, the independent vote which put Democrats over the top in the 2006 off-year congressional elections is gone.

Those voters, many of whom have long harbored a powerful antipathy towards both parties, towards the government, and towards the corporations that dominate the political process, came out in record numbers and voted Democratic in November, ’06 because, sick of the Bush/Cheney administration, sick of five years of a phony ‘war’ on terror, and sick of three years of the Iraq War, they turned to the Democrats, even in traditional ‘red’ states and congressional districts, in hopes that the Democrats would do what they were promising to do: end the war and defend the Constitution.

Now they have seen that this hope was misplaced.”


“In 2008, independents and even many Democratic voters know that the Democrats will not be different from Republicans in any meaningful way on the two key issues – ending the war and restoring the Constitution.”


“As for Congress, Democrats may be in for a big shock in 2008. Expecting major gains in both houses, they may find themselves surprised if the independent voters who came out for them in 2006 stay home, and leave the field to Republicans and nativist independents who base their votes on issues like immigration and an unreasoned fear of terror – both issues that the Republican candidate plan to stoke.”

This is about as good as it is going to get from someone who, for political correctness reasons, can’t spell out the real reason for baffling Democrat ‘strategy’, Jewish Billionaire control of the Democratic Party.  Supporters of the Democrats who think they can bluster their way to an easy victory in the next American election cycle, while providing pitiful excuses for Democrat wrongdoing, or denying that the key issues are really important to Americans, are asking for a disaster.  People will vote ‘none of the above’ by just staying home, while the Christian Zionists will be bused in by their pastors to vote as they are told.

You can only win one election by claiming to be the alternative to the disaster incumbents.  Once you prove yourself to be a phony alternative, you lose all your advantage, and then some.  You need a positive story to win an election when you are no longer assisted by the example of your opponents.  Again, the Democrats are lining up as a somewhat less committed version of the Republicans.  They are offering the same story, just a less interesting version.  Once the media starts to fire up the Hillary Clinton scandal stories – and Clinton’s life-long history of what amounts to kleptomania will give them plenty of ammunition in addition to the stuff they just make up – all the disadvantages of being in the same party as Bush and Cheney will disappear.