« Repubs take House convincingly yet some Dem stalwarts remain especially in the Senate | Main | Pelo-See Ya Later! »

Doubling Down On Stupid

A little while ago, this self-important twit over at Daily Kos decided to pick a fight with me. I smacked him around here, and every now and then I meander over to his site and smack him around again -- it's a guy thing.

Anyway, this morning good old VP put up his analysis of yesterday's elections, and it's pretty good. "Good" as in "so god-awfully wrong, it's just the belly laugh I needed today."

But it is well-written. I gotta give him points for style. It's concise, uses solid structure, and clear language. And I didn't notice any spelling or grammatical errors, either.

Here's the key part:

DEMOCRATS:

You didn't lose because:

-- Your luck is bad, or
-- Your message got drowned out, or
-- The media was against you, or
-- The voters didn't get out, or
-- President Obama was a negative, or
-- Nobody knew your accomplishments, or
-- The economy was so bad your ouster was a given.

You lost because:

-- You have been scared, indecisive little mice for the last four years.

-- You have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA how to craft a marketing message that is simple and strong, explains accomplishments in REAL PERSON, REAL ENVIRONMENT sort of way, and pushes buttons.

-- You worried more about polls and less about your party.

-- You considered yourself a proud "independent" who will vote his/her mind on issues where the party desperately needed you to vote their way.

-- You went against our President - a President who needed to make change in this country and found a roadblock with the Senators and Congresspeople in his own party.

-- You wasted time trying to compromise with republicans. They want nothing more than to see you destroyed.

-- You mistook indecisiveness and half-wins as some kind of accomplishment. It's not. The public wants strength and decisiveness in their party. How do you think Bush won a second term? It wasn't because he was right on anything.

-- You had a majority leader in the Senate who couldn't be more useless. He reeks of weakness, folds at any opportunity, and the public knows this.

-- You don't learn from the past - and it looks like you never will.

REPUBLICANS:

You didn't win because:

-- Your ideas are better, or
-- Your opinions are moral, or
-- The country is on your side, or
-- The country hates the President, or
-- Your fear-bating, nasty, ugly, cynical approach to politicking is correct.

You won because:

-- You crafted a simple message for a public that is too stupid to remember the past.

-- You appealed to those who are racist, callous, selfish, ignorant, angry and fed that negativity.

-- You won by making the country lose. You must be so proud of yourself for destroying our only chance to get out of this recession - and if you don't understand why you're wrong, you're too stupid to hold your position.

Oh, VP. You're so precious, I just wanna eat you up.

"Luck" is hard to quantify in elections -- it usually relates to uncontrollable events. Your "message" wasn't drowned out; it was rejected. The media did all they could for you, but you can't polish a turd. Your voters did turn out -- they turned out against you. President Obama HAS been a drag among all but the hardest hardcore of your base. People knew your accomplishments, and were appalled. And the economy certainly didn't help.

On the flip side: you haven't been "scared, indecisive mice;" you got a lot through. Sadly, most of it sucked. Your "marketing message" of "we'll give you stuff" has been exposed as a fraud. You listened to the polls just as much as almost every other politician. You marched in lockstep with really, really bad leaders with really, really bad ideas. You followed Obama cheerfully as he threw more and more of you under the bus. You spent way too much time telling the Republicans "we won" and shoving them to the back of the bus, or off the bus and told everyone in earshot how irrelevant they were -- to the point where you believed your own BS.

In VP's analysis of the Republicans, he makes it very clear that he's obsessed with his stereotypes and is furious that the GOP won't play along and be the demons he insists they are.

No, a far better analysis on the situation was put out by FrankJ over at Pajamas Media a couple of weeks ago.

The only message the Republicans put out that resonated was "we can make things better." And that is the only mandate they have. It's vague, it's undefined, and it's almost unmeasurable.

But it's still the only one that really matters. And that is the standard they will be held to.

The fight for 2012 has already begun. Hell, we've gotten into the perpetual campaign mode, so each election is just a skirmish in the endless war that politics has become. And one of the best signs I can see for the side of reason is just how far into fantasy such staunch progressives as VP are lost. They are stuck on stupid, and that particular strain of stupid is a tar pit -- the harder they fight, the worse they dig themselves in.

And lord, isn't it entertaining.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/40479.

Comments (58)

As I was reading through hi... (Below threshold)
Wordygirl:

As I was reading through his message to Democrats, it sounded like it could have been directed to the Repubs after the 2008 election... almost

Ah yes. Once again the left... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Ah yes. Once again the left ignores the obvious (That their policies are responsible for their defeat) and blame the voters because they are too stupid to understand and their leadership for being insufficiently leftist.

Never mind that the outrageous spending policies of the dems have crushed the economy for what could turn out to be a whole generation (for God's sake even the AUSTRALIAN dollar is worth more than the US dollar now!). It isn't the policy that was wrong it was that they didn't spend enough. They didn't go far enough left.

Never mind that the policies like obamacare are extremely unpopular. It's the ignorance of the voter that prevents them from understanding just how brilliant obamacare is. Why can't the voter see that forcing companies to fill out a 1099 for every person from whom they buy more than $500 worth of goods and services is going to significantly improve our healthcare? Stupid voters.

Excerpt from Kos was tl;dr<... (Below threshold)

Excerpt from Kos was tl;dr

But I gather it's just more of the same "we didn't get our message out, the wrong people were in charge, they didn't try hard enough" whinging they usually come up with when things don't go their way.

It's like a religion for them; it's simply not possible that their Ten Commandments, which include things like, "Not only shall I covet my neighbor's goods, but I shall bind him into servitude and he shall shut up and take it," might have something to do with their permanent state of failure.

Your "marketing me... (Below threshold)
Gizmo:
Your "marketing message" of "we'll give you stuff" has been exposed as a fraud.
You're also forgetting Obama and the Congressional Democrats other swell marketing message "We won! Therefore we get to do what we want to do!!!" I don't think that went over so swimmingly either.
Jay TeaWhen dealin... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Jay Tea

When dealing with these people you have to remember what Ron White put so eloquently

"You cant cure stupid, there's not a pill you can take or an operation you can have. Stupid is foreva"

So the people who voted in ... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

So the people who voted in the Democrats in 2006 and 2008 are now "stupid"?

A better analysis is that the Democrats were given 4 years to show some meaningful accomplishments. The voting public has obviously found them wanting.

I'm waiting for the Democrats to finally admit "Hey! We fucked up!". But I'm not holding my breath. Just as with Barry, it's always someone elses fault.

Tea Party cost Republicans ... (Below threshold)
galoob:

Tea Party cost Republicans three seats in the Senate.

Delaware, Nevada, Colorado.

Tea Party cost Republica... (Below threshold)
Stan:

Tea Party cost Republicans three seats in the Senate.

Delaware, Nevada, Colorado.

Colorado is still being counted. So don't get your bells and whistles out yet.

You cannot argue with someo... (Below threshold)
Trump:

You cannot argue with someone such as him.

You're wrong to even try.

The Tea Party "cost" the GO... (Below threshold)
Trump:

The Tea Party "cost" the GOP 3 seats. So if you're keeping score, then you should also note the two Tea Party Senate seats in Paul and Rubio, yes? And you're gonna regret Rubio getting in BIG TIME. That guy is on track to be a major national figure

Wow, VPs post has 769 commm... (Below threshold)
Stan2:

Wow, VPs post has 769 commments - yours has 11.

-- You crafted a simple ... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

-- You crafted a simple message for a public that is too stupid to remember the past.

I wonder if this rule applies to California Democrats who elected Jerry Brown, Destroyer of California in the late 70s-early 80s, and The City of Oakland.

What's your point, Stan2?</... (Below threshold)

What's your point, Stan2?

Jay shut your mouth!... (Below threshold)
Meiji_man:

Jay shut your mouth!
remember your Napoleon quotes
'Never interfere with an enemy while he's in the process of destroying himself.'

Stan2"Wow, VPs pos... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Stan2

"Wow, VPs post has 769 commments - yours has 11."

Lets see 700+ comments from a site who doesnt tolerate dissent so everyone shakes their head in accordance with the poster vs a site which goes way beyond tolerance with posters who dont agree with their writers views (putting up with lee "he who shall not be named" ward comes to mind)

I will take the 2nd. Especially since it is the voice of sanity.

Since you like dailykos so much do us all a favor. Post there and stay away from here. Your bring down the average IQ by 50 points just by reading the articles.

Jay Tea - You are wrong.</p... (Below threshold)
Dan Irving:

Jay Tea - You are wrong.

You can polish a turd. The boys at Mythbusters proved it.

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbusters-polishing-a-turd.html

Dan, I was thinking of that... (Below threshold)

Dan, I was thinking of that very episode when I wrote it, but went for the saying anyway. Shoulda listened to myself...

In my defense, I fast-forwarded through that portion of the show...

J.

Whups - forgot the /snark t... (Below threshold)
Dan Irving:

Whups - forgot the /snark tag ...

Galoob, tell us, how many s... (Below threshold)
Upset Old Guy:

Galoob, tell us, how many seats did Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid cost you Democrats in the House? And how many seats did Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid cost you Democrats in the Senate?

Normally I wouldn't directly address galoob, but it's the Wednesday after "The Tsunami."

You wasted time trying t... (Below threshold)

You wasted time trying to compromise with republicans.

Hmmm, I missed that part. Wait, was it when Obama had a few Republicans over at the beginning of 2009 for cookies and to watch the Super Bowl? Was that was threw off the Obamagenda? Can't say I can think of anything else.

Smacked me around...sure, J... (Below threshold)
Verbalpaintball:

Smacked me around...sure, Jay. Keep believing that dream - and the other one you have where you're being molested by Phyllis Diller.

And as far as the GOP are concerned, they've accomplished NOTHING in the past four years with the exception of voting "no" on everything. As a result, they "own" nothing in the last four years while the democrats do the heavy lifting and fall on the sword. Real courage there.

Meanwhile, have the democrats fucked up on messaging and pushing or right reform through (like they always do)? Sure. Nobody's saying their actions are vacant of blame. I'm the first to criticize because I think tough love is necessary, but their failures are never as bottom-feeding cynical as the republicans. Just watch as they do more of nothing for the next two years. Cowards.

And I'm afraid Stan is wrong. I've only had 741 comments...oh, wait. 742.

The Tea Party "cost" the... (Below threshold)
galoob:

The Tea Party "cost" the GOP 3 seats. So if you're keeping score, then you should also note the two Tea Party Senate seats in Paul and Rubio, yes? And you're gonna regret Rubio getting in BIG TIME. That guy is on track to be a major national figure

I agree that Rubio is on track to be a major national figure. I said I was impressed by him. He's clearly intelligent and sane, qualities which are in question in Palin, O'Donnell and Angle.

I predict in two or three years or less, Rubio will have moved to the center and you will be ranting about him being a RINO, like people do with Scott Brown now.

The Tea Party cost the GOP a net gain of three seats.

While the Tea Party helped Rubio win the primary and general election, they did not cause that seat, or the Kentucky seat to be a net gain for the GOP. First, the FL and KY seats were already held by Republicans, second, FL would have been won by Christ if Rubio had not come on the scene, and third, it's likely that a more establishment Republican would have won the KY seat had not Paul ran, as they would have in DE, CO and NV if Jane Norton, Mike Castle and Sue Lowden had not been beaten by Palin-cult-backed candidates.

People don't like to vote for flaky witches like O'Donnell, nutballs like Angle, or mean assholes like Buck.

Galoob, tell us, how man... (Below threshold)
galoob:

Galoob, tell us, how many seats did Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid cost you Democrats in the House? And how many seats did Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid cost you Democrats in the Senate?

Cost them a lot. Obama has been weak, following in Bush's footsteps when people wanted change, and Pelosi and Reid are weasels, especially Reid.

Welcome back, VP!D... (Below threshold)

Welcome back, VP!

Don't make me link to all your postings where I've shut you and your trained gibbons down, chum. 'Cuz I can.

As far as comment quantity... well, as you stated, there are a lot of stupid people out there. Fortunately, a lot of them hang out at Kos, and enjoy saying the same things over and over and over. Hell, you're on a forum that explicitly encourages groupthink and squashes dissent.

And you didn't "earn" that audience; you're part of the herd of whiny sheep that make up Kos. You got pushed up to the front page, and that triggered a huge contest to see who could win the circle-jerk that is "we're so much better than those proles who won't listen to their superiors." Thanks, but I'll pass.

But keep on porking that chicken, VP. It served you so well yesterday, and it'll work wonders in 2012.

In the meantime, here are some phrases you might remember:

We won. And if you wanna ride along, get in the back seat and shut up.

J.

Ride along? What, off anoth... (Below threshold)
Verbalpaintball:

Ride along? What, off another cliff? We know how you people drive.

I would LOVE to hear the co... (Below threshold)

I would LOVE to hear the coherent message the Republicans put together. You know, the one that was so awesome that it fooled all but the most gerrymandered of districts. Other than, "we're not Democrats", I really can't think of anything.

Apparently the Democrats to... (Below threshold)

Apparently the Democrats took Congress in 2006 based on their "accomplishments" in the minority and not opposition of Bush and the GOP Congress.

Right?

(Sorry, did I make you think a little bit, there? Take a couple of aspirin, it'll be OK, you can practice your helpful 'fury' on the House for 2 years before getting back to hating all of Congress and the occupant of the White House in 2 years.)

Congratulations to the Repu... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Congratulations to the Republicans! I wouldn't write off the Kos post completely. Obama failed because he didn't have the courage to change Washington. You can't say he tried. We should have been more forewarned. Look at the commiteee he chose to help him choose his vice -president, a commiteee headed by the shady insider, Franklin Raines of all people.

Obama wished to be accepted by the establishment, and so deferred to the venal suits in the Democrats and on Wall Street, placing many of them in his cabinet and on his economic team, the same ones, that helped drive us in the ditch into the first place.

I was always worried when Obama said he didn't want to be seen as the sterotypical happy black man during the campaign, or ruled out studying for a MA or Phd degree because of what the public would think and how it would ruin his image. Someone who is still more concerned about his racial image, rather than doing the right or smart thing, was never going to be 'transformational', but would become just another ordinary, ambitious politician.

Obama wished to be accep... (Below threshold)
galoob:

Obama wished to be accepted by the establishment, and so deferred to the venal suits in the Democrats and on Wall Street, placing many of them in his cabinet and on his economic team, the same ones, that helped drive us in the ditch into the first place.

Correct. Zero prosecutions for the Wall Street mortgage securities fraudsters is the tell.

The Republicans did just wh... (Below threshold)
Carol:

The Republicans did just what they needed to do the past 2 years. They said NO to the crazy ideas that hurt individuals and groups in our country, as well as our country as a whole that the Democrats proposed and pushed through despite being unpopular with the majority.

And Republicans, Independents, and even Democrats educated themselves, looked at the issues and asked themselves........do I want more of what the Democrats are pushing, or do I want more Republicans to block Obama and the liberals crazy ideas?

And they voted for Republicans.

galoob : 'Zero prosecutions... (Below threshold)
doubled:

galoob : 'Zero prosecutions for the Wall Street mortgage securities fraudsters is the tell.'

Well, Barney Frank isn't Wall Street, but he is a fraudster who told the country that fraddie and fannie are totaly solvent and in no way are at risk, only to tell us now that we will need billions to bail them out (with a blank check , payable by the taxpayer), and the dem's still voted him back in.

Enventually , you leftist will realize that big business and big government are peas in a pod, and that the little guy gets crushed by both party's statist-mongers.
Only one side cynically, hypocritically says it is 'for' the little guy though.
I guess painting the opposition (I'm sorry, to quote O!, while paiting the 'enemy') as anti-kids, anti-poor, anti-women, anti-minority, anti-etc etc etc .... counts as being 'for' the little guy for some.

-- You went agains... (Below threshold)
Gizmo:
-- You went against our President - a President who needed to make change in this country and found a roadblock with the Senators and Congresspeople in his own party.
VP, the degree in which you over read the situation is truly breathtaking. You don't suppose a lot of Democratic Congress-persons "went against" Obama because they knew that their district leaned red? Like perhaps many of the 28 now defeated Democrats in districts that voted for McCain in 2008?!?!? No, couldn't be! It was because they didn't go Left hard enough.... right!

Here's the real deal... "O", Harry, and Nan got their butts handed to them for a few major reasons. 1) Voter frustration over an economy that's stuck in 1st gear and is threatening to jump back into reverse. 2) Run away spending that has a lot of people scared to hell about our running (no longer walking) towards the cliff of financial insolvency. And for the record, a LOT of us weren't too wild about 43's spending habits either, but Obama has put him to shame. 3) Democratic overconfidence in the meaning of the results in 2006 and 2008. It's the old "We got a shiny new Chevy Mandate and we're heading to town! trap.

Newt & Co. did the same thing after 1994. They mistook that particular voter "restraining order" against Clinton & Co. as carte blanche to try and completely wrestle control of the government away from the President. They paid a price in 1996.

Obama demonstrated that he had smoked too much of his own hopeium when GOP objections to his planned legislative agenda after he was sworn in was pooh-pooh'ed by the President with his now infamous "I won!" line. Reid and The San Francisco Treat were only too happy to take that ball and run with it.

Last night, voters tapped them on the shoulder and asked for the keys to the Mandate back! We'll see if the current GOP leadership has learned anything since 1996.

Verbalpaintnub- Can I come... (Below threshold)
zaugg:

Verbalpaintnub- Can I come put up a dissenting opinion on Daily Kos like you left here twice? No?
Liberals are fools and the ones that aren't, are tools.

galoob : 'Zero pro... (Below threshold)
galoob:
galoob : 'Zero prosecutions for the Wall Street mortgage securities fraudsters is the tell.'

Well, Barney Frank isn't Wall Street, but he is a fraudster who told the country that fraddie and fannie are totaly solvent and in no way are at risk, only to tell us now that we will need billions to bail them out (with a blank check , payable by the taxpayer), and the dem's still voted him back in.

Enventually , you leftist will realize that big business and big government are peas in a pod, and that the little guy gets crushed by both party's statist-mongers.
Only one side cynically, hypocritically says it is 'for' the little guy though.
I guess painting the opposition (I'm sorry, to quote O!, while paiting the 'enemy') as anti-kids, anti-poor, anti-women, anti-minority, anti-etc etc etc .... counts as being 'for' the little guy for some.

You are right - Dems like Barney Frank are part of the problem. I would have been happy to see him defeated by Sean Bielat.

I agree with you that the average person is being crushed by both parties. Both parties allowed most manufacturing jobs to go overseas. Both parties pandered to Wall Street, although the Republicans opposed the even the modest regulation of the kind of securities and derivatives which croaked the economy. Both parties supported the bank bailouts.

Both parties are statist, neither party supports freedom.

The Democrats go farther in wealth confiscation, nanny state health regulation, protection of vested business interests, and suppression of speech about sexual and racial minorities.

The Republicans go farther in war-mongering, supporting police state surveillance and extrajudicial detention and searches of Americans. They are also for the state imprisoning, torturing and executing people in a big way. They have a problem with adults having sex in ways they don't like. They don't like workers organizing themselves to bargain collectively. Their MO is "painting the opposition" as baby-killers, anti-Jesus, pro-homo, anti-business, anti-military (anti-war) and not saluting the flag correctly or whatever.

Both parties allow... (Below threshold)
Gizmo:
Both parties allowed most manufacturing jobs to go overseas.
When I hear stuff like that, I ask "So how's the government supposed to do that, short of starting a trade war?"
Hey, galoob -- when did Enr... (Below threshold)

Hey, galoob -- when did Enron have its meltdown?

Here's a hint -- it was the Bush Justice Department that prosecuted them for shit they pulled during the Clinton administration.

Sorry to burst your delusional little bubble there...

J.

Delaware has another Senate... (Below threshold)

Delaware has another Senate seat up in 2012 -- one of a butt-load of Dem-held seats the GOP will be able to target in the pursuit of relegating Harry Reid once again to Minority Leader.

I'll bet O'Donnell could take it, if she were to run again.

...and I'm pretty confident... (Below threshold)

...and I'm pretty confident that two years from now Harry Reid will be wishing he had lost yesterday.

Contrary to VP's hypothosis... (Below threshold)
Gizmo:

Contrary to VP's hypothosis, The Hill has noted that voting for Obamacare appears to have been a political "3rd rail" for MANY candidates last night. Few Democrats survive healthcare vote  However, this trend appears to have helped Democrats in one race:

Democrats did, however, pick up Republican Rep. Joseph Cao's seat in Louisiana. Cao had voted yes on the bill in November -- the only Republican to do so ....
So it appears that supporting the President isn't all it's cracked up to be!

Both parties al... (Below threshold)
galoob:
Both parties allowed most manufacturing jobs to go overseas.

When I hear stuff like that, I ask "So how's the government supposed to do that, short of starting a trade war?"

I had to laugh. Starting a trade war? The trade war's already underway, and we're getting our asses kicked.

Example: Chinese exchange rate fixing.

Example: Japanese agricultural protectionism

Example: Chinese intellectual property theft and bootlegging

Example: German industrial policy

Example: Korean product regulations

Anyways, since we don't export much manufactures anymore, what's the downside if we protect a domestic market for manufactures through tax or tariffs?

Are the Chinese going to stop selling us their stuff? Are they going to refuse to buy our food, our minerals?

It would be better to have those high-value added, high wage jobs in the USA, instead of turning the country into a serfdom for global corporations with zero loyalty to the USA or its constitution, but who bankroll lobbyists and Members of Congress.

More here: http://www.benzinga.com/life/politics/10/06/351878/the-free-trade-myth

Hey, galoob -- whe... (Below threshold)
galoob:
Hey, galoob -- when did Enron have its meltdown?

Here's a hint -- it was the Bush Justice Department that prosecuted them for shit they pulled during the Clinton administration.

Sorry to burst your delusional little bubble there...

J.

Not sure what I said that you're referring to, JT, so it seems like a non-sequitur to me, but I give credit to John Ashcroft as having some integrity.

I was complaining about Obama/Holder not prosecuting the Wall Street fraudsters, you know. . .

Anyways, since we ... (Below threshold)
Gizmo:
Anyways, since we don't export much manufactures anymore, what's the downside if we protect a domestic market for manufactures through tax or tariffs?

Are the Chinese going to stop selling us their stuff? Are they going to refuse to buy our food, our minerals?

Oh, I think the Chinese government could get pretty creative in their response to us doing something like jacking taxes and/or tariffs... and I don't think it would be pretty.
Oh, I think the Ch... (Below threshold)
galoob:
Oh, I think the Chinese government could get pretty creative in their response to us doing something like jacking taxes and/or tariffs... and I don't think it would be pretty.

So, you're saying the Chinese already have us by the balls as they pursue an economic strategy of wiping out our manufacturing by pursuing huge trade surpluses through currency rate fixing and intellectual property theft?

You might be right, but "free trade" on our side only ain't the answer.

I'm stupid, bitter and scar... (Below threshold)
Dennis:

I'm stupid, bitter and scared ... and I vote!

supporting police state ... (Below threshold)

supporting police state surveillance

Ah yes, I remember when Bush rolled out X-ray vans onto the streets of America...oh wait...

Tea Party cost the GOP 3 se... (Below threshold)
Trump:

Tea Party cost the GOP 3 seats....you know, some of us don't see this as a negative. We see it as a warning.

Here's the idea - if the Tea Party candidate wins the seat, GREAT! If the Tea Party candidate loses the seat, it's a lesson to the GOP - if you don't want the Tea Party picking candidates (admittedly, sometimes with weak vetting) then you better get with the program.

We're playing a longer game than just 1 single election. Besides, at the end of the day the argument can be made that having split chamber control works out for the GOP.

PS- Who rants about Scott Brown? We knew what he was when he was elected. (Same with Kirk - we know he's a "liberal" Republican, but we need him seated now) When we no longer need him, he can feel free to flip to your side of the aisle (and take Murkowski and the Maine twins with him)

Allies of convenience, nothing more.

Here's the idea - if the... (Below threshold)
galoob:

Here's the idea - if the Tea Party candidate wins the seat, GREAT! If the Tea Party candidate loses the seat, it's a lesson to the GOP - if you don't want the Tea Party picking candidates (admittedly, sometimes with weak vetting) then you better get with the program.

Can you tell me what the Tea Party "program" is, Trump? I mean it.

Cut spending? Where? Non-defense discretionary spending is not that big of a part of the budget. Do you want to cut Social Security benefits? Medicare? Those are the biggest non-defense outlays. Cut veteran's benefits? NASA? The Coast Guard?

How do you get the money for what you want left over? Income taxes? A VAT? Or do you live in a dream land that says that if you cut taxes, revenue will always go up, until taxes are zero and revenue is infinite?

Oh, you can be sure the GOP establishment, guided by Karl Rove, will be prepared next time with a program and money to hammer down all the nutballs like O'Donnell, Angle and Miller in the primaries, including buying them off with promises of government jobs - oh, the irony.

The Tea Party and sympathizers are about 20-40% of the electorate, depending on how extreme you are talking. They can be a disruptive force in the GOP, but their agenda and style will be rejected by the broader electorate which includes of urban and suburban liberals, government workers, academics, immigrants, and people on public assistance or dependent on government subsidy.

Tea party? Never heard of i... (Below threshold)
Charlie 'galoob' Gibson:

Tea party? Never heard of it.

These astroturfs never amount to much.

Mr. Tea, You can't... (Below threshold)
brucepall:

Mr. Tea,

You can't fix stupid...but you can vote it out. Yesterday was one of those times... and how sweet it was. In fact it was so much fun, we'll have another go in 2012 ;-)

Semper Fidelis -

Mr. Tea, To me, pi... (Below threshold)
brucepall:

Mr. Tea,

To me, picking a fight means combat...and when your enemy has even the smallest character defect or personal flaw...then their survival instincts kick in...and they'll begin to crack... they will do (or say) the most stupid-crazy things that you can't even imagine... also known as FUBAR (Fouled Up Beyond All Recognition - for those civilian readers out there).

Tis true behavior in war. And even more true in a flawed politician. Add a little stress... and they'll break every time. An amazing sight to behold.

Semper Fidelis-

Verbalpaintnub- Ca... (Below threshold)
Verbalpaintball:
Verbalpaintnub- Can I come put up a dissenting opinion on Daily Kos like you left here twice? No?

You can, you little homonculus, but then you'd actually have to deal with a response to your unintelligible, unsubstantiated blather. I've challenged Jay to do the same - and when he has, many of the Kos commenters slaughtered him (of course, he'd spin it differently, but doesn't the loser of the fight always do that).

Sorry to inform you, but lying and instilling fear in the electorate to win seats doesn't make you a saint. It is a commendable fight strategy from someone who urges the left to do the same, but don't kid yourself that your lies are ever the truth - or entitle you to anything resembling fair treatment.

Nobody on my end of the spectrum is afraid of a good fight, either actual or metaphoric. Last of all me. I'm Irish.

Mr. V, If I had to guess, I... (Below threshold)
Brucepall:

Mr. V, If I had to guess, I would say you were borne between 1943 and 1963, which would make you a "Boomer." Notice I dropped the "Baby" Preamble cause we're not so young any more.

Its a Boomer world. They sit at the top of every tree in the land. Academics, Business, Politics etc. Boomers are Idealist, and have a reputation of spinning everything they can just to win an argument. The following generation, which I call the Realist (a moniker I gave em cause they are always telling us Boomers to - get real - when they have had enough our BS) are the wave of the future. All generations grow-up (the formative years), become young adults, move to mid-life, and then become the elder leader generation...then they die. Its the way of the world.

In politics, the up coming generation first populates the House, then the Senate, then the Supreme Court, and finally they elect one of their own to be President. The sole exception being the Silent generation, aptly named because they are the only generation in the history of our country who didn't elect one of their own to the Presidency (we had a string of GI Generation Presidents and then went straight to the Boomer Presidents - bypassing the generation in the middle).

Problem today is the Boomer generation is divided. I'm Liberal, Your Conservative. I'm a Republican, your a Democrat. I'm pro-life, your pro-abortion, I'm right, your wrong. It really is 50/50 red/blue nation. Is it any wonder that we (the elders of this nation) cannot get anything done? Hell we sure did learn well form our parent's (GI) generation -many Boomers politicians today still feel they are so indispensable to this nation that they will die in office and be carried out on a slab. We already have had 16 years of Boomer Presidents (8 Clinton and 8 Bush Jr.), add at least another four more from Obama, and now we're at 20 plus. We will not have another.

Unlike most, I see this past election in generational terms. I see a wave of Realist taking over in the People's house. Now Realist will get the job done, even though it won't look pretty and one doesn't look to closely at the methodology (at least from the Boomer's perspective).

Am I worried then about the future of America? Not at all. Once the Realist grasp the reins of power and begin to focus upon the task at hand - (Heck they always out numbered us - they just haven't realized it yet) - they will begin to assert themselves.

Unlike the Boomers they will speak with one generational voice - suddenly, the impossible will be doable. A better clean-house and setting things straight crew will have been found. They will change or discard the unworkable and dysfunctional institutional programs of our Nation (no matter how much the residual Boomers squeal) and render them in their own image.

This is my vision of the future, and the Realists' destiny. Semper Fidelis-

but their agenda and style ... (Below threshold)
Trump:

but their agenda and style will be rejected by the broader electorate which includes of urban and suburban liberals, government workers, academics, immigrants, and people on public assistance or dependent on government subsidy

>>> In other words, the takers.

Mr. V, More on th... (Below threshold)
Brucepall:

Mr. V,

More on the Realist generation. They can't be spun, cause they already grew up in a world of hard knocks. They will see right through your transparent BS as if you were translucent, and call a Spade a Spade. Realist are organizers, they volunteer and form associations even better than the GI's (and I knew both generations). Boomers, as Idealist, see the world as it could be; Realist see the word as it is, or to be blunt, as it will be. Realist are consensus builders, and once they get their cohort sub-groups aligned, they will change the world in ways we divided Boomers can only dream of.

Semper Fidelis

Mr. Trump, That's... (Below threshold)
Brucepall:

Mr. Trump,

That's a cynical Boomer voice I hear. The Realist don't think or reason that way at all. They are different than you or I.

SF -

You're a very optimistic so... (Below threshold)
Verbalpaintball:

You're a very optimistic soldier, Brucepall. Lets hope you're right.

And you're also pretty close - 1964.

Generational boundaries are... (Below threshold)
Brucepall:

Generational boundaries are formed from common experiences in one's formative years. For example, everybody from my generation can remember exactly where they were and what they did that day when Armstrong walked on the moon (circa 1969). Ask a young person and you draw a blank...like, "Huh, I wasn't even borne yet." Being older and having seen more than I like to admit, 9/11 didn't have the impact on me like it did on the young folks. Ask them and you'll see what I mean.

The new Millennials (who came of age starting in the year 2000), are the most connected generation in history. They tell me, "Email is so... ancient." I see em all over campus tweeting and yacking constantly on their cells, "Hay, whats up?, whatcha doing?, where are you?" Their little thumbs are racing at 100 miles an hour - as they play games with each other, or whatever. I never used a (rotary) telephone that way. Cells cost money, and my communication habits are strictly business... and that's a generational difference.

Is that bad? No, just the opposite. Change is good. Take the Corps for example. My grandfather taught my father who taught me 65 year old tactics. Essentially, hay-diddle-diddle straight up the middle! Now truth be told, they was no other way to over-run a Pacific Atoll...and it did have a certain shock effect on one's enemy (they'd know for sure that you were coming right at em - and they were certainly going to die). But the casualties were horrendous and the legacy lasted much too long.

I stayed around long enough to see the new generational tactics, like maneuver warfare, envelopment, and mission orders. When your outnumbered and out gunned (if you don't know, Marines are the best, but really just light infantry troops), then one can see that breaking your enemy's will to resist is the way to go (its much better than smashing directly into their defenses and digging em out one by one), and the truth is, all things being equal, you'll have fewer casualties and it'll end quicker too.

What I find interesting about the 2008 Presidential election is that out of the four POTUS/VP candidates, only one was a non-Boomer. Yup, you guessed it, it was a she...Sarah Palin. I figure a good deal of the vitriol she received had a lot to do with her being from a different generation.

Having made this observation, the news around America today is: Folks, you better get use to it, cause I stand by my prediction (see my post above) that our next President will most probably NOT be a Boomer...but someone from the next (Realist) generation. Who? I don't have a clue... but we'll all finding out soon enough.

Semper Fidelis-

Hey Mr. V,I just l... (Below threshold)
Brucepall:

Hey Mr. V,

I just looked Palin up on Wiki...February 1964...that makes you and her generational cohort buds. What do you think of that?


SF-




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy