Translation: Wussy Democrats

Published by

Clarissa

April 10, 2013

“We’re not going to have the White House forever, folks. If he doesn’t do this, Paul Ryan is going to do it for us in a few years,” said a longtime Obama aide, referring to the 2012 Republican vice presidential candidate who proposed a sweeping overhaul of Medicare that would replace some benefits with vouchers.

Translation: “We, the Democrats, are sad little wusses who are terrified of having won the White House. We can’t wait for the Republicans to take it away for us. In the meanwhile, we will tell our voters to shove all of our promises to them made during the campaign. Instead, we will start doing everything the Republicans would have done had they been elected. Because we don’t think we deserve to win and we don’t really believe in our own ideas. We simply repeat them to make the perennially stupid progressives in this country think that they have a party to represent them.”

If you make such pathetic little pronouncements 3 months into a new term, then you definitely won’t have the White House forever.

The political scene in this country is so impoverished that it makes me want to barf. There is hardly anybody but liars, illiterates, and whiny weaklings.

Rate this:

25 responses to “Translation: Wussy Democrats”

David Gendron

April 10, 2013

We have the same problem with the PCul in Québec. But I don’t think they’ll be re-elected.

LikeLike

Reply
1. bloggerclarissa
  
  April 10, 2013
  
  The US Dems have every chance of being reelected if only they stop sabotaging themselves.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
Roberto Severino

April 10, 2013

Two party system is a racket. I think these parties enjoy trading each other every 8 years. I currently distrust most politicians for this reason and many others.

LikeLike

Reply
1. bloggerclarissa
  
  April 10, 2013
  
  ” I think these parties enjoy trading each other every 8 years.”
  
  – Spain had such a system in place in the XIXth-early XXth centuries. The two parties that were supposedly conservative and progressive traded power by means of rigged elections. The system seemed to function. That is, until the country got so impoverished and polarized that a civil war broke out in 1936. Just saying.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
charlesrowley

April 10, 2013

Entitlement programs in the United States are non-sustainable. For sure, there will be no Medicare or Social Security for people of your age group unless spending is reined in. Most politicians understand this. But most of them do not have the courage to initiate measures that will preserve and protect those programs. Such measures include increasing the age at which one qualifies for such programs, and requiring those who are better off to pay more for Medicare, It also requires aggressive action to curb corruption, especially in the rush to disability of able-bodied Americans.

Understand that such policies will be implemented during the next decade. But every year lost increases the burden of adjustment.

What is non-sustainable will not be sustained. That is a truism that even politicians cannot evade.

LikeLike

Reply
1. David Gendron
  
  April 10, 2013
  
  Programs in the United States are non-sustainable.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. David Bellamy
    
    April 10, 2013
    
    “Programs in the United States are non-sustainable.”
    
    This is not true. Out taxes are just far too low. And, there is a booby-trap in Social Security, since for many years the “Social Security Payroll Tax” (actually, an insurance premium) has been larger than necessary. The surplus has been lent to the federal government, which enabled the Congress to recklessly cut income taxes to unsustainably low levels. When these loans come due because of demographic factors, the taxes will need to rise.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
2. bloggerclarissa
  
  April 10, 2013
  
  Politicians have the obligation to do what they were elected to do, not what strikes their fancy at any given moment. Obama was elected to avoid cuts to Medicare or Social Security. If he knew this was untenable, he shouldn’t have promised it. But to promise and then turn around and do the opposite is low. It isn’t like anything changed in the few days since he was elected.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. Stringer Bell
    
    April 10, 2013
    
    He’s done pretty much the opposite of whatever he promised. That’s why they say that Democratic politicians despise their base, while their Republicans counterparts fear their base.
    
    Even after all this shit, republican leaders in congress won’t make a deal that involves raising even a penny on taxes because they know some tea party nutjob out there is ready to take their place in the next primaries. And that racist, xenophobic, sexist, homophobic nutjob will actually be electable!
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. bloggerclarissa
      
      April 10, 2013
      
      “That’s why they say that Democratic politicians despise their base, while their Republicans counterparts fear their base.”
      
      – Yes, yes, yes.
      
      “they know some tea party nutjob out there is ready to take their place in the next primaries. And that racist, xenophobic, sexist, homophobic nutjob will actually be electable!”
      
      – No, that time has passed. Unless some very serious disaster – a natural disaster, a war, another wave of the economic crisis – hits, this will not be happening. The far right is dead.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
3. David Gendron
  
  April 10, 2013
  
  But, as Clarissa would say, we should replace entitlement programs by more police! 😉
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
charlesrowley

April 10, 2013

Obama knew well that those programs are untenable. He lied to win an election. Now he has to chose between honoring a lie and leaving behind an even bigger mess, or reneging in order to prevent a long-term disaster. Because he is a weak self-seeking man he is wobbling and hoping to evade responsibility. As Clarissa says, the electorate is the problem. By voting for short-term entitlement benefits they betrayed their children and grandchilden.

LikeLike

Reply
1. bloggerclarissa
  
  April 10, 2013
  
  “Because he is a weak self-seeking man he is wobbling and hoping to evade responsibility. ”
  
  – This is the conclusion I’m reaching. And not just about Obama. This seems to be a very wide-spread problem in the Democratic party.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
thevenerablecorvex

April 10, 2013

Republicans fear their base but Democrats are contemptuous of theirs.

LikeLike

Reply
1. bloggerclarissa
  
  April 10, 2013
  
  Republicans fear their base and Democrats fear the Republican base. Conclusion: progressives need to become more scary.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. n8chz
    
    April 10, 2013
    
    How about we start by applying some message discipline? I myself have a strict editorial policy of never playing into the right’s hand by referring to safety net programs as “entitlement programs.”
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
  2. David Gendron
    
    April 10, 2013
    
    I agree with n8chz.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. bloggerclarissa
      
      April 10, 2013
      
      This is a good idea but I have a feeling that, whatever vocabulary you, me and n8chz use, Medicare and Social Security will be eviscerated. 😦 😦 Obama seems to have no other words in his vocabulary these days but “deficit reduction.” How many times did he repeat them this morning? I stopped counting after 6. I can’t avoid being angry about that because this is not why people elected him. The equivalent would be people voting for Bush Jr. who’d occupy the White House and start repeating the words “woman’s right to choose” obsessively. I’d be happy, sure, but I suspect his voters would know how to keep him in check. As opposed to Obama’s voters.
      
      Obama’s voters in the meanwhile just mewl impotently.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
  3. David Gendron
    
    April 11, 2013
    
    Uncle Tom OSama tries to not be a lame duck in his last two years…
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
kelly

April 10, 2013

Obama has not been up to the task during the first term and he’s getting even worse during the second. We should have not given him a second opportunity. Too late though to say it. He has managed to transform ‘the audacity of hope” into ‘ managing a total waste of people’s hopes”.

LikeLike

Reply
1. bloggerclarissa
  
  April 10, 2013
  
  “He has managed to transform ‘the audacity of hope” into ‘ managing a total waste of people’s hopes”.
  
  – Sad but true. 😦 😦 We kept hearing during the 1st term that he was making compromises to make sure he got the second term. WHAT’S THE EXCUSE NOW?????
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. n8chz
    
    April 10, 2013
    
    Not that it’s any excuse, but the medium has been repeating the mantra “center right nation” so long and so often that Democratic leaders implicitly believe it, so even if they win elections, they have this sense of being on borrowed time. The Republicans, on the other hand will treat the narrowest victory as a “mandate.”
    
    I’m mewling, but I’m also puking.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
  2. David Gendron
    
    April 11, 2013
    
    The excuse is 2014…
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
2. thevenerablecorvex
  
  April 10, 2013
  
  Too bad there was no credible alternative.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
Fie Upon This Quiet Life

April 10, 2013

I’m starting to think that the real problem with American politics is that our politicians have made Machiavelli a god and, following his advice, work only to serve their own immediate interests instead of serving the people who elect them. I taught Machiavelli last semester and this semester and I’m constantly having to remind my students that Machiavelli did not reached some sort of moral achievement in writing The Prince. They think Machiavelli is amazing. People in the Renaissance thought he was the devil.

I suppose one could say, “well, Machiavelli is simply right about the way the world works. It’s not like I think we SHOULD live like that; we just do. It’s not a question of morality at all.” Giving up like that is pretty cynical, but I’ve yet to find a student who takes a different position on Machiavelli. (Out of a sample of about 250 students.)

LikeLike

Reply