You’ve gotta see the first couple minutes of this video: Democrats, some of them fairly prominent, dancing a “protest dance” to show President Donald Trump who’s boss. [Commentary by Judge Jeanine Pirro and Fox News panel]
Have these Democrats been chewing on the loco-weed again? They do understand that if they want to run the country, they have to persuade most people to vote for them… don’t they? And that voters won’t support them if they act and talk like lunatics.
A small contingent within the Party argues that, at best, Democrats will have to deceive the public and change their image: no more Way Far Left Crazy. But a bigger contingent wants to double down on the Far Left stuff. Open borders! Schools that push transgender! Huge enormous big government! Censorship! Yeah… they want to keep trying to ram their fun-pack down our throats.
And now they’ve got a dance for it.
Heaven help me, I know people who will vote for these chuckleheads, dance and all.
I remember second grade school kids who were much more mature and reasonable than these knuckleheads. I hope their parents are not still around to suffer the humiliations.
They’re probably hiding, with new identities.
In line with Erlene’s comments, there is a disconnect on the part of many people, who seem unable to distinguish between what is real and substantive and what is not. Dancing as part of a congressional session? A lot of silly things happen, but most people know.
If I see a pro wrestler being interviewed, I know that I’m seeing an act, and I don’t take it seriously. But governance, at its root, is very serious and dancing, chanting, etc. May have theatric value, but it’s no substitute for the serious business of solving problems, finding solutions, and most importantly, respecting the will of the voters.
It’s impossible to respect these people.
I’m astounded that anyone takes them seriously.
And yet I know people who always vote Democrat, no matter how inane and asinine the candidate or platform. Their brains have been thoroughly washed.
Old loyalties can be very persistent. I don’t get it, either.
I used to be a Democrat (it’s a phase); but the more time I spent around other Democrats, the less I liked it.
There’s an old saying, which I believe originated with Churchill: If you’re not a liberal when you are young, you don’t have a heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you are forty, you don’t have a brain.
I think that a lot of people in my generation, the Vietnam era, favored Democrats because of the perception that they were the party of peace, and that the Republicans were the party which perpetuated the war. Of course, this ignores the fact that US involvement in Vietnam happened under the watch of the Democrats.
But few in my era wanted to be drafted and herded off to Vietnam and the perception was that the Dems were the horse to bet if you didn’t want that fate. Eugene McCarthy was the darling of the era, for his opposition to how Johnson handled the war. The conclusions were understandable, but a bit oversimplified.
When I was in my twenties, I thought that I was a liberal, and in some ways, I was. But at heart, I was much more conservative than liberal, or perhaps more accurately, the essential freedoms I felt strongly about, were more effectively protected by the Right, than by the Left.
It’s easy to become mired in the terminology. The Left has cultivated the image that they are the liberal party, but they are actually very much the Establishment, which was the term that youth in my day used to describe the political forces which we saw as perpetuating the war in Vietnam.
In a sense, it comes down to brand identification and as of this writing, the Republicans are the anti-establishment and the Dems are playing the role of the indigent establishment. It’s serious business, but I have to confess that it’s entertaining to observe the bizarre theater which has resulted.
At heart, I’m the same guy I was when I was a small child. My approach to life is conservative and that has been consistent from my earliest years. Even when I would have identified as a liberal, I was quite conservative at heart. First of all, know thyself.
I suspect that a lot of us, here on this blog, are former liberals, ex-Democrats. In our defense, it was somewhat different back them. The Party was nowhere near as odious as it would become. My mother, who never voted Democrat in her life, actually liked Hubert Humphrey. And then there were the Democrat picnics and softball games.
It was at our country presidential convention that the scales fell from my eyes. The McGovernites had slyly–very slyly, I never noticed–taken over the party organization and rigged the convention. Their technique was as plain as the nose on your face: all results predetermined, our voting was just a charade to make us think we mattered.
And it was ham-fisted, clumsy, so easily seen through. They didn’t respect us enough to be clever about it: just pushed it through. The vote counts were pure crapola.
That was it for me. I didn’t change my mind about any of the issues, and eventually came back to the GOP.
I would love to hear from any of you who had a similar experience.
The whole thing was hijacked, somewhere along the line. The siren call of those opposing the Vietnam war seemed to open the door to all sorts of things which came along for the ride.
I recall talking to a person, during Trump’s first term, who was very disconcerted by Trump’s presidency, but couldn’t think of anything in Trump’s policies which had affected him, negatively. There’s a knee jerk reaction on the part of many, to defy anyone that doesn’t parrot the party line of the Left, and I suspect that many of these people don’t even know why they feel that way.
Shortly after Ronald Reagan was elected governor of California, there was a criminal scheduled for execution. IIRC, he had killed a police officer. Reagan was called a killer, by the Left, because he wouldn’t commute this criminal’s sentence. Did these people of the Left show the same fervor on behalf of police officer who had been killed in the line of duty? I’m certain that they didn’t.
Mercy and compassion, I fully understand, but many in our day seem to have misplaced their sympathies, and this has all become intertwined with the same movement which has its roots in opposition to the Vietnam War. It’s a package deal and a lot of people seem to be willing to adopt, even if this doesn’t really work to their overall benefit.
What I find really intolerable is their lavish generosity–with other people’s money.
It’s the syndrome of believing in the concept of a free lunch. People who want to believe that you can have something for nothing, hate to have this belief/wish challenged. It’s impossible for anyone to get something for nothing, unless someone, somewhere, is getting nothing for something.
Now who said that first?
I’m not sure. I heard it from my sister, back in the ‘80sm
BTW, when I look back on my work as a newspaper editor and reporter in the mid-1970s, I remember any number of local Democrat politicians, in many towns, who were good, upright, decent men and women.
If any like that are still around today, they’ve become invisible.