Both of them lead to the same deadend. Rush Limbaugh says something that a number on the Right these days says: President Obama is to blame for the rise of Donald Trump.
Rush also says that Trump is the fault of the GOP Establishment-they didn't fight hard enough against President Obama.
This is absurd, of course. The GOP was the party of 'No' for 7 and a half years. The night of Obama's Inauguration back in 2009, the GOPers met over dinner and agreed to unify around opposing him on everything he proposes or tries to do.
Mitch McConnell famously saw the job in 2009 not as bringing back the US economy and sending Americans back to work but making sure Obama was a one term President.
Yet, for the Tea Party, they never believed the GOP was being obstructionist enough with the President, despite them refusing to work with him on anything, even things they agreed with, even trying to use the debt ceiling in 2011 as part of a hostage negotiation. Yet, the answer was they never really opposed Obama.
And is this not the same thing with the Berners on the other side? They believe Obama never tried, that the Dems haven't tried, that we could have gotten single payer if only we'd asked for it more forcefully.
Both the Tea Baggers and the Berners-aka the Emoprogs-see everything as a failure of will. We don't have everything we want not because of opposition but because we never really tried to get it.
This is why I think races like the one where Debbie Wasserman-Schultz are so important are so important.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/05/debbie-wasserman-schultz-is-being.html
We can't let the Democratic party become the Left wing version of the Tea Party as Obama has said. We should remain Center Left not Hard Left.
It's worked pretty well for us. Think about it: Starting with Bill Clinton in 1992, the Dems have won 4 of the last 6 Presidential elections-the popular vote 5 times.
The Berners will sniff that this just shows the Dems have failed to do what they are elected for as we haven't gotten everything we wanted.
Right. But that's because the Congress has been GOP most of this same period-for only 4 years did the Dems have the House. The only way to really judge is when the party has all three branches for a sustained amount of time.
Yes, we had it in 2009, but because of GOP obstruction, everything needed 60 votes in the Senate. And a number of the Dems were Blue Dogs-who are now mostly out of the party.
Also that was just two years. What is needed is to have some time as a majority party to really have the full benefits of the policies we desire.
It will help a lot now that the Supreme Court is no longer Right wing with the passing of Scalia and will be liberal within a few years once Hillary wins.
Rush also says that Trump is the fault of the GOP Establishment-they didn't fight hard enough against President Obama.
This is absurd, of course. The GOP was the party of 'No' for 7 and a half years. The night of Obama's Inauguration back in 2009, the GOPers met over dinner and agreed to unify around opposing him on everything he proposes or tries to do.
Mitch McConnell famously saw the job in 2009 not as bringing back the US economy and sending Americans back to work but making sure Obama was a one term President.
Yet, for the Tea Party, they never believed the GOP was being obstructionist enough with the President, despite them refusing to work with him on anything, even things they agreed with, even trying to use the debt ceiling in 2011 as part of a hostage negotiation. Yet, the answer was they never really opposed Obama.
And is this not the same thing with the Berners on the other side? They believe Obama never tried, that the Dems haven't tried, that we could have gotten single payer if only we'd asked for it more forcefully.
Both the Tea Baggers and the Berners-aka the Emoprogs-see everything as a failure of will. We don't have everything we want not because of opposition but because we never really tried to get it.
This is why I think races like the one where Debbie Wasserman-Schultz are so important are so important.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/05/debbie-wasserman-schultz-is-being.html
We can't let the Democratic party become the Left wing version of the Tea Party as Obama has said. We should remain Center Left not Hard Left.
It's worked pretty well for us. Think about it: Starting with Bill Clinton in 1992, the Dems have won 4 of the last 6 Presidential elections-the popular vote 5 times.
The Berners will sniff that this just shows the Dems have failed to do what they are elected for as we haven't gotten everything we wanted.
Right. But that's because the Congress has been GOP most of this same period-for only 4 years did the Dems have the House. The only way to really judge is when the party has all three branches for a sustained amount of time.
Yes, we had it in 2009, but because of GOP obstruction, everything needed 60 votes in the Senate. And a number of the Dems were Blue Dogs-who are now mostly out of the party.
Also that was just two years. What is needed is to have some time as a majority party to really have the full benefits of the policies we desire.
It will help a lot now that the Supreme Court is no longer Right wing with the passing of Scalia and will be liberal within a few years once Hillary wins.
No comments:
Post a Comment