FLAIT

Beginning with the Reagan administration, through the Clinton administration (see the deregulation of Wall St. and the Telecom industry) and the entire Bush administration, the country has gone conservative. And we don't have to look very far to see the results of that (I recommend viewing that link).

While the Republican Party and conservatism were committing political suicide, you'd think the Democratic party would have engaged the country in a mature, intelligent conversation the last few years and not only explained what "less government," "lower taxes" and bullying the world has gotten us into (no lies and no spin necessary), but also explained why we need, yes, "big government"; and then proceeded to get smart, honest, creative, liberals elected.

But they didn't. They weren't bright enough or had the guts enough to "go liberal." And that's understandable. The GOP has turned "liberal" and "government" into such dirty words over the last 30 years that it has intimidated the Democratic Party into running away from them.

So instead of using the facts, logic, practical reasoning and the power of persuasion to build a solid liberal majority - and turning a selfish electorate into one that's willing to sacrifice for the good of the country - Democrats ran to the right and got DINO's elected. And we don't have to look very far to see the results of that either.

Making matters worse, the GOP sprinted even further to the right and gave us selfish, hostile "tea baggers" whose mentality and tone can be measured by the fact that they "didn't come armed...this time."

With the country hopelessly riding the wrong track, bogged down in two wars and on the brink of an economic depression, Barack Obama had an opportunity like no other incoming president before him. The country was desperate for mature, intelligent, bold, responsible leadership. Leadership that was going to finally tell the lobbyists exactly where to go; leadership that was going to finally take the painful and politically unpopular steps to turn the country around; leadership that was going to finally put an end to Congressional bureaucracy and politics as usual; and leadership that was going to finally stand up to the radical fundamentalist Republican Party Cult.

But he didn't do any of that. Instead we got a passive, hesitant, easily intimidated, moderate to conservative turn-the-other-cheek appeaser (February insert: here and here) who's yet to cross the political center line onto the liberal side a single time.

This complete lack of leadership enabled the Democrats to remain the bumbling saps they've always been and permitted the GOP to get crazier, angrier and more destructive, if that was even possible (see last summer's town hall meetings, the aforementioned "tea baggers" and the party's obstruction tactics on health care well, just about everything).

The Republican Party is nothing but thugs, bullies and political terrorists wrapped up in a massive cult that shouldn't be allowed close the political table. In fact, if the Democrats had the record George Bush and the GOP had in the last decade - their incompetence, their fecklessness, their hypocrisy (also here, here, here, here, here and here), their spin (also here and here), their disastrous wars, their war crimes, their mental illness and their obstinate, pugnacious, immature and unconstitutional (cough, cough) governance - there would no longer be a Democratic Party; the Republican Party would have made sure of it.

But the Republican Party is alive and well because Democrats never stand up for themselves, or anything. Democrats didn't even realize that being accused of "cutting and running" from Iraq was an insult (I guess it was okay for Ronald Reagan to "cut and run" from Lebanon in 1984. And last I checked, "cutting and running" was pro-life). The word "liberal" has become an insult and something Americans should fear. The repetitive mantra of "Nazi," "Socialist," "big government," "tax and spend," "Democrats will take your guns away" and "Democrats are soft on (fill in the blank)" have either gone unanswered or by lurching to the right (this could be why Obama sent more troops to Afghanistan, twice, and why he's dropping more bombs in more countries. He's acting tough for the sake of appearing "tough on terrorism." Lot of good it does. Republicans are still declaring that "Obama's soft on terrorism." Gee, what a surprise.).

And then there were last summer's angry rants of "death panels" and Joe Wilson's shriek of "you lie" during President Obama's health care address to Congress. All of it went with a turn of the cheek. Anyone see a pattern here?

I would have loved to have seen President Obama step down from the podium, go over to Wilson, grab him by the shirt collar and literally throw him out of the chamber. No, Presidents shouldn't have to act that way, but if that's how Republicans have to be treated, if that's what it takes to respond to Republican immaturity, gridlock and attack politics, if that's what it takes to get things done and save the country, so be it. Someone has to be the adult. It's called leadership.

But Obama would never do that because he wants to keep his dignity and therefore, can't show anger publicly. If anything, he avoids confrontation with Republicans (but confronting liberals is another story). Show me a President that avoids confrontation with an opposition that will kick, lie, cheat, scream, blame, complain and create disarray (just like a spoiled child or a school yard bully) so they can prevent him from succeeding, and I'll show you a weak, ineffective and intimidated President.

But we shouldn't be surprised because Democrats never get angry at Republicans and never, ever fight back.

I realized something recently: when the Senior prescription drug legislation was going through Congress in 2003 - written by the pharmaceutical industry, for the pharmaceutical industry and passed by the GOP despite the program adding to the deficit - they made sure every state had to take part. There were no opt-ins, no opt-outs and no triggers. States had to join, they didn't have a choice. And here we are talking about opt-ins, opt-outs and triggers with the public option. Oh wait, there won't be a public option. Never mind.

Winning elections because the other side single-handedly destroyed the country (and the world) wasn't enough. Barack Obama and the Democrats had an incredible opportunity the last few years to change minds, change politics, change direction and prevent the country from going further (right) into the abyss by building at least a center-left majority that turned the GOP into an afterthought. Instead, they welcomed turncoat Joe - "we need his 60th vote" - Lieberman back into the Democratic Caucus, continued politics as usual that caters to the big, the powerful and the wealthy, and handed their lunch money over to the Republicans the same way a wimp hands it over to the schoolyard bully.

That's worked out so well that Democrats will lose a bunch of seats in November and possibly their Congressional majority. Regardless, in less then a year, opportunity lost.

Maybe if Democrats got mature, responsible "good government" liberals elected (as opposed "typical politician" DINO's); maybe if they led in 2009 by putting forth a real health care plan that actually addressed the asinine system we've been working with the for past 60 years; maybe if they stood up for it and didn't allow the town hall lunatics to take control of the (cough, cough) "debate"; maybe if they didn't allow the GOP to filibuster it to death; maybe if they seriously addressed money in politics and changed "the system"; maybe if there was a complete and thorough investigation* of the nation's global financial collapse (as opposed to putting the same deregulating Wall St. bankers who are responsible for the collapse on your economic team); maybe if they re-regulated Wall St. (as opposed to keeping the status quo); maybe if they enacted a bigger, bolder and more creative stimulus package (as opposed to one that was too small and too boring); maybe if they investigated and prosecuted the Bush administration for war crimes; maybe if they dealt with terrorism in a more astute, practical and intelligent manner (as opposed to dropping more and more bombs, which creates more and more terrorists, that we'll have to drop more and more bombs on, which creates more and more terrorists [April insert: also here]); maybe if they stood up to Republicans, embarrassed them and discredited them, and proved to the country they are thugs, bullies, political terrorists and blatant hypocrites wrapped up in a massive cult; and maybe if he became the Theodore Roosevelt/Franklin Roosevelt/Harry Truman the country so desperately needed, not only would Barack Obama be on the verge of becoming this generation's John F. Kennedy, but he'd be on the way to becoming the best president the country ever had!

We'd also be talking about the Democrats picking up seats in November and no one would bother listening to any Republican anymore because there would no longer be a Republican Party.

Oh, and most important, after getting very close to the point of no return, the country would finally be headed in the right correct direction.

But Obama and the Democrats didn't do that. They didn't even try it. They didn't even think of it! Instead, they've been running to the couldn't-be-more-wrong right because they're scared to death of Republicans and because pulling troops and resources out of Afghanistan in 2002, invading Iraq, torturing detainees, warrantless wiretapping, corporate welfare and largess, dismantling FEMA (on purpose so when they're unable to respond to a hurricane, it reinforces the GOP propaganda that "government is incompetent and doesn't work"), instituting a bellicose foreign policy that created enemies (on purpose to rile up the party's base), deregulating the telecom and financial industries, wartime tax cuts for the wealthy, and our free market, for-profit, employer-based private health insurance system were all wonderful "big government" liberal ideas. And Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the public option, SCHIP, the GI Bill, the WPA, the TVA, the FDIC, the SEC, the FDA, the EPA, FEMA, banking regulation, the minimum wage, college loans, civil rights, flood insurance, unemployment, disability and workers comp insurance, and addressing global warming were all horrible "small government" conservative ideas.

I'm joking. But I wanted to point out that the right doesn't have a leg to stand on. They rarely do. And yet, they're the ones that get out of bed every single day looking for a Democrat to scream at; and it's the Democrats who you'll find rolled up into a fetal position, willing to hand over their lunch money to the Republicans so they'll stop screaming at them, insulting them and ridiculing them (but they never do. Gee, what a surprise.).

If that's not a clear case of the bullies intimidating the wimps, then I don't know what is.

Democrats have proven that they couldn't argue themselves out of a paper bag...a wet paper bag. Not a brain or a backbone in the bunch. And that puts the left into a quandary. Do we continue to support these dithering "K Street" DINO's with our contributions and votes? Or do we turn our back on these schnooks and allow the Republicans to regain power?

When politics has become such a nasty, petty, partisan game; when a terrorist attack is used for political gain; when the President is attacked because he doesn't use the word "terrorist" enough; when the President is attacked because it took him three days to make a public statement about a terrorist attack (even though it was alright for a Republican President to take six days); when the President is attacked for speaking to school children about staying in school (but it was alright when a Republican President spoke to school children about "line item vetoes, gun control, the need to reaffirm our traditional moral values" and tax policy); when governing becomes more about spin, photo-ops, acting tough just to appear tough, and navigating around deliberately placed political roadblocks then it is about solving problems, preventing problems and, well, governing; when political "victories" are the result of caving in (again, again and again) on legislation that's already been watered down and is "the best we can do"; when inducing fear, dividing the country and legislative sabotage (February insert: and obstruction) is considered a "winning political strategy" (February insert: also here); when a political "party's" only priority is to keep their brainwashed base in a perpetual state of anger at (and fear of) liberals, and "government", it's no wonder our once great country has fallen so far, so fast. And it will continue its free fall until someone leads this country and begins to change minds, change direction and drastically changes politics. It won't be easy because conservatism has had an unopposed 30-year head start - and getting a nice tail wind from President Obama and Congressional DINO's. But we have to begin somewhere because America's future - and "President Palin," or any "less government"/"lower taxes"/"let the free market decide"/do-nothing radical fundamentalist Republican for that matter - lies in the balance.

Then again, maybe "President Palin" (February insert: here) is exactly what Barack Obama and the Democrats deserve. But the country doesn't. So what do we do?


* An investigation is getting underway this month but it won't be "complete and thorough." As Frank Rich of the the New York Times writes: "The new inquiry does have subpoena power, but its entire budget, a mere $8 million, doesn’t even match the lobbying expenditures for just three banks (Citi, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America) in the first nine months of 2009. The firms under scrutiny can pay for as many lawyers as they need to stall between now and Dec. 15, deadline day for the commission’s report."

February insert: I wanted to add something.

During his campaign and the first few months in office, President Obama said something like, "government can not solve every problem." Of course he did because Democrats have to appease conservatives at every turn (when was the last time a Republican appeased a liberal? Heck, when was the last time a Democrat appeased a liberal?).

Obama also thought he had to calm Republican fears about Democrats "going too far" or "over reaching" when it comes to government because after 30 years of incessant anti-government rhetoric spewing out of the GOP propaganda machine, the mindless and gullible will naturally fear government (how come after 30 years of "less government," Republicans never have to calm Democratic fears of the "free market going too far" or "over reaching"? Nope. Quite the contrary. They call for more "free markets" and even "smaller government!").

Lot of good all that appeasing and calming did, huh?

Obama's quote reminded me of Bill Clinton when he declared, "the era of big government is over," as if we actually had "big government" (talk about appeasing).

But other then a failing marriage, what is Obama talking about? I'm serious. What problems can't government solve? Because whether it's health care, primary education or college, your savings account, your credit card, your investments, your airline, your mortgage, your daily commute, the food you eat, the water you drink, the reliability and cost of our energy needs (oil, coal and gas), how we bring TV, phone and internet into our homes and businesses, or our competitiveness in the world, one way or another, directly or indirectly, government is involved in every American's life. It has to be. If not, here's what "less government," "the free market" and "competition" have given us: the collapse of Wall St., an asinine employer-based for-profit health care system that's bankrupting the country, broadband internet access that lags behind the rest of the world, and as far as energy's concerned, an ethanol boondoggle, gas guzzling SUV's and "high speed" trains that are two generations behind the rest of the industrialized world.

Heck of a job by that "free market," huh?

Sure, "government can not solve every problem" sounds good. And I'm sure it polls well (since it's been drummed into every American non-stop for the last 30 years by the GOP propaganda machine, I'd think so!). But is it really true? If so, what problems are Obama talking about? What problems can the "free market" alone fix? Okay, I'll give you the battle between VHS and Beta 30 years ago. But that wasn't even a "problem," that was a burgeoning industry's competition.

And I'll give you lower telephone rates and lower air fares (the latter didn't come without consequences, however). But those are basic, everyday consumer goods and services.

So what public problem can't/shouldn't government solve? What problems has the "free market" alone A) addressed and B) fixed?

(October insert: If private businesses are so well run, why do so many go out of business? And after what BP, Blackwater Xe, Enron, AIG, Lehman Brothers, Bernie Madoff and the mortgage and health insurance industries have done to families, tax payers and the country...hell, when the airlines (deregulated by the way) treat travelers their own customers the way they do...why does the right think so highly of and have so much confidence in private business? Americans are ripped off, and worse, by private companies, big and small, every day. So where is the right getting this notion of unquestioned purity, wholesomeness, honesty and competence for private business and industry? Well, they have to believe it, or else government would look pretty darn good, and they can't allow that.)

President Obama's quote doesn't surprise me because he, like the rest of the Democrats - due to Republican intimidation and failing to fight back for 30 years - has been kidnapped into going along with the GOP's propaganda. And Democrats are too frightened to prove why "big government," especially at this point in time, is very important. So instead of using Big Oil, Big Pharma, the Big Banks and the insurance industry as prime examples of corporate largess and "deregulated free markets," the Democratic knee-jerk reaction has been to run to the right, appease conservatives and embrace the "free market" and "competition" as if they alone will solve our problems.

"Competition" and "free markets" are all well and good for say hammers and HD TV's, but not something as complicated, costly and as wide ranging as energy, health care, flood insurance, derivatives, collateralized debt obligations, credit default swaps, the environment, the country's infrastructure and competitiveness, or much of anything else. And it's about time Democrats - you know, the supposed "party of big government" - realized that.

Hey, if you're going to be accused of being for "big government" you might as well live up to it.

I won't hold my breath.

April 19, 2011 insert: Laura Clawson of Daily Kos shows that government can not, and should not be "run like a business".

April. 21, 2011 insert: Paul Krugman on health care and why patients should not be thought of as consumers in the marketplace.

February, 2010 insert: Democrats are all for progressive legislation when they know it can't pass...and when it can, they make excuses to make sure it doesn't, here (Mar., 2010 insert: and here).

March 25, 2010 insert:

This is how the right acts when they don't get their way (on legislation that can help most of them. But never let practicality get in the way of anti-government defiance, intimidation, threats and violence.).

But we shouldn't be surprised. It was only last summer that a Democrat was hung in effigy and jokes were made about lynching Democrats.

You know, maybe if Democrats stood up to this crap a long time ago, and maybe if they didn't allow "liberal" and "Democratic" to be turned into evil code words that are used to brainwash and incite hate, none of this would be happening. But that's for another time.

In the mist of all this right-wing rage, threats, intimidation and vandalism over the health care legislation, Democrats still sit there and take it.

After Democratic Majority leader Steny Hoyer admitted that his members are at risk, a reporter asked him about a meeting he had with Republican leadership regarding a possible joint appearance, where the GOP would address, and denounce, these right-wing threats, intimidation and vandalism. Check out his response at :25 into this video clip. He acted if he's sorry the Republican leadership missed their favorite TV show for Christ's sake!

So after admitting that his members are at risk, Hoyer didn't go after the leaders of this "party" who won't join him in a unified Congressional setting to denounce these threats and intimidation... which they're responsible for!

Hoyer had the chance to show some anger and rage of his own and really let the Republicans have it. But since he's rolled up into his fetal position, too freighted of the Republicans to come out, he wasn't angry and didn't go after the GOP who are ostensibly responsible for these threats, intimidation and vandalism .

With members of the United States Government "at risk," where's President Obama on all this? All rolled up in the fetal position as well, also too scared to fight back against the Republicans.

And we wonder why these afraid-of-their-own-shadow Democrats are always bullied, threatened and intimidated by the GOP.

Now they're handing over more then just their lunch money.

September, 2010 insert: Putting Republicans on the defensive doesn't happen often. And Democratic victories are few and far between. But leave it to Democrats to screw up the one time they had the chance for both, right before the elections.

Democrats ran away from Bush's expiring tax cuts for the wealthy, and making middle class tax cuts permanent because they were afraid Republicans would say they were "raising taxes."

Jesus Christ. Don't they know by know that they're going to say that anyway? What a bunch of pathetic saps.

I have one word for Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi: Boo!

September, 2010 insert: I wanted to add something but it was a bit long so I gave it its own post, here.