Escape From Nutter Prison

Just when you thought Democrats couldn't sound any nuttier, their nutty aunt in the attic, aka Helen Thomas and nutty political analyst Paul Begala start offering them political advice to stop their monthlong erosion in the polls. They'd be wise to ignore these nuts, which is why they'll accept their advice, depriving themselves of any chance of retaking either the House or Senate this fall.

Here's Thomas' take on the current Democratic woes:

When are the Democrats going to get their act together?

Surely, they are not going to let President Bush's political guru, Karl Rove, snooker them in the mid-term November election campaign as he did in the past two presidential elections. What is he going to pull out of the hat? Soft on terrorism? Gay marriage? Flag burning? 9/11?

Are the Democrats going to be such easy prey again, neutralized by phony wedge issues and neglectful of the real issue, which is the administration's flagrant use of falsehoods to justify a war of choice? It could happen again. The leaderless Democrats, speaking in a cacophony, are being outgunned by the conservatives and members of their own party representing the Democratic Leadership Council who are at heart "Republican lite."

Helen, to answer your first question, the answer is no. If you'd think back to the thirties, you'd realize that Democrats never get their act together. Remember the famous Will Rogers line that "I don't belong to an organized political party. I'm a Democrat"? Need I say more?

As for being "such easy prey again, neutralized by phony wedge issues" like being "soft on terror", yesterday's votes prove that Democrats don't care about winning the GWOT. That's hardly a phony wedge issue. It's the most important issue of our time, outdistancing all other issues by miles. That provides a nice segue into Begala's incoherent, irreverant blather.

The media are hyperventilating about "Democrats in disarray" over the war in Iraq. ABC's "The Note" captures the stupidity, vapidity and gullibility of the mainstream media perfectly: "Democrats can deny it all they want (and not all do...), but they are on the precipice of self-immolating over the issue that has most crippled the Bush presidency and of making facts on the ground virtually meaningless. In other words, they are on the precipice of making Iraq a 2006 political winner for the Republican Party."

I'm sure I've read a dopier statement of conventional wisdom, a more perfect transcription of Karl Rove's ignorant talking points, but I really can't remember when. As usual, the Smart Guys have it backwards. Democrats can and will win the Iraq debate if they embrace the fact that they disagree and contrast it with the slavish, mindless rubber-stamp Republicans.

That he thinks that Democrats should "embrace the fact that they disagree and contrast it with the slavish, mindless rubber-stamp Republicans" tells you everything you should know about Democratic strategists.

If they merely disagreed with themselves while offering intelligent counterproposals to win, then they'd be wise to embrace their differences. That isn't what they're doing though. They're fighting amongst themselves because they don't want to "embrace" any of the plethora of cut-and-run, cut-and-walk, cut-and-jog or my favorite from Jane Harman "cut-and-win" plans.

Begala is legendary only because he was part of the initial Clinton team. He lost favor, along with the Rajin' Cajun Jim Carville after guiding the Democrats into the 1994 massacre. Since then, Begala has fed off of his reputation instead of off his accomplishments. These days, he's nothing more than a smartalecky idiot pundit. It isn't like he's got a long history of great accomplishments.

I almost feel sad for Democrats because they get such lousy advice from so many nuts who shouldn't be left out of the attic and who shouldn't be allowed within a hundred miles of a TV camera. Then again, they've brought it on themselves.

---

Posted Friday, June 23, 2006 7:12 AM

May 2006 Posts

No comments.