Damn Fools: Democratic Party!

| | Comments (2)

I have never heard anything so politically bereft of intelligence as some Democrats on the hill calling for a filibuster or Senatorial 'Custer's Last Stand' on the replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Does the Democratic Party have any clue as to how politics can be played to win for a change? I don't think so.

Look, unless Bush's nominee is so malicious toward the public good that it is transparent to the public at large, Democrat's filibuster of O'Connor's replacement will miss and immense opportunity to win voters over. But do they see it? Apparently not.

There are at least two seats that will come open in Bush's term, the current one and in all likelihood, Chief Justice Rehnquist's. Democrats should demonstrate bipartisanship to the public by giving a pass on even the most barely acceptable Bush nominee for O'Connor's replacement. This one move could generate real high profile and widely media covered political capital when it comes to the second Supreme Court nominee.

To filibuster O'Connor's replacement will do nothing to elevate the view of the Democratic Party in voter's eyes, save for the already loyal. Avoiding that filibuster will earn the Party respect and a very large pot of public relations good will to package into their fund raising and voter awareness and education advertising. If they can win more voter support, and demonstrate the high moral ground on O'Connor's replacement nominee, they will have a much stronger position to work from when Rehnquist's or another Justice's replacement comes up between now and 2008. It is the 2nd replacement nominee they should filibuster if Bush does not show the same bipartisanship measure Democrats showed by not filibustering O'Connor's replacement nominee. Can they not see this?

In other words, Democrats have within their grasp the opportunity to credibly paint Republicans as the Party unwilling to work bipartisanly for the good of the people and the nation when Bush nominates his second justice replacement. That opportunity evaporates however, if they filibuster O'Connor's replacement and they paint themselves, instead of the Republicans, as the obstructionists and unwilling to work in a bipartisan manner for the people's benefit.

So, far, I have heard nothing from Democrats or their Party, that they even see this opportunity. And if the Democratic Party proceeds with the filibuster of a nominee which the majority of Americans feel will be OK, they will have proved their utter political ineptitude which many already blame for their spate of recent election losses, including myself.

If the Democratic Party wants to share power, they had bloody well get busy on long term planning and strategy and stop letting every Republican action deter them from achieving that goal of power sharing. Republicans gained power ONLY with a long term multi-election cycle plan to win the hearts, minds, and trust of voters: a plan adhered to almost without exception from 1990 through 2004. This is precisely what the Democratic Party lacks, and it betrays their utter lack of political saavy and sophistication which the Republicans have so adroitly displayed through the last election.

It is wholly insufficient for the Democratic Party to rely upon in-fighting and differences amongst Republicans to part the "Red Sea" for Democrat's return to majority status. Republicans may be Christians, but, they damned sure aren't that benevolent politically. Republicans are losing the voting public's trust on Iraq, the deficits, Social Security and border security. Do the Democrats have a plan to capitalize on that political reality? I don't see it.

Wake up Democrats, get some intelligence into your leadership, or join the Green Party and Libertarian Party as permanent minority third parties and learn to live under a one party democracy, if there is such a thing.


All politicians have a very short memory. They all cry when things are going their way and then when they are, the other side cries about the same thing. I wish we had some politicians that would focus on the real issues of today instead of whining about unproductive topics.

You and me both, traditionalist. Perhaps if we voters get on the anti-incumbent bandwagon in 2006, they will listen, eh?

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.


Monthly Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.25

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by David R. Remer published on July 7, 2005 6:37 AM.

Jail the Messenger, Forget the Message! was the previous entry in this blog.

Senate Hearing on CPB Funding is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Offsite Links