The "mainstream" is shrinking

Toronto Free press ^ | Friday, June 17, 2005 | Klaus Rohrich

[rface]

.....after all, how can a thrice-divorced Limbaugh or the likes of O’Reilly dare to speak about morality? The answer is that at despite their own weaknesses and failings, both Limbaugh and O’Reilly believe there is an absolute right and wrong, which the Democrats do not.....

I recently heard Howard Dean, the loony tunes former Democratic presidential candidate and current chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), talking about how George W. Bush was "outside the mainstream", since he was elected by a cabal of right-wing conservative fundamentalist Christians. Either Dr. Dean is redefining the term ‘mainstream’ or he has problems with basic mathematics. Last time I looked the Bush victory was resounding, winning by a margin of over 3,000,000 votes. This represents a plurality of 2.5% of the popular vote, which admittedly is slim, but the Electoral College votes for Bush exceed the Democrats by 6%. Either way one looks at the 2004 presidential election, the majority of voters opted for Bush.

Taking into account that in addition, the Republicans gained a majority of seats in the House of Representatives, the Senate and the majority of the nation’s governorships, one is given to wonder just how unbalanced Dean really is. I am reminded of that day in Iowa when after taking a sound drubbing, Dean stood on the stage claiming that he would win all the states in the union and belting out his now (in)famous primal scream.

Whatever drugs Dean is taking, I’d like to have some, too. It would be nice to face utter defeat repeatedly with the buoyant optimism Dean brings to the table. But then, reality doesn’t have a very large role in the Democrats’ playbook.

Listening to Hillary Clinton when she is addressing her supporters, one would get the impression that she is Howard Dean’s hand puppet. Ditto for Ted Kennedy, who makes Fidel Castro seem positively conservative, with some of his pronouncements.

One is given to wonder if the Democrats really believe the things they say, thinking they are addressing people too gullible not to know the difference. In my wildest imagination, I could not think that any of the Democratic luminaries really believe the stuff that passes from their lips. After all, these are all supposedly intelligent, well-educated people. Yet they speak in imagery so primitive and basic, that one would think their words were meant for morons.

This, I believe is the reason that the so-called "mainstream" is shrinking. The Democrats insult people’s intelligence with their outrageous statements, who subsequently look elsewhere for political inspiration. And while George W. Bush isn’t necessarily the most scintillating or inspirational of leaders and his Republican Party is far from dynamic or exciting, at least they aren’t bonkers like the Democrats! Personally, I’m delighted with what the Democrats are doing and saying, as they will continue to alienate people, driving them to the Republican side. While this trend has been ongoing for the past 12 years, it appears the Democrats do not understand the process. They believe that their message is not reaching the public, that talk radio icons such as Rush Limbaugh or TV personalities like Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity are dominating the airwaves not through the quality of their message, but though some nefarious subterfuge, designed to suck the oxygen out of the Democrats’ platform. And after all, how can a thrice-divorced Limbaugh or the likes of O’Reilly dare to speak about morality? The answer is that at despite their own weaknesses and failings, both Limbaugh and O’Reilly believe there is an absolute right and wrong, which the Democrats do not.

To the Democrats right and wrong are relative and depend on circumstances. That’s why they appear not to have a problem with people like Ted Kennedy talking about women’s rights and Bill Clinton or Al Sharpton talking about the Truth. They believe that no one has the moral certitude to define good and evil in absolute terms, because after all, what’s evil to some is good to others. Which is one of the things that’s at the root of their undoing.

Twenty years ago, the so-called "mainstream media" had a virtual monopoly on what constituted "truth". Thankfully the advent of the internet and talk radio have given dissenting individuals an opportunity to challenge that "truth" and while daily the number of Democratic supporters decreases, the Democrats’ leadership hasn’t yet figured out that they’ve been urinating into their own well these past two decades and seem determined to continue doing so. Which, as Martha Stewart would say "is a good thing". After all, anything that shrinks the Democrats’ "mainstream" is helpful.

[rface]

It's always surprising to me to see opinions like this come from Canada

[Juan Medén]

Great stuff. Full of great one-liners! I think he has said it better than any American I've read. Coming from a Canadian, it seems more objective too.

[Peach]

A very good article that surprised me.

[marty60]

Well ea are in the midst of a MASSIVE Dum/MSM campaign to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory concerning the Iraq War. They are massively working on convincing the American people that the Iraq War is really a defeat. It is a sickening site to behold.

[oldbrowser]

George W. Bush was "outside the mainstream"

The democrats are inside the "mainstream",
The "mainstream Media" in inside the "mainstream",
The republicans are outside the "mainstream,
The majority of Americans are outside the "mainstream".