Posted on 08/09/2006 10:40:08 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob
The Democrat Party died yesterday in Hartford, Connecticut. Present when this venerable institution breathed its last were a minority of the Democrats in the Nutmeg State. The Party was the child of the Republican-Democrat Party, and the Anti-Federalist Party. It leaves no known descendants. However, political parties sometimes spawn children many years after their deaths.
Is that verdict too harsh? The leaders of the Democrat Party in Washington, New York, and elsewhere, are not admitting even to a serious illness. It’s difficult to conduct a proper Irish wake when on-lookers insist on prodding the deceased to sing and dance.
These major political parties have held great power – usually including the Presidency and control of one or both Houses of Congress – only to disappear from the political stage, remembered in history books that no one reads any more: The Federalists, the Anti-Federalists, the Republican-Democrats....
Let’s review. The Democrats hold Jefferson-Jackson Dinners annually, claiming Jefferson as their progenitor. Crack open a history book. Read Jefferson’s First Inaugural Address. He founded the Republican-Democrat Party, which existed only during his two terms as President. Not only was he not a Democrat, he would have run screaming into the night rather than accept the levels of national power and taxation that modern Democrat espouse.
The Whigs, the Union Democrats, and the Liberal Republican Parties are also in the political graveyard, along with lesser-known cousins like the Anti-Masonic Party (held the first national political convention), the Know-Nothings, and the Progressives (the actual party which ran Teddy Roosevelt in 1912).
Since most reporters are grossly ignorant of American political history, they are unaware that political parties have often died, and others were born in their place. Not knowing that, they’re also unaware of the common cause of such political death. It happens when any party gets permanently crosswise from the American people on a critical issue. The Democrat Party has just crossed that divide.
Mind you, I am not making a brief for Joe Lieberman, personally. I liked and respected him when we were classmates at Yale, and when we worked together on The Yale Daily News. I supported him financially when he ran defeated Lowell Weicker for Senate. I lost all respect for Joe when he chose his party over his country, backing away from the Clinton Impeachment. (Because I thought Joe thoroughly honest, I’d written six months prior that I expected him to be the “honest Senator” as Goldwater was concerning President Nixon a quarter century before.)
But, when Joe came to that unique point where he alone could influence American history, for better or worse, Joe chose worse. No, I am not saying that the Democrat Party is dead because it failed to renominate Joe Lieberman for Senate from Connecticut. I’m saying the Party is dead because of who it did nominate, and how, for that slot.
Ned Lamont was the choice of the Connecticut Democrats. He’s a wealthy man who bought his nomination. This is a sad but spreading phenomenon in both parties. One reason I tend to distrust filthy-rich people who buy their way into office – regardless of their politics or party – is that they are disconnected from real life.
For instance, Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey simply forgave a half-million dollar mortgage on a house he bought for a lady friend. Since time immemorial, men have given gifts to women And it is true that Governor Corzine’s one-time bed mate had the additional advantage of being head of a large public service union. Still, anyone who can drop half a million dollars without blinking, for sex, politics, or both, is not living in the same world as I, or almost anyone I know.
Such people simply are not touched by worry about paying taxes, putting up with government regulation, or facing the myriad of real issues of real people. That brings us back to Ned Lamont. A prime mover in putting him into office was MoveOn.org. Rather than describe that outfit, I encourage every reader to go to their website. Read a sample of their policies; decide for yourself whether they are barking mad moonbats. While you’re at it, read up on George Soros, the eminence grise behind MoveOn, and various other financial puppet masters.
On foreign policy, Lamont follows former Secretary of State Madeline Albright, who in turn is Neville Chamberlain in drag. We are in a war. The war will to continue – and perhaps get worse – until America takes the lead worldwide, and does what is necessary to win that war. We can only hope the price for Lamont’s politics will be lower than the 50 million who died for Neville Chamberlain’s politics.
Does this assessment change, if Joe Lieberman gets elected as an “independent” come November? Not in the least. The mere nomination of Lamont shows the cut-and-run Murtha disease has now infected more than half of the Democrat Party. The only remaining questions are, how much time will it take, and how many tens of thousands, or millions of Americans, most of them civilians, will have to die before the Democrat Party as it now exists is actually buried in the history books. Only then can a more honest and competent party take its place – as has happened so often before in American history.
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." —Marcus Aurelius
- 30 -
* Note to editors who might question the 1828 date. In 1824, four candidates ran as “Democrats” including Jackson who placed first without a majority, and John Quincy Adams, who placed second but won in the House of Representatives. There were two other candidates, both “Democrats.” In short, the Democrat Party did not make a nomination in 1824. In 1828, Jackson did become the (first) presidential nominee of the Democratic Party.
- 30 -
About the Author: John Armor is a lawyer specializing in constitutional law, who may again be a candidate for Congress in the 11th District of North Carolina.
- 30 -
Ping.
Everyone chooses their occupation or profession based on their ability and desire to satisfy themselves and the people they care about. Most simply take the first job that will pay enough money to keep the respect of their family. Professionals prepare systematically to do something more than that. Journalists go into journalism to be part of a profession which is at the top of the pecking order. First and foremost, journalism promotes the idea that journalism is the most important profession. And that implies pecking at all the other chickens in the barnyard.And so on. In general, anyone who aspires to respect based on doing things, and who is a natural for membership in the Republican Party, is a natural target of journalism.
- Water is so important that if somebody shuts someone else's operation down they are said to have "shut his water off." Does someone take their importance by providing good water to the public? Journalism's reaction is to look for questions which can be raised about the possibility of quality degradation in the water supply, and about how expensive water is. Peck.
- Everyone needs gasoline and electricity. Does someone take their importance by providing energy to the public? Journalism's reaction is to look for questions which can be raised about the environmental and international political impact of producing energy, and about how expensive energy is. Peck.
- Everyone needs, or will need, health care. Does someone take their importance by providing health care to the public? Journalism's reaction is to look for questions which can be raised about the reliability and expense of health care. Peck.
- The nation needs police and military. Does someone take their importance by providing security to the public and the nation? Journalism's reaction is to question whether they do their job adequately without brutality. Peck.
Who does journalism not peck? Only those who sell out any independence from the idea that journalism is the only thing that matters. Those people, it calls "liberals." Or "progressives." Or whatever high-sounding label they prefer. Which is why people who are rich enough, tend to buy off journalism by taking on journalism's political coloration. Especially, but far from exclusively, those who inherited their money.
Ping to my #42.
Great analysis Congressman. I agree that Lieberman's party has wandered into the desert without a pillar of smoke or fire to guide them.
When I heard about Lieberman, I thought the Democrats had lost it. To abandon the central part of their party in this time of terrorism is simply insane.
I lile the way you talk--and I like what you say. Harold Ford the junior must go down... too many socialists already in the senate.
Don't be too sure that the dim party is finished! The mad-leftists are very powerful and rich. They will stop at nothing to make the USA a communist paradise.
I think you're right. The fringe is taking over the dems - these folks think it's 1965 and the "kids" are all behind them... Ain't no kids - boomers grew up - and more are becoming conservative every day...
bump
"The Democrat Party died yesterday in Hartford, Connecticut."
I would agree with you that the current Democrat party is dying - or splitting into two as it did before the late unpleasantness of the War between the States... Then, as now is cannot paper-over or sustain the policy dichotomy of either slavery/anti-slavery or National security/National isolationism. The Lieberman/Lamont contest just highlighted that fundamental divide, however my personal opinion is that it will takes two more Presidential election defeats before that party takes the road blazed by the Federalists.
"These major political parties have held great power – usually including the Presidency and control of one or both Houses of Congress – only to disappear from the political stage, remembered in history books that no one reads any more: The Federalists, the Anti-Federalists, the Republican-Democrats...."
I would differ just a bit on the history of "major" political parties in the history of the United States. By my count there have been five major political parties, with a few more influential minor parties to boot. Still hard to believe that James Monroe was elected to a second term with no opposition.
There have been five major political parties in the history of the United States, the Federalists, the Democratic-Republicans, the Democrats, the Whigs and the Republicans. Each of these major parties has in at least one Congress controlled the House, Senate and Presidency concurrently. This is what has defined them as major parties...
What say you?
dvwjr
Great Post!!!
May I plagerize?
I lost all respect for Joe when he chose his party over his country, backing away from the Clinton Impeachment. (Because I thought Joe thoroughly honest, I’d written six months prior that I expected him to be the “honest Senator” as Goldwater was concerning President Nixon a quarter century before.) I have never forgotten that. I have nothing but contempt for LIEberman ever since. HHC's husband.
Bump for later
Ping: Death of a party
Yes, it's true. That was exactly the reason my Democrat voting fishing buddy gave. That he always had voted Dem, and so had his father. On the one hand he'll go on about his belief in the free market, then he'll go right out and vote for a socialist. None of these guys believe in affirmative action or even many of the Dem causes; but they see the Dems as the "home team."
I guess you could say the Bushes, the Romneys and other Republicans are blue bloods, but the Dems have their own share of 'em, the Kerrys and the Kennedys come to mind right away. Not to mention FDR, who was a blue blood as well. And this Lamont idiot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.