Posted on 12/09/2003 2:21:44 PM PST by swilhelm73
Did you know that the Democratic party in the U.S. relies more heavily upon large donations from millionaires for its finances than the Republicans? The Republican party takes in a much larger proportion of its funds from small and modest donations, because its backbone is formed by the small businessmen and "sole proprietors" (barbers, shopkeepers, plumbers, etc.) of the American heartland. The Democratic party gets its strength from the millionaires in the communications industry, Hollywood, and other new technological elites.
These underreported facts do not serve the mythology of the American Left. The Left imagines that it is the populist party. But most journalists, professors, and other commentators on public affairs are considerably to the left of the American people. And wealthier, and highly educated — in short, privileged. The "voice" of the Democratic party seems much more like the glitzy people "uptown" and in Hollywood than like the workers and middle class of Midland, Texas.
That is why, under the leadership of George W. Bush, the Republicans have gained control of not only the White House, but also the Senate, the House of Representatives, 28 of the 50 governorships (having won three out of four elections last month), and (for the first time in ages) a majority of the legislators in the 50 states.
So it is no wonder that a big story in the United States these days is "Bush-hating." The Democrats seem to be spinning crazily in pure fury at the president. Time magazine describes the president as a "polarizing figure." A small majority of Americans love him, Time says, but those on the leftmost side of the Democratic party positively hate him.
Why do they hate him? Some say he irritates them because he is a Yale elitist and a Connecticut plutocrat, others say because he is an unsophisticated lower-class Texas boob. Some say he is a clever schemer and liar, and others that he is a moron. Some say all these inconsistent things at once. The point is, they hate him and who cares exactly why?
Yet, I can see two reasons why leftists might really hate him.
Bush has stolen two things which the Democrats believe they own by right: the presidency, and the future.
Having finished on top in the Florida election by a small margin, the Bush team prevented the Democrats from stealing the election in the recount. But winning elections in a recount is a maneuver at which Democrats have been incomparably accomplished for generations. In most urban centers, the Democratic party controls the local workers who do the bulk of the counting and vote storage.
Therefore, Democrats felt the bitter loss in Florida with exquisite pain. The Republicans beat them on the streets, in the counting houses, and in the courts. That election belonged to them, Democrats think, and they have continued to cry out against a cosmic injustice.
After the election, each of the independent recounts of all the Florida votes showed that Bush had in fact won, with virtually the same margin as the election-night returns. But Democrats still feel they should have won, by a kind of cosmic right.
The second thing the Democrats think they own, by a kind of Hegelian dialectic, is the future. The Left has long believed that the Left defines the future, and points out the path of progress. In the past, moderate Republicans tended to respect this leftist claim, protesting only timidly, "Not so fast, not so much, not just yet." The Democrats got used to facing an essentially compliant, "me-too" opposition. They thought President Bush would be the same. He isn't.
That's why some Democrats call Bush "the most radical president in history," "the worst president [from their point of view] in a hundred years," a "disaster," and other such names.
It would take another column to show how Bush has cut off the future that the Democrats thought they owned, and how he dared to put the world (not just the U.S.) on an entirely new progressive path, both in domestic and in foreign policy. If he succeeds, the Democrats will be caught thinking in outmoded terms. In tax policy, in welfare policy, in medical care, and in support for democratic reforms rather than mere "stability"overseas, the very meaning of "progressive" will have been defined afresh. Failed Democratic programs will be revised, new directions will be set.
Of course, they hate him! He is the greatest threat to them in 100 years.
Bush has redefined conservatism. It is now not the process of cutting government and devolving powers; it is the process of installing choice and accountability into government even at the cost of allowing it to grow.
I see that. But I cannot grasp that as being "conservative". It isn't. It is slightly less a federal power grab than Dems would want but it is still advocacy of Federal control of local control.
I am not naive. This is the nature of politics. Bush can't just change things overnight (as some libertarians and Paleo Conservatives seem to think). Baby steps. I support Bush because that is the true conservative thing to do. He has to compromise with the powers that be in bloated DC. Let's just hope that when he wins re-election he appoints judges that will strike down much of the power the Feds have currently! I have faith in Bush on that.
Ditto.
Simply stunning! It looks great on you, too.... pretty soon everyone will want one :-)
Like many here on FR, with each post you reveal your ignorance and contempt for the concept of a representative republic. You want Bush to govern according to some list of principles to which you subscribe. You demand a principled leader who does not listen to the voters but does what you deem to be right. In other words you long for a dictatorship.
Bush is the perfect public servant. He will do what his bosses want done. If they want medicare to include prescription drugs, he will do his best to give it to them. All of the left, all of the center and even a bit of the right want prescription drugs included in Medicare. So Bush worked to enact it and got it done. That goes against every principle you believe in . But principles are not worth a warm pitcher of spit in a Representative Republic. Principles are only good in nations where there are rulers who rule by the dictates pf their conscience. The United States has no principled rulers. Its form of government does not allow them to succeed. This Free Republic only allows public servants who do the peoples will.
Try taking a clue!!! This Nation is and will remain a Representative Republic. Lincoln said it well 168 years ago.
Fools on the right have for all my lifetime been crying for a leader to do their will. It will never happen until they convince a majority to support their agenda. The only way to get an agenda enacted is to convince over half the voters to accept that agenda.
We are a nation whose government is run by public servants. They are not rulers. They serve at the pleasure of their bosses. You might ask Gray Davis how that works. And the real political bosses are and always have been a majority of the voters. No president will do what you want until you convince a majority of the voters to support your agenda.
I am not sure what you believe you? Does the Federal government have any limit to it's power in your thinking?
What happens when people who hate have no release for that hate once it is stoked to fire-branding proportions? Upon seeing Bush's popularity rise or at least remain stable, and upon seeing Dean going nowhere with the general population, what will hate-filled people do?
I think it portends some crazy hate-filled whacko who decides to take that hate and solve everyone's problem by himself.
-PJ
There's no doubt that he has. But the real question is his motive. I'm worried because his early economic speeches were horrible.
Reagan spent a fortune to defeat the Soviets, but it paid off handsomely. The question is whether GWB is spending a fortune to defeat the communists within our borders. Like I said there is good reason to have doubts. OTOH, the Rats hate him. That's a good sign.
-PJ
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.