media girl has a very good post or rant, as she calls it, on What’s Wrong With the Democrats?. She’s getting pretty frustrated with the hemming and hawing of Democratic Party front-men on the direction of the party after the election on the 3rd:
Why are the Dems so wimpy? Today, “equal rights for all” is not ever discussed as the moral issue it is. Graft in government is not considered a moral question. In our current political climate, lying is considered “spin” and the press signs off on it. Educating our children is not considered a moral issue. Executing innocent people is not considered a moral issue. Killing 100,000 people in Iraq is not considered a moral issue. Economic justice and relief for the growing poor population in this country is not considered a moral issue. Preserving the fiscal integrity of our government is not considered a moral issue. Preserving liberty in our own land is not considered a moral issue. None of these things are considered moral issues. No, what passes for morality today is intolerance, greed, bigotry, divisiveness—all expressed in loud voices of outraged victims.
I think there are a number of reasons for this. The first is that public morality—the actions of some faceless bureaucrat in a nameless office—is no substitute for personal morality—treating people with respect and concern in your daily life. We must have both.
The second reason is that too many of the disparate interest groups that form the backbone of today’s Democratic Party have lost their moorings. When the NOW lined up behind Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal it suggested that their agenda had ceased being better lives and decent treatment for women in society and the workplace and had become unwavering support for Democrat politicians. Now, as Q&O Blog points out, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), in their failure to respond appropriately to the recent racist treatment of Condoleezza Rice by the leftist press, seems to be less about advancing colored people than about advancing the careers of sufficiently left-wing politicians:
As a matter of fact, I’m a bit astonished as well. Where is the NAACP on this? Where is Jackson’s Rainbow/PUSH? I thought these organizations existed to stamp out the very sort of racist bigotry that is being used against Rice by the left.
Instead we are treated to the sound of crickets.
Apparently there’s a litmus test one has to pass before they can count on the NAACP or Rainbow/PUSH’s support.
You can’t just be the right color, you have to be of the right ideology. Otherwise, or so it seems, racism just isn’t that big of a deal to them.
When you look out and see that the Party’s most faithful union support is the public employees’ unions you begin to wonder if the Democratic Party is the party of public morality or the party of public employment.
Not to mention that the ranks of America’s poor are NOT expanding. They’re shrinking. Standards of living have been going up for decades. Democrats need to shake off this illusion. They should also take note that most of the poorest areas of the country this year voted Republican. Why?
I suggest it’s not because they’re fearful paranoid idiots, but because Republicans had a message of hope and optimism and a vision for the future. Democrats had… what? Fear and loathing of Bush and Christians?
I strongly suggest reading this:
http://www.economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3400772
Then contemplate how Democrats’ core message can be retooled to look at the reality that most people WANT to work for a living, WANT to believe they can prosper, and don’t relate to a gloomy message about how oppressed and helpless they are.