Sponsors

The Superhero Conundrum. Email Print

Much has been made about what the Democrats have done and what they need to do. At times, their actions and/or inactions have been confusing (to say the least).

Support censuring Bill Clinton, but wishy-washy on censuring George W. Bush. Call Bush on misleading the public, but don't provide a clear alternative. Have staffers to take the phone calls and emails of their fellow Democrats and progressives, but repeatedly fail to act on the suggestions given.

Devilstower has an excellent take on where most Democrats are on the issues. I'd like to tackle why that is, and why it seems that these "important issues" don't get the support they require when they need to.

Randi Rhodes once joked that the problem with Democrats were we have too many ideas. And that's very true. Currently, it's hard to recognize that when they have to constantly shoot down bad ideas from Republicans or try to get people to listen to theirs. And it's more difficult when someone has a simliar idea, yet not exactly yours.

Nevertheless, the options availble in getting your ideas (or bills or resolutions) are:

  1.  Fight with all your heart to get exaclty what you want;

  2.  Compromise to get something close to what you want accomplished;

  3.  Give up and do nothing;

  4.  Acquiesce to the ideas of others (whether the ideas were simliar or the opposite of your own).

Many would argue that Democrats have done either #3 or #4 rather religiously, #2 to their detriment and #1 sporadically. But from their perspective, #1 and #2 can only lead to their ruination.

Picture this: Your party ran honest campiagns (by today's standards) in 2000 and 2004 with upstanding candidates. The "moral hangups" connected with Bill Clinton were not to be found with either Al Gore or John Kerry (although gore was Clinton's VP). They both served in Vietnam with honors and were accomplished delegates.

Your opposition has been under a cloud of corruption and suspicion since it's inception, and it has not gotten better. An unecessary war, a natural disaster, and poor domestic and economic policy have made the public wane on the sitting president. His aides and co-workers are either criminal, heartless, greedy or woefully unqualified for their positions.

Every gut instinct you have had said you should win. The House, the Senate, the White House. All of it.

Then something strange happens: your party loses. Big time.

Memebers of your party who helped the president are the first to go. He campiagns with their challenger saying "it he likes me, and this guy likes me, and you like me, why not keep it in the family?" And the voters agree.

Those who survive are treated as extremist (becuase the "moderates" have been exterminated, see?) or "cower" to the party in power, occasionally providing the opposition with the "bi-partisan" cover they need to make controversial issues look mundane.

What do you have after all of this is over? Only the battered and the brazen.

Right now, the Democrats have more of the former than the later. But make no doubt, they have heard your voices. The concerned elderly couple who's deciding whether they want their pills or dinner. The young, single woman who just found out she is pregnant. The black couple who can't get the home they wanted, even though they had the money and credit. The choirmember who knows more about the Bible then her hellfire pastor.

But sadly, these calls, these political prayers, have been heard too late. The Democrat Survivors have been bitten and are now twice shy. Asking them to stand for principle is like asking Superman to pluck Lex Luthor's head right off. It would help make the world a better place, but that's not what heroes (or superheroes) do.

Superheroes don't beat down on the bad guy when they are down. Superheroes are not preemptive. They often let the villan do whatever they want; especially if they think stopping them immediately would be harmful to "the greater good."

And everyone's "greater good" differs. For people like Sen. Nelson, it means letting Alito be confirmed so there'll still a be Democrat to vote for future projects. For people like Sen. Clinton, branding yourself a war hawk because you don't have much of a military background to begin with. For people like Sen. Biden, it's constantly being on TV, even if you have nothing constructive to say because you believe a Democrat has to be in public saying something.      

And make no doubt; you can't be treated with a loyal staff, lavish gifts, trips to Cancun, and other "perks" and not come away feeling that you are extraordinary.

So there we have it: men and woman who thought they were titans have been humbled in their own arena. Couple that with most of them being geniunely concerned with the well being of others (and their own image in society). Their actions or inactions are not totally based on indifference or cruelty; but a misguided belief that sacrificing the present to secure the future will benefit us all, and/or that sooner or later the villan(s) will be exposed for what they are to the public.

We need to wake Democrats up, and help them overcome their Superhero Conundrum.

 


KEYWORDS: , ,

Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!

< The Phantom Menance | My husband is one of Feingold's FINALISTS!!!! >
 Display:
I'm working toward an idea that I'm having a very hard time phrasing -- that we have to be more...

Agressive isn't the right word.  Neither is forceful.

The word is something closer to the term you used "brazen" or maybe "risky" or even "wild."  One thing that's impressed me over and over with the Republicans has been their utter disregard for the opinions, not just of Democrats, but their own moderates.  They'll charge ahead on a program that the polls would indicate was "extreme," and legitimize it by sheer force of repetition.

I've no doubt they're moving the goalposts almost daily, shifting the right edge of "acceptable positions" to include things Americans would have been up in arms about a decade ago, and dragging the political middle into territory that would have made Barry Goldwater a leftist.  

Democrats are sitting around worryin about finding a "moderate" position, while Republicans give all their love to their most radical.  It's as if we're scooting up toward the middle of the see-saw while theyre jumping up and down on the end.  Quess who makes the board move?

by Devilstower on 03/19/2006 09:43:29 PM EST

I have another theory about Democrats that's linked to this one, but it's more connected to your statement ("we have to be more...").

Essentially, it's this: if Democrats were more like Republicans in their execution, they'd be more sucessful. But, would they still be "Democrats?"

Hopefully I'll get the chance to flesh it out this week.

Strike the shepherd and the sheep will scatter...

by Omen on 03/21/2006 12:33:13 AM EST

[ Parent ]
 Display: