Democrats More Extreme Than GOP?

I read an interesting article today by Alex Castellanos on CNNOpinion.  Mr. Castellanos is a Republican strategist and the founder of the Purple Strategies and NewRepublican.org.  His contention is that the “new” Democrat is far more extreme than the Republicans.  Let’s investigate what he meant.

President Obama and Press Secretary Jay Carney have called Republicans extortionists and blackmailers.  VP Joe Biden, according to Politico, once commented that Republicans are “terrorists.”  Senator Pelosi called them “arsonists.”  Senator Rangel has called them the “same as those who fought for the Confederacy.”  Sheila Jackson Lee has called for marshal law, although I’m sure she doesn’t even understand what that means.

Mr. Castellanos said it this way:

Liberals have led a media assault, calling the GOP anarchists, jihadists, “gun to head” hostage takers, and the political equivalent of the Taliban.  White House advisor Dan Pfeiffer has likened Republicans to suicide bombers “with a bomb strapped to their chest.”

What do all of these people have in common?  They are far left liberals so driven by ideology and their socialist agenda, that they can’t see beyond the noses on their faces.  They have blinders on, unable to see the whole picture.  It’s amazing to me that they can spout the party line with a straight face…but they do.  Why is the Democrat Party pushing so hard?

Let us count the reasons:  Baract Obama has taken the Democratic Party left of Clinton.  He left blue-dog, centrist Democrats to be punished for his sins and they were wiped out in the GOP’s 2010 Congressional landslide.  All the while, the internet has empowered and organized the party’s remaining and most extreme elements.  The Democratic Party can’t go left.  It is left, in entirety.  They already occupy America’s left fringe.

These Democrats have no use for Republicans/Conservatives.  Their disgust, dislike, and disdain is evident in their every action, their every word.  These Democrats want to crush the Republican Party.  They want a one-party system that gives them full power to make decisions for the “dumb” masses.  Sadly, many American citizens are too lazy to make their own decisions, so…”come on Big Government, take care of me.”  It’s sad to see what the liberal agenda and political correctness have done to the hard-working, independent American.  Where have the Ronald Reagans’ and the John Waynes’ gone?

The Tea Party is a grassroots movement that has the good of our country at heart.  The group, for the most part, is inexperienced in the area of politics and, yet, they have become a force to contend with.  We should applaud their courage.

I like the way Mr. Castellanos stated my exact feelings, so here is “the rest of the story.”

Bill Clinton’s New Democrats are dead.  This is not Hillary Clinton’s Democratic Party.  Today’s Democratic Party…is the party that just nominated a Sandinista trainee, who returned from Nicaragua with “a vision of unfettered leftist government,” for mayor of New York City, according to the New York Times.

And Today’s Democrats think this is a good thing.

They dream audaciously, as Ruy Teixeira wrote in the Atlantic, of a new Emerging Democratic Majority.”  As Peter Beinart noted in a Daily Beast piece, “TheRise of the New New Left,” “Bill de Blasio’s win in New York’s Democratic primary isn’t a local story.  It’s part of a vast shift that could upend three decades of American political thinking.”

The Democratic Party is now animated by the “mobilized left,” Beinart writes, emboldened by internet activism.  Their cause was galvanized by President Obama’s seemingly impossible re-election.  (On a personal note, I still have questions about that strange election.)

Once, Obama may have campaigned as a centrist, but that was long ago.  He has since governed as an old school economic liberal from the 60’s.  As Fred Thompson has noted, Barack Obama has been “George McGovern without the experience.”  Obama’s answer to every economic challenge has been top-down.  Our governing class knows best, he believes, especially since Washington’s elite now includes him.

If the world has changed in eight decades, our President hasn’t noticed.  His view of government is cast from the bronze of Franklin Roosevelt and the ’30’s.  He puts our big, dumb, inflexible public sector at the top of American life, to mandate redistribution and prosperity.

At every opportunity, he has grown the public sector’s archaic program-and-policy factory.  This empty presidency tries only to cure too much old government with even more of it.  Though little of what he has tried has worked, it has not seemed to deter his party.  it hasn’t deterred him.

Alex Castellanos has much more to add to this conversation, and I wish I could insert it all here.  I hope you’ll follow the link to finish reading his enlightening article.  http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/15/opinion/castellanos-extreme-party/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

He ended with this:

Which party is more extreme?

A Republican Party divided between 180 mainstream members and 40 Ted Cruz mini-me’s?  Or a Democratic Party united to preserve our fossilized ineffective public sector?

A Republican Party advocating a path to fresh, natural, economic growth?  Or a Democratic Party offering young voters the outdated economics of conformity, artificially imposed by Washington’s elites?

A Republican Party being driven to offer change?  Or a Democratic Party united against it?

Entrepreneurs, start printing tie-died shirts now.  They will be hot sellers at the next Democratic Convention.  Both sides are in for an interesting ride, but for Democrats, it’s going to be an extreme 2016.

I’m hoping that moderate Democrats will finally understand where the far left is taking their party, and pull it back to the middle.  Perhaps, then, their elected officials can begin to act like adults instead of schoolyard bullies.

Advertisements

About usawoman

I am a published author with a healthy interest in the direction of our country. I love the USA, and believe in upholding the constitution. I am for term limits; I'm anti big government; and, most definitely, pro-life.

14 thoughts on “Democrats More Extreme Than GOP?

  1. larrydunbar says:

    Really?
    The Democrats are more extreme because they are better name callers, have more numbers, and elect radicals?
    I think the key word here is “elect”.
    I think what the people in support of the House Republicans have forgotten is that revolution doesn’t work. Now I only know this because I did the reading for a college program at Oregon State University.
    The reading of the course work told that after a revolution, if the insurgency manages to overthrow the incumbent force, and especially a very violent revolution, what you end up with are people in power who are the same as the people who were tossed-out. From what I remember this fact is true, because, unless you are very careful you become like the enemy you fought. I think the Iraq war shows this dynamic, as torcher became common in the US, as we started fighting those in the Middle East.
    The fact that the leaders after a revolution become like those they fought, has been proven time and time again in history, but, and despite what Thomas Jefferson says about the subject, America got lucky. We elected Washington as our first executive in command of our new country.
    By all accounts that I have followed on the internet, he could have been our first King, but he declined.
    As Jefferson knew people, Washington knew Kings. He fought one and only managed to expel him from having any command and control of his colony, but had little effect on the King himself.
    But because of the fight, Washington knew how powerful Kings are, and I am sure he knew how powerful our country would be with a King as the executive.
    However, Washington also knew revolution. His actions, in becoming the first Chief Executive not as a King, seems to be to try and manage revolutions here in North America.
    The House Republicans have now radicalized the concept of revolution. It seems to me like the Democrats, as Obamacare also seems to underline, are trying to work within the system, and through the New World Order.
    While working through system in which a planet is going through a radical change might seem radical. It doesn’t seem like the Democrats are the ones being radicalized.

  2. larrydunbar says:

    Sorry about my spelling. “As torcher became common in the US” should read: “as torture became common in the US”

  3. larrydunbar says:

    “Senator Rangel has called them the “same as those who fought for the Confederacy.””

    And, while the supporters of the House Republicans are probably not in favor of slavery (I am not sure what they want), the Dixiecrats, who at least identify with those who fought for the Confederacy, moved to the Republican Party, as they got on board with Reagan economics. So, while during the Civil war this would have been called treason, now it is called: “being the base” of the Republican Party.

    In that context Rangel is not being very radical.

  4. usawoman says:

    Thank you, Larry, for reading and commenting on my post. I fail to understand how your rambling explanation of “revolution” has anything to do with this article. I’ll move beyond that and answer the statements in your last paragraph.

    In spite of all proof to the contrary, you state that Obama and the Democrats are working within the system. That is a false belief. You mention Obamacare as your proof, so we’ll stick with that. Obamacare was rammed into law by backroom deals and threats. Most of the people in our great country did not want it, but Obama and his minions in congress and the MSM didn’t care. After all, don’t the elitists know better what’s right for the rest of us peons?

    The ACA that was voted into law has been unconstitutionally changed by Obama around 240 times. He delayed part of the law, again, unconstitutionally. He does not have the legal authority to change laws. The law is a fiasco that is going to destroy the healthcare system in our country. No one knows what is in it, or how it is going to work–not our president, or our congresspeople. At this point in time no one knows how it is going to effect us, but Obama and the Dems are going to push it through anyway.

    You mention the One World Order. I would ask you if you’ve read how the New World Order is prophesied in the Bible. It is not a good thing, and the fact that it has been mentioned in a speech by Joe Biden indicates the radicalized direction the far left is going.

    • larrydunbar says:

      No, I have not read how the New World Order is prophesied in the Bible. I have read the Bible, but there is a lot to miss, so it doesn’t surprise me that this is something I missed. On the other hand, I have heard how the term New World Order upsets religious fundamentalist, but I thought it should be brought up in this discussion because the talk of the New World Order coming from someone like Biden sounds to me a lot like the Old World Order. In other worlds, the order of things might change, but it is still pretty much the same events, just at a greater magnitude. Which as you point out, with a bunch of crazy fundamentalist running around, things could get very bad, before they get better.

  5. usawoman says:

    Again, you talk in rambling, run-on sentences which use a lot of words but say very little. I do think you rather proved my point about the left attempting to make their points by name-calling. Crazy fundamentalist? Let’s just say we disagree and move on.

    • larrydunbar says:

      Agree, but I have never been oriented towards the Left. Liberal, guilty as charged, not affiliated with any religious affiliation, also true, but I am really not comfortable with the title of Leftist. As I am not with any affiliation, they (religious affiliation) all sound a little crazy to me. As my father said, ” I am not against religion, just superstition.” Unfortunately he never told me which was which 🙂

    • larrydunbar says:

      “I fail to understand how your rambling explanation of “revolution” has anything to do with this article.”
      Perhaps I can explain:
      1. The Tea Party is a part of the Republican Party.

      2. The Tea Party, was in support of Ted Cruz and his attempt at keeping the government closed and defaulting on the debt.

      3. This is a revolutionary idea, i.e. the destruction of the U.S. government as it has been known.

      4. The fact Ted Cruz wanted to shut down and default on our debt is also pretty radical, wouldn’t you say?

      5. Therefore, the Republicans, with a portion of them being Tea Party members, are more radical (read here extreme) than the Democrats.

      6. Hands down.

      • Catherine says:

        Obviously Mr. Dunbar you have drunk the kool-aid that the Democrats keep pouring out to those who can’t think for themselves. It case you missed it, it was OBAMA who wanted to shut down the government in order to get what HE wanted. Or haven’t you heard that he is out to “transform the government” any way he can. And if shutting down the government (THERE WAS MORE THAN ENOUGH MONEY COMING IN TO PREVENT A DEFAULT AND OBAMA KNEW IT), gave him what he wanted, so be it. He got what he wanted didn’t he? As to the Tea Party like all liberals you can say you’re not but your words say different, the Tea Party is made up of the grass-roots of this nation who are determined to take this county back to its Judea-Christian roots and stop the onslaught of the Muslim-in-Chief’s’ attempt (with the help of the Democrats) to turn this nation into an Islamic one. Open your mind and your eyes to what is going on around you before we no longer have a country to call our own.

      • larrydunbar says:

        I realize you must be very young, but we are a Republic. It just doesn’t work that way. Obama is just one man, and that man had no incentive to see that which he put into being destroyed by those who wanted to de-fund it.

        ” (THERE WAS MORE THAN ENOUGH MONEY COMING IN TO PREVENT A DEFAULT AND OBAMA KNEW IT),”
        I suggest you read my post: http://larrydunbar.com/2013/10/20/an-act-of-war/, but I am afraid you are too young and ignorant to understand what I have written.

      • larrydunbar says:

        Yeah, “Muslim-in-chief’s” and I drank the Kool-aid, 🙂 Don
        t ever call me again, please!!!

      • Catherine says:

        When you finally wake up to what is going on around you, it will be too late. If you don’t believe that Obama is a Muslim, then I feel sorry for you. And PLEASE don’t bother answering, I can’t stand stupid people who prefer to stick their heads in the sand and are oblivious to the world around them..

  6. Something the left and liberals very conveniently forget about the Confederacy was that one of the top reasons they went to war was to preserve state’s rights. That is something that is again being threatened through Obamacare and other items on the Obama agenda that he is trying to shove through Congress and down our throats. Dems prefer to focus on slavery – but need to go back and reread the actual history to see that was only 1 of several reasons why the Confederate states were formed and why there was a civil war.

    Also – while I encourage a spirited debate and exchange of ideas — I do insist that everyone AVOID PERSONAL attacks.

  7. usawoman says:

    I agree. The conversation has devolved into name-calling and disrespect. Thank you, everyone, for showing interest, but personal attacks solve nothing. Perhaps I started it by calling your comment “rambling,” Larry. Maybe it was just my mind that was too slow! lol I will check out your blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s