"Crazies"
Now that the second round of Democrat "debates" is over, more than a few Dems are shaking their heads. Michael Moore, a hard-left documentarian, suggests that only Michelle Obama can save the party, given the lackluster collection of candidates. But many others observe the Democrat field and shake their heads at the hard-left direction of their party.
Conservative writer Kim Strassel does a little categorization:
The debates have highlighted important policy distinctions. But in the context of this overall leftward shift, they are rightly measured on a sliding scale from “lefty” to “absolutely nuts.” And it’s only the presence of the real radicals that allows commentators to get away with suggesting any of these policies are remotely “centrist” or “moderate.”The long-time party of big intrusive government (B.I.G.) is now emphasizing that the size of government matters, and the bigger the better—the more intrusive, the more effective (or so they think).
The crazies want to tax everyone and everything—financial transactions, carbon, bank liabilities, sales, wealth, income, families. Mr. Sanders has outright said he will raise taxes on the middle class, while Ms. Warren has all but admitted as much. The ordinary lefties merely want to raise taxes on capital, estates, businesses, payrolls and higher incomes.
The crazies would take over or kill entire sectors of the economy. Some Medicare for All proponents would immediately outlaw private insurance; others would do it over time. Fossil-fuel jobs would be abolished, while disfavored corporate executives would face “jail.” The lefties would merely regulate the hell out of the economy, dictating what types of health plans, financial products, energy, and drugs we can have, and at what price.
The crazies would pack the Supreme Court (Ms. Warren), prosecute Mr. Trump (Kamala Harris) and spend billions on slavery reparations (Marianne Williamson). The lefties would merely require two years of mandatory national service (John Delaney), ban union and nonprofit political speech (Michael Bennet) and impose sweeping new gun control (John Hickenlooper).
The Democratic Party seems to be banking that voters dislike Mr. Trump so much that they’ll accept any alternative. That’s an enormously risky bet.
Strassel rightly notes the broad impact of Dem policy positions. But she doesn't mention the suffocating emphasis on political correctness. A once acceptable mechanism for making the broader public more tolerant has now morphed under the Dems' social justice warriors into dangerous thought control. Innocuous speech that "triggers" the SJWs is forbidden. The word "racist" is used so frequently it has lost its meaning. Opposing viewpoints are considered "hate speech." It's 1984 on steroids.
And then there's the viciousness, exemplified, but not isolated to the Kavanaugh hearings. If a person doesn't agree with your ideology, its perfectly okay to destroy them—to ruin their life and sully their family in the process. If a man you truly don't like is elected president, it's perfectly okay to create a hoax in a pathetic attempt to remove him from office and then perpetrate the hoax with lies for his entire time in office. And if a person of color, or a woman, or a gay person doesn't toe the Dem ideological line, they're not "authentic" and shouldn't be heard.
That's the Dems throughout 2016 - 2019. It will continue to be the Dems in 2020. People are noticing.
<< Home