Skip to main content

Return Of Royalty

I've begun referring to the Democratic Party as the Royalty Party. It certainly needs to ditch the "Democratic" moniker because it's simply a lie.

Hillary Clinton, by any reasonable count of actual votes cast by everyday people, won their primary... but the powers that be had "bigger plans" and disenfranchisement was the policy of the hour. By the end of the primaries, Mrs. Clinton saw her strongest big states neutralized and disenfranchised, and in a remarkable turn of events towards the end of the primary, had several of her delegates reassigned to Barack Obama "just because."

I wouldn't care so much about the Democrats' duplicity if they were a private political organization, but they (and the GOP) have effectively banned independent, Libertarian and Green candidates from running for office with a host of laws designed to exclude candidates that are not from the two major parties.

Thus, their efforts at disenfranchisement are notable.

So, too, are their double standards.

Back during the primary, the logic of the Obamacrats was that a Hillary Clinton presidency would be a "dynasty," and would subvert democracy by keeping one family in power for potentially 16 of the past 32 years. Obama, we were told by his ardent supporters, represented a breath of fresh air -- a break from political dynasties, an end to politics as usual, "Change we can believe in."

Fast forward to today. It's not even inauguration day, and Obama is arguably more of a Clinton than Hillary is. His administration is loaded with Clintonites. He delivered a Clinton-style Sister Souljah moment to the gays with his selection of Rick Warren as the pastor to give the invocation at his inauguration.

Oh, and all that stuff about dynasties being bad? We didn't really mean it!

Let's put Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg in Mrs. Clinton's Senate seat, as an appointee. Mrs. Schlossberg's resume is pretty thin -- mostly fundraising, Manhattan socialite, and daughter of a famous president... but let's bring Camelot back!

And closer to home, Senator Joe Biden's son is said to be waiting in line to take over the seat his dad left warm for him.

The New York Times, in a rare moment of clarity, describes the Kennedy Schlossberg situation thusly:

Not unlike an overleveraged but venerable investment house, Ms. Kennedy is considered by many to be too big to fail.


Meanwhile, the attitude of the New Ruling Party strikes me as rather similar to the Old Ruling Party that was just dispatched.

What do you little proles know? Don't worry your pretty little head with managing things, we'll do it for you.

You shouldn't have too many choices on the ballot. It's confusing.

And anytime we can make the choices for you, we will. We know better. And us and our friends are the most qualified to run everything, from General Motors to the banking system to your own marriage. We're qualified because we say so, and if you question us, you just don't get it!

Now begone, Caroline and I have a fundraiser at Diane von Furstenberg's to attend, you bitter God-loving gun-nut flyover-state peasant! Here, have a quarter.


Something tells me this attitude will not go over well with voters, especially considering what's coming in 2009. Obama and his advisors should reconsider their "strategies" post-haste.

Comments

Anonymous said…
The Democratic Party does not have a monopoly on political dynasties as BUSH I and II aptly demonstrate. (Then, there's JEB...) Concomitantly, neither do the two so-called major parties have a momopoly on truth and wisdom, despite their multi-million dollar propaganda campaigns.

Too much power is flowing into the hands of too few pseudo-elites at the expense of the majority of the American People. Concentration of political and economic power will not bring much needed enlightenment and emergent practical solutions to our common problems; only a more tightly closed loop and incestuous special interest dominated government/
corporate mismanagement. What else can we logically or intuatively expect from a toxic combination of politicians, lobbyists and interlocking boards of directors?

In the face of growing disparity, tyranny, corruption and ineptitude, it is time for establishment of an effective alternative party coalition to define common ground and implement a coordinated middle-class strategy in defense and advancement of constitutional liberty, independence, common sense and sound management principles before the doors of participation are permanently shut to the majority of the electorate to the detriment of our civilization.

Wolfgang von Baumgart
State Chairman,
Independent Party of Delaware

ipodosc@yahoo.com

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...