democratic party

What the German elections teach us

 This weekend's German election has some lessons for our political context. Der Speigel sees a new German political pattern emerging from this:

After Sunday's election, Germany's political landscape has been shaken up, perhaps for ever. Angela Merkel's conservatives will be able to form a coalition government with the business-friendly FDP, but the balance of power between the two parties has fundamentally shifted. And the once-powerful Social Democrats may never recover from their defeat.

Chancellor Angela Merkel has probably saved her chancellorship -- but the price that her conservatives will have to pay for it is high. The election result for the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU), is lower than in 2005. Nevertheless, she can form a coalition government with the business-friendly Free Democratic Party because support for the FDP has increased in a way that until recently pollsters would scarcely have thought possible.

Just as in the European elections, we are seeing a splinter of the political scene. On the left, the far left gained, the Greens gain, the centrist-left collapsed, the center-right shrunk slightly, and the liberal party gained massively. The right (center-right + liberals) has grown, but not hugely.

Several things to take away from this in the time of an economic downturn:

First, the appeal of libertarian positions has grown. Even in Europe and Germany there has been an anti-government, anti-entitlement, pro-reform movement that is growing massively. We see this here in the tea party movement.

The response to the economic crisis has been more freedom and less government. Somehow government is getting the blame, at the ballot box, for the downturn.

Second, the center-left has lost credibility, but the numbers on the left are still large if you include the far-left. It is hard to imagine a victory of the German left without the Left Party, but it is also questionable whether this turns off swing voters between the center-right and center-left. Some on the American left will try to learn the lesson that they need to move to the left -- isn't that always the lesson? -- but one wonders if, like the SPD, the Democrats would suffer from highlighting their relationship with the far-left.

All in all, we are in a situation in which right-leaning parties are sweeping elections or performing at historic highs. These things happen in response to global events. It will be interesting to see if this pattern continues into the next year. 

 

 

What will Democrats do about Arlen Specter?

The news that Arlen Specter is switching parties has sparked a lot of attention to the predictable Republican reaction, which ranges from disappointment to blame-storming to "Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out".

But that's not the most interesting story here.

Once everybody gets the Republican reaction story out of their system, we'll turn to a much, much more interesting chapter in this story: How will Democrats react to Democratic Senate candidate Arlen Specter?

Early reaction (Daily Kos, Glenn Greenwald, The New Republic, MyDD, Open Left) suggests Senator Arlen Specter has somehow managed to join a political Party that dislikes him even more than Republicans did. 

So, by promising to give Specter the institutional support of the Democratic Party, it looks like the Democratic establishment has engineered a switch that advances their political control at the expense of the ideological agenda and ideals of the progressive movement.

This will be a crucial test of who holds the power on the Left. Who controls the Democratic Party: the Party establishment or the progressive movement?

Democratic Party Conducts Anti-Catholic Smear Campaign in Northern Virginia

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is fully engaged in a disgusting and bigoted anti-Catholic smear campaign against faithful Catholic Keith Fimian, a candidate for Congress in Northern Virginia.

The Democratic Party has been sending out bigoted mailings, attacking Keith Fimian for his Catholic faith and especially his involvement in a wonderful Catholic organization for successful business persons, Legatus.

Legatus has a clear mission: for its members "to study, live and spread the Faith in our business, professional and personal lives." In 2007, I attended the national Legatus confernece in Naples, Florida. I met amazing men and women who were well-grounded in their faith and successful in their fields of business. I met people like the late Bowie Kuhn, who was once the commissioner of Major League Baseball. People like Sam Brownback spoke at their conference, and the entire conference saw a screening of Bella. The late Pope John Paul II himself addressed Legatus in the past, saying "the world needs genuine witnesses to Christian ethics in the field of business, and the Church asks you to fulfill this role publicly and with perseverance."

The Democratic Party has claimed in attack mailings against Keith Fimian that Legatus “promotes rolling back women’s rights,” and “encouraging women to be more submissive.” Of course, when they are referring to "women's rights" they mean abortion. Why didn't they just say abortion? Because they want to deceive voters into thinking Fimian is trying to roll back the rights of women in general, which is a desperately absurd accusation. And of course, the other claim about women being submissive to their husbands is beyond false.

This is how desperate the Democratic Party has become -- it now wages deceitful bigoted smear campaigns on a candidate's Catholic faith.

ACTION: Call the DCCC at 202-863-1500 or e-mail them and tell them to end their bigoted anti-Catholic smear campaign against Keith Fimian. Also, send a small donation to Keith Fimian's campaign and continue to pray for him as he stands strong against attacks on his Catholic faith.

MORE:

FIDELIS: Democrats Playing With Fire in Virginia - Attack on Catholic Comes at a Bad Time Catholic League: Democrats Continue to Lie about Fimian

Netroots vs. Grassroots

It's official: "netroots" is accepted as a real word by Merriam-Webster dictionary. They provide the following definition: "the grassroots political activists who communicate via the Internet especially by blogs."

While this is a blog where those on the right come to share ideas and disagree, it's always nice to see an online strategy fight between Democrats. Kirsten Powers, registered Democrat, former Clinton administration official and now columnist for the New York Post, today wrote a scathing critique of liberal bloggers like Markos Moulitsas. To give some emphasis to her distaste, the title of the column today is "Net-Roots Ninnies: Dem Left's Dumb Bam Slams." Let's see what Powers has to say:

"One top liberal blogger opined last week that Obama's drop in a recent Newsweek poll resulted from his vote for a compromise on FISA, the intelligence surveillance law. Ridiculous: The average American voter can't describe what FISA is. Meanwhile, a virtual mutiny is taking place on Obama's campaign Web site, which is swamped with angry complaints that Obama has sold out his 'base.' Newsflash to the netroots and the media (which seems perpetually confused on this issue): The netroots are not the base of the Democratic Party. Overwhelmingly white, male and highly educated, they're a loud anomaly in a party that's wholly dependent on the votes of African Americans, women and working-class whites."

I love it! This really does show the central divide in the modern-day Democratic party: the educated white male who voted for Obama in the primaries and the working-class whites who voted for Clinton in the primaries. Matt Bai, from the NYT Magazine, points out something interesting that many who've looked at the numbers also emphasize: "Obama did best in areas that have either a large concentration of African-American voters or hardly any at all, but he struggled in places where the population is decidedly mixed."

What Are Your GOP Core Values?

Updated - One of the tangible benefits to readers of this site who want to move the party forward is that Peggy Noonan's article provides examples of the following GOP Core Values:  Optimism, Liberty, Equal Opportunity, Reform, Respect for our Opposing Party and Love for American Democracy to name a few.  If you'd like to participate in creating the GOP that represents you in addition to a GOP voter turnout machine (which we seem to agree cannot be our only tool in the toolbox), please read, and then respond with the Core Values of your GOP.  

Ever since I read Jon's post congratulating Barack Obama for his historic and remarkable victory, I've been at a loss as to how to process this development. I knew the Democratic primary had to end at some point, but a part of me wished it would just go on and on so that we wouldn't have to face the relentless Battle of the Titans this summer. 

But then, today, Peggy Noonan put it all into perspective for me in that moving and generous-spirited way that made her a master wordsmith of the Reagan era.

It was the night Mr. Obama won Alabama. My friend was watching on TV, in his suburban den. His 10-year-old daughter walked in, looked, saw "Obama Wins" and "Alabama." She said, "Daddy, we saw a documentary on Martin Luther King Day in school." She said, "That's where they used the hoses." Suddenly my friend saw it new. That's the place they used the water hoses on the civil rights marchers crossing the bridge. And now look. The black man thanking Alabama for his victory.

What kind of place makes a change like this? Only a great nation. We should love it tenderly every day of our lives.

Peggy provides more illumination to this event:

Mrs. Clinton would have been a disaster as president. Mr. Obama may prove a disaster, and John McCain may, but she would be. Mr. Obama may lie, and Mr. McCain may lie, but she would lie. And she would have brought the whole rattling caravan of Clintonism with her—the scandal-making that is compulsive, the drama that is unending, the sheer, daily madness that is her, and him.

We have been spared this. Those who did it deserve to be thanked. May I rise in a toast to the Democratic Party.

I'd never have thought of it this way, not on my own.  I'm too caught up in my disdain for Obama's liberal policies to see the absolute greatness of the country that spawned his opportunity.  There's a wonderful optimism combined with a deeply spiritual center behind someone who writes with this kind of appreciation and gratitude over an event that, frankly, just left me feeling queasy.  And yet deep down, I know that Peggy gets it.  Her gift to conservatives is to show us what this whole fragile American experiment is really about,  much greater it is than most of us probably imagine. 

 

Thank You Father Pfleger

Cross-Posted at Illinois Conservative

If America is spared the devastating effects of a socialist administration presided over by Barack Obama we have the Trinity United Church of Christ to thank.  By now, unless you’ve been on an extended vacation off the planet, you have probably heard and seen the video clip of Father Pfleger’s Sunday morning sermon at Obama’s church often enough to have memorized the content.  

For those who may not be familiar with Father Pfleger, he is a long time social activist and Catholic Priest, and close friend of Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama.  He has been Pastor of Saint Sabina Church on Chicago’s south side since 1981.  The Archdiocese has attempted several times to transfer him to other parishes, as is the custom in the Catholic Church.  Each time, he has been able to organize protests by his parishioners resulting in the Cardinal setting aside Church policy and allowing him to stay on at St. Sabina.

In many ways his career has been more entwined with the career of Barack Obama than Jeremiah Wright’s has.  He worked closely with Obama when Obama was a community organizer in Chicago and they have maintained the relationship ever since.  Pfleger has contributed to Obama’s campaigns and Obama has directed “earmarks” to his church programs for years.  Between 1995 and 2001 Pfleger contributed a total of $1500 to Obama’s various campaigns.  In January 2001 Obama announced $225,000 in state grants to St. Sabina projects.

As a guest speaker at Trinity United Church of Christ on Sunday, Rev. Pfleger ridiculed Senator Hillary Clinton, accusing her of feeling entitled to the Presidency because she was “Bill’s” wife and because she was white.  In a performance reminiscence of a “Saturday Night Live” comedy skit, he mimicked Hillary’s tearful response to a supporter’s question at a campaign rally, saying, “"When Hillary was crying, and people said that was put on, I really don't believe it was put on, I really believe that she just always thought this is mine. I'm Bill's wife, I'm white and this is mine…”

In the aftermath of Pfleger’s sermon Obama supporters have been scrambling to moderate the effects on Obama’s campaign.  From accusations of “guilt by association” to drawing a moral equivalency to McCain’s support from Pastor Hagee, they are regurgitating all the excuses used to explain away Obama’s twenty years as a member of Jeremiah Wright’s church.  This episode, however, is more problematic for Obama than any of the others for a number of reasons.

Using a candidate’s religious views or the theological doctrines of a candidate’s church as fodder in a negative political campaign is a dangerous precedent.  So are “cherry-picking” statements from a pastor’s sermons when those statements are based on theology, whether or not they are politically correct by today’s community standards.  If the practice of demanding that a candidate disassociate himself from any pastor or church where politically incorrect language has ever been used in a sermon, it will eventually be impossible for anyone who regularly practices their religion to run for public office.

Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Hindus, Moslems, Buddhists or any other religious group have many doctrines that, when enunciated from the pulpit, could be considered offensive to those outside that religious belief.  Attempting to apply politically correct standards to religious thought is detrimental, not only to the religion involved but to society at large.  Furthermore, when you prevent someone from speaking their mind by political correctness, it is not only contradictory to the American principle of freedom of speech; it also prevents an accurate understanding of other peoples’ true character.

Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger are perfect examples of this point.  Had they not been exercising their freedom of speech or if they had been careful to speak only in politically correct terms we would have no knowledge of their true beliefs.  Having said that let me point out that the sermons under consideration are not theological.  Instead, they are racist and political with little or no valid theological content, unlike those by Hagee and Falwell used as a moral equivalent by Obama supporters.  As unpleasant and ill advised as the statements by Hagee and Falwell may be, they are grounded in the theological doctrine of God’s sovereignty over the affairs of man and nature.  Those by Wright and Pfleger are grounded in racial hatred and a hatred for the American culture and social structure.

It is their right to believe whatever they choose and to share that belief with anyone who chooses to listen.  In fact, I am grateful they shared them with the world.  Now we know where we stand with them and can react accordingly.  In addition, their sermons give us an insight into the character of the man many would like to see as President of the United States.  You might ask, how can that be, since he was not even present and has denounced the offensive remarks by both Wright and Pfleger?

At this point the politically correct comment would be “I’m sure Obama does not agree with their views”.  This is the accepted caveat used by almost all commentators, columnist and talking heads in the media.  The truthful comment, at least for me, is “I’m sure he does agree with the worldviews expressed by these preachers“.

The worldview expressed in their sermons is the motivating factor that underlies the profession of community organizing of which Obama often boasts.   It is the belief that members of a community are victimized by unjust actions and oppression by those in power that forms the basis for community organizing efforts.  It is also compatible with the socialist’s worldview of what they believe to be the universal injustices in the capitalist system.

Furthermore, the enthusiastic reaction from the congregation to Pfleger’s sermon, so evident in the video, indicates this type of message is not unusual for this particular church but rather is the expected fare.  Obama’s twenty-year membership and his continued loyalty to the church should be proof positive to any unbiased observer that he is in agreement with its views.  It does not matter what he says or does at this point.  The opportunity to disassociate himself from Wright and the Church has passed long ago for anyone who is truly concerned.

These latest revelations may affect Obama’s chances in the general election but they are not likely to prevent him from becoming the Democratic nominee.  I heard someone today opine that the Democratic Party’s rules committee meeting this weekend would probably switch their support from Obama to Clinton in response to the growing controversy.  That is not likely.  The socialist dominated base and leadership of the Democratic Party has invested too much time and money in the Obama candidacy to change course now.

This is just the type of bombshell Hillary has been waiting for and it could supply her with the incentive to keep her candidacy alive until the convention.  Whether it will do any good or not remains to be seen.  Obama has been groomed and promoted by the leadership of the socialist movement for most of his adult life for just this moment, and they are not likely to pass up the opportunity to usher in a socialist era in America with his election.

 

If after the Denver convention Obama is still their candidate we will know for sure the Democratic Party is really the Democratic Socialist Party.  If he is elected President in November, we will know the American people are ready for a democratic socialist government.  If he is rejected by the voters we should all be thankful to Unity Church, Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger for waking up the American people.  

 

 

Syndicate content