There they go again!
The American Prospect has published an article on how Democrats can win the culture war. If you can’t bear to read this long-winded, bloviating drivel, here is the thesis [emphases mine]:
Incoming Democratic Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, a former Christian missionary in Latin America, learned the importance of cultural appeals early in his campaign. Kaine, Virginia’s first Catholic governor and one of the two major Democratic electoral success stories of 2005, had worked as a court-appointed attorney for inmates on death row while a young attorney. This, he knew, would be a major strike against him in his bid to run a state whose citizens overwhelmingly support the death penalty, and in a contest against the state’s attorney general, who would inevitably accuse him of being soft on crime and a bleeding-heart liberal.
In the spring of 2005 Kaine’s pollster, Peter Brodnitz, of the polling firm Benenson Strategy Group, decided that the campaign needed to develop a strategy to handle such charges. It convened a focus group of white, conservative, religious voters, and explored different ways Kaine could reach out to them. The result was startling. Brodnitz found that once Kaine started talking about his religious background and explaining that his opposition to the death penalty grew out of his Catholic faith, not only did charges that he was weak on crime fail to stick, but he became inoculated against a host of related charges that typically plague and undermine the campaigns of Democratic candidates. “Once people understood the values system that the position grew out of, they understood that’s he’s not a liberal,” says Brodnitz. “We couldn’t even convince them he was a liberal once we’d done that.”
Strategists who had been predicting Democratic success with a more values-based approach considered themselves vindicated. Virginia elected its second Democratic governor in a row, and its first one to survive opposition to the death penalty in an electoral fight. “People appreciate that I have a moral yardstick, and, even if they don’t have the same one, they appreciate that I have one and it’s not all about what a speechwriter puts in front of me or what a pollster tells me,” the governor-elect told the Prospect. That moral yardstick may be just the tool Democrats need.
In other words, they have found a way (they claim here) to fool people into believing they have morals — and we’ll be too stupid to fall for it. How is this a new strategy, exactly? Haven’t they been doing this all along, with their blather about “being for the little guy” while taking positions directly opposite to those of the same little guy?
So yet again, the Democrats show themselves to be the party of superficiality — in fact, right after the election on my old blog, I said as much:
After the election (the gift that keeps on giving!) Democrat after Democrat sat on TV and stated some variant on the “We need to learn how to talk to people in red states” theme. Over and over again, it was the same thing–and still is, because the Democrats are still saying it.
My first reaction to this was to shake my head in disbelief. How to talk to these people? Talk–language–isn’t the issue; issues are the issue. My second reaction was to what the Democrats were implying when they made this statement, that they needed to learn how to “brand” (Clinton’s term) themselves–that is, how to lie in order to seem like they are something other than slobbering, diapered socialists.
This isn’t news, of course, not after Clinton. He campaigned on fiscal conservatism, which he immediately forgot when he was elected. It took Newt Gingrich and the Contract With America Congress elected in 1994 to force Clinton back to the fiscal conservatism on which he campaigned (and now, laughably, for which Democrats take credit).
It didn’t take Whitewater or Monica’s dress for us to figure out that Clinton was a liar. He demonstrated that by turning into a leftwinger as soon as he was elected.
It came as no surprise, then, that Democrats seemed dumbfounded that our President started pushing to fulfil his campaign promises even before the Inauguration. Why wouldn’t it dumbfound them? After all, they run candidates who lie on the campaign trail, condidates who have no intention of fulfilling their campaign promises. That’s what they expected from Bush–and thank God they were disappointed.
It’s not that liberals don’t believe in personal integrity–keeping one’s promises in this case; liberals don’t understand it. They saw no problem with Clinton running as a centrist, then immediately becoming a leftist when he was elected, because that’s an issue of integrity, and even if liberals did understand it, they would ignore it if doing so aided their agenda. This is why to this day, liberals do not understand that Clinton’s impeachment had nothing to do with his getting a blowjob from Monica Lewinsky, and everything to do with his lying under oath. This is also why all of the Democrats who were Clinton’s cheerleaders when he was talking about reforming Social Security before it went bankrupt now claim that there is no crisis, that Social Security is just fine–and why liberals see no problem in doing so.
And it is because liberals do not understand personal integrity that the Democrats have become the party of superficiality, whose current obsession is figuring out how not to look and sound like Marxists while sticking with the same tired platform.
To be fair, though, why would they understand integrity, when you think about it. These are the people who turn cop killers into heros, who malign our military, and who scorn and want to destroy everything this country was founded upon. They wear Che Guevara T-shirts and go to Free Mumia Abu Jamal rallies. They hang U.S. soldiers from their houses in effigy. They believe that criminals are victims, and patently ignore the real victims. They want to forever destroy Federalism in favor of a bloated all-powerful socialist federal government. And most tellingly of all, they swoon at the mention of Chirac and the UN.
Indeed, it would be silly to expect them to understand integrity. They are defined by their utter lack of integrity. The have one and only one thing: an agenda, which they will push no matter what the cost.
Fortunately, there is still a majority of Americans who do understand and believe in integrity, who believe that you should work for a living instead of taking handouts, who support their troops, and who put their country first, right or wrong. And those Americans will flush Democrats into the sewer of their own irrelevance.