Monday, July 16, 2007
(12:00 AM) | Adam Kotsko:
On Hating Democrats
Every election season, we non-Republicans get a bad case of Stockholm Syndrome. Suddenly we expend massive amounts of energy trying to identify with the political party that continues to screw us over. Hopefully the euphoria from the last election has worn off by now, and we're far enough away from the next election that the undecided grandma in Ohio will have forgotten about my tirade by the time it rolls around -- that is, hopefully, the time is ripe for hating the Democrats.First, Al Gore, I personally, deeply hate you for your performance in 2000. Your should have demanded a state-wide recount -- hell, a nation-wide recount. Instead, you did the typical bullshit Third Way Democrat thing of trying to cobble enough counties together to get a win by a hair, as though an election were an elaborate heist. It's bad enough normally when they do this ("If we track just a smidge right, we'll hopefully pick up enough national-security-conscious soccer moms in Ohio to pull this thing off..."), but you were doing this after you had already fucking won the election. Then, when the Supreme Court screwed you over (in a decision that was party-line, but -- and I know it's heresy to admit it -- it was bullshit that you were asking for targetted recounts only in counties that would help you win), you played the good boy, play by the rules, don't be divisive.
Divisive? Let me tell you what's divisive -- some cokehead frat boy who lost the popular vote by half a million votes strutting around like he obviously owns the presidency because he won one state by only 200 votes, even with his brother actively rigging the game in his favor, such that by a stupid technicality, he technically "wins." That's divisive. Calling him on his bullshit? That would be -- totally fair. Al Gore, you had options even after the Supreme Court fucked you over (in part because of your own idiocy, but still -- you were ultimately in the right). You could have been cultivating some "faithless electors." You could have strong-armed some senators into cosponsoring a challenge to the electoral vote count. You fucked us over, Al Gore, and now you get to travel around the country giving gripping lectures and you're treated like some kind of hero. Bullshit. You were in the right, and now you get to enjoy being in the right and having all the right opinions without having to actually do anything. I hope you choke to death on your fucking useless correct opinions.
But it's not all poor Al Gore's fault -- look at the influences he was dealing with! We have a whole party full of people who have no idea why they're in office anymore, other than to continue to be in office. Vote for the war to look tough on national security, follow the stupid non-entity of a president around like a puppy dog so as not to disturb the poor little nation during its "time of crisis" -- Democrats, fuck you and your empty desire to be popular. Let me give you a little lesson here: popularity is not something that you can ever get directly. In a democracy, for instance, the normal way to become popular is to propose and implement policies people like. I know it's hard, because so many of those policies are "crazy liberal" and you won't be taken seriously by right-wing pundits, but maybe it'd be worth giving it a shot at some point.
Even if you can't be popular, though, it seems like you probably have a couple basic duties as public servants. Upholding the constitution, for instance. If you're in Congress, providing a counterbalance to the executive branch -- especially when the whole reason you even have a majority in Congress is because the public is sick to death of the war that you helped give them in your eagerness to shore up your "toughness" credentials. You don't want to cut off funding for the war because it would look like you're betraying the troops -- well, they fucking already constantly say you're betraying the troops. What's there to lose? More generally, you don't want to end the war because you don't want to be blamed for "losing" it. Maybe you will be blamed -- so what? This war is a much more serious issue than the legislative careers of a few Democrats in unsafe seats. Take some fucking responsibility!
The same thing with impeaching Bush -- oh no, there may be some backlash if we try to impeach him. Like what? His approval ratings jump back up to 37%? Republicans will call you partisan? Have you not put two and two together? The reason you keep getting screwed every time you do anything is because the Republicans actively screw you. It's not like there's some kind of force of nature at work whereby the Republicans always get off scot-free, but you're screwed no matter what. If you want the Republicans to suffer for their actions, you have to make them suffer.
Seriously, you hate those motherfuckers, right? Well show it! You're not going to get any serious legislation passed as things stand, but why not use every ounce of your power to screw those fucking Republicans as much as possible? Is it because that would be too divisive? Too partisan? Not fair? Well, let me tell you what's objectively not fair: allowing the Republicans to have any power whatsoever. That's not fair at all. A Supreme Court vandalized by an illegitimate president? Not fair. Countless dead in Iraq? Not fair. I could go on and on. It's a pretty damn divisive list -- but let me tell you, it's not the people who bring it up who are divisive, it's the people who did all that shit. You want to be the party of balance and reasoned deliberation and constitutional checks and balances? Well, by treating the Republicans as good-faith parnters in that enterprise, you're effectively destroying everything you stand for. At this point, you can either just pretend that all that stuff is possible under these conditions and therefore continue to dig yourself into a hole, or you can have the courage of your convictions and fight for them, which you fucking won't, you fucking spinless sacks of shit!
