Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Democrats Tag

Sunday afternoon the Democratic Party's official social media accounts unveiled a series of graphics.

These Republicans can’t hide from who they are — but when they play the Game of Votes, they'll either say or do anything to win.

Posted by Democratic Party on Sunday, April 12, 2015
A total of eight graphics were posted on both Facebook and Twitter. Each graphic was meant to be jab at a Republican presidential hopeful.

Now that Harry Reid has announced his retirement, some Democrats think it's time for Pelosi to do the same. Two congressmen from Massachusetts are leading the charge. Daniel Bassali of the Washington Free Beacon:
Dem Reps: Nancy Pelosi Needs to Go A couple of Massachusetts congressmen suggested Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s (D., Calif.) efforts in the House are not working, with Democrats losing seats in the lower chamber at historic levels. “Nancy Pelosi will not lead us back to the majority,” Rep. Steve Lynch (D., Mass.) said. Democrats control 188 seats in the House, compared to Speaker John Boehner’s (R., Ohio) dominant 247 seats. In fact, since President Obama took office, Democrats have lost nearly 70 seats in the House, putting him in the company of Dwight Eisenhower, Franklin Roosevelt, and Harry Truman. Republicans have not held this many seats in the House since 1949. With such overwhelming odds against them, it would be difficult to find a political expert who believes the Democrats could regain control of the House in 2016. “I think we need leadership that understands if something you are doing is not working, change what you are doing,” Rep. Michael Capuano (D., Mass.), her former transition chief, said.
Take a look:

The news of Harry Reid's decision to retire at the end of his current term is already causing speculation about who will fill his role and lead senate Democrats. Charles Schumer of New York seems like an obvious choice to some, but the party's Warren wing is always eager to give the junior senator from Massachusetts a promotion. Peter Schroeder of The Hill:
On Wall Street, Dem shake-up puts party at crossroads Harry Reid’s decision to not seek reelection could open another front in the battle for the direction of the Democratic Party, and its complicated relationship with Wall Street. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) emerged as the immediate favorite to take over as the chamber’s top Democrat, but his rise could further intensify an already heated debate about the party’s approach to the financial sector, one of his home state’s biggest industries. Led by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), liberals with a harsh perspective on Wall Street have seen their voice and influence within the Democratic Party grow of late. The freshman senator’s fierce recriminations of big bankers have attracted plenty of attention on the left and launched her into a spot in Senate leadership, just two years into the job. That message also provided the foundation for a relentless campaign to get her to challenge Hillary Clinton, who many on the left are wary of for ties to the financial sector. That same groundswell could complicate Schumer’s bid to lead Senate Democrats. “I don’t know how he’s going to play this, I really don’t,” said one financial lobbyist. “He’s got huge personal and political interest in the financial industry…they’re the biggest employers in his state.”
According to the Washington Post, Reid has endorsed Schumer to replace him.

Remember a few years ago when Democrats took to lecturing conservatives about a new tone? They don't. Brad Woodhouse, former DNC communications chief and current President of liberal super PAC American Bridge, recently made some rather unsavory comments about New Jersey governor Chris Christie. Alex Pappas of The Daily Caller reported:
Democratic Super PAC Goes After Chris Christie: ‘We Want To Kill Him Dead’ The president of a Democrat super PAC dedicated to digging up opposition research on Republicans said of New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie: “We want to kill him dead.” Brad Woodhouse, the president of the liberal super PAC American Bridge, made the provocative comments in a profile of the organization published by Bloomberg Politics. The story notes that American Bridge would not back off its attacks on Christie. “We’re not going to pull resources from Christie,” Woodhouse told the outlet. “We want to kill him dead.” Woodhouse, a longtime Democratic operative, has often accused Republicans of using offensive rhetoric against President Obama. But on Thursday, Woodhouse seemed proud of his quote, retweeting it several times in his Twitter feed.
If nothing else, you have to love the fact that Christie is being attacked by a liberal group called American Bridge.

Following huge 2014 midterms losses, Democratic Party leaders did some soul searching, analyzed their problems, and made recommendations for winning in the future. The results were published in the Democratic Victory Task Force Preliminary Findings. Most notably, Democrats want more "narrative" to help them win back the southern whites they hate. You can read the document here. I'll share a few short excerpts:
As Democrats, we believe in an economy where hard work is rewarded, where everyone pays his or her fair share and plays by the rules. We believe in a government that’s focused on building a stronger and more secure middle class, with good-paying jobs, affordable higher education, and a secure retirement... The national Democratic Party must never allow itself to become a party of Beltway consultants who routinely recommend cookie-cutter campaigns that are detached from the concerns of the people we hope to represent, at the city, state, and federal level. In order to consistently win on every level, we have to reconnect with the reason we want to win—and that reason is the people. The national party must work with and help grow state and local parties, to empower the people to participate in politics, while recruiting and training the next generation of office holders.... We know that our message is powerful because our opponents are trying to steal it. Income inequality and the resulting middleclass economic stagnation have become so extreme that even the Republicans are giving lip service to economic fairness—even as they advocate policies that would undermine it...

Some Democrats are planning to boycott Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to Congress next month because they view John Boehner's invitation to Netanyahu as an insult to Obama. Senator Marco Rubio spoke out on Thursday, urging Democrats not to boycott the speech. The Washington Free Beacon reported:
Rubio Urges Democrats to Not Boycott Netanyahu Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) strongly urged his Democratic colleagues to stand with Israel during his floor speech Thursday, stating they should not boycott Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s March 3 address to Congress.
“Don’t do this to a people that are in the crosshairs of multiple terrorist groups with the capability of attacking them,” Rubio said. “Don’t do this to a nation whose civilians are terrorized by thousands of rockets launched against them at a moment’s notice. Don’t do this to a country that’s facing down the threat of a nuclear weapon annihilating them off the face of the Earth. Don’t do this to a people that are being stigmatized all over the world, even as we speak, who are being oppressed. Don’t do this to a country that in forum after forum has become the subject of de-legitimatization as people argue that somehow Israel’s right to exist is not real."
Here's the video: Rubio's sentiment has been echoed by Nobel Peace Prize winner and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel.

Remember when Harry Reid and other Democrats thought they could retain control of the Senate by demonizing the Koch brothers? In November of 2014 that strategy proved to be a loser---but Democrats learned nothing. Sean Sullivan and Anne Gearan of the Washington Post reported yesterday:
Democrats see new chance to attack Kochs after $1 billion spending announcement Forget Jeb, Rand and Ted. For Democrats, it’s all about Charles and David. The announcement this week that the vast political network backed by the wealthy industrialist Koch brothers aims to spend nearly $1 billion on the 2016 elections has reignited Democratic hopes of casting the brothers as electoral villains and linking them closely to Republican candidates. It’s a campaign strategy that yielded little success for the party in 2014, a banner year for the GOP. But Democratic officials and operatives say they are hopeful that their anti-Koch message will have more potency in a presidential election year.
Sally Kohn, who somehow has a job writing for CNN, jumped right on the bandwagon:
A better way for the Kochs to spend their millions Here comes spendageddon! To influence the 2016 elections, oil barons Charles and David Koch have pledged that their political network will spend $889 million, media reports say. Basically -- wrap your head around this if you can -- the ultra-conservative Koch brothers want to keep their business and personal taxes as low as possible and keep regulations on the energy industry as low as possible. And if they get their way, that $889 million in money donated by the Kochs and others to the groups they founded, will turn out to be just a drop in the bucket, a small investment for which they stand to gain much more in tax breaks and free pollution.
I fail to see how the libertarian Kochs, who favor gay marriage and the legalization of marijuana, qualify as "ultra-conservative"; but I'm clearly not as smart as Ms. Kohn.

Democrats, who have spent the better part of the last six years politicizing... everything, are suddenly concerned that Republicans might politicize the Congressional Budget Office with a new appointment. Vicki Needham of The Hill reported:
Dems warn GOP: No 'ideologue' in budget job Senate Democrats are warning Republicans to tread carefully with their selection of a budget scorekeeper for the new Congress, saying they will “strongly object to any effort to politicize this important office." "Appointing a new [Congressional Budget Office] director on the basis of ideology would fundamentally compromise the integrity of an institution that has served as a trusted scorekeeper," a group of Senate Democrats wrote in a letter sent to Republican leaders and budget chairmen. As one of their first acts this year Republicans must decide whether to give another term to Douglas Elmendorf, the director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). While the CBO job is little-known outside Washington, it holds enormous power. The “scores” handed out by the office — measuring the impact of legislation on the budget — are often make-or-break for legislation, particularly if a bill is found to add to the deficit.
Too bad Senate Democrats didn't have the same concerns about politicization when they released the so-called "torture report" last month, huh?

The ink on 2015 is barely dry, but that hasn't stopped liberals from continuing their push for increased gun control. Seizing on the still-raw emotions of the shooting at Sandy Hook, Adam Gopnik of The New Yorker outlined what he calls their "moral work":
The Newtown Lawsuit and the Moral Work of Gun Control The news that the parents of the children massacred two years ago in Sandy Hook, near Newtown, Connecticut, by a young man with a Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle, were undertaking a lawsuit against the gun manufacturer was at once encouraging and terribly discouraging. The encouraging part is that those parents, suffering from a grief that those of us who are only witnesses to it can barely begin to comprehend, haven’t, despite the failure to reinstate assault-weapons bans and stop the next massacre, given way to despair. Like Richard Martinez, after his son was murdered by a weapon that should never have been in the hands of a lunatic, or anyone else, for that matter, they’re allowing themselves to be angry, and then turning their anger into action: they’re naming the business that helped kill their children and asking a court to hold that business responsible. The filed complaint—the numbered paragraphs give it an oddly religious feeling, like theses nailed to a church door—is worth reading in full, however painful that might be, not only because of the unbelievable suffering and cruelty it details on that terrible morning but also because it offers, in neatly logical fashion, an indisputable argument: the gun manufacturer is guilty of having sold a weapon whose only purpose was killing a lot of people in a very short time.
John Hinderaker of Powerline wrote an excellent response to this which you can read here. Leftists claim to support the rights of law abiding gun owners when it's politically convenient, but they will never stop pushing gun control.

Obama recently sat down for an interview with National Public Radio during which he was asked how he is going to work with the new Republican controlled congress for the remainder of his presidency. His response was rather telling. Brendan Bordelon of National Review has the story:
Obama: ‘I’m Obviously Frustrated’ Dems Didn’t Run on My ‘Great Record’ in November In an interview released Monday by National Public Radio, President Obama made clear what’s long been suspected by White House observers — he believes Democratic politicians sowed the seeds of their own defeat in November by failing to support his “great record” as president... “I’m obviously frustrated with the results of the midterm election,” he said. “I think we had a great record for members of Congress to run on. And I don’t think we — myself, and the Democratic Party — made as good of a case as we should have. And, you know, as a consequence we had really low voter turnout, and the results were bad.”
Watch the segment below: Of course, some liberal media types are already trying to correct the mistake the American people made in November.

Democrats are trying to make political hay out of the recently released and highly partisan "torture report" even though they were briefed on enhanced interrogation techniques as far back as 2002. Former CIA official Jose Rodriguez, who oversaw counterterrorism from 2002 to 2004, appeared on Fox News Sunday today. When asked directly by host Chris Wallace who knew what and when, Rodriguez was explicit: Brendan Bordelon of National Review:
Former CIA Torture Head: Nancy Pelosi, Top Dems ‘Knew Exactly What We Were Doing’ “These people were fully aware of all of the techniques that were given to us and approved by the Office of Legal Counsel at Justice,” Rodriguez continued, saying that neither Nancy Pelosi nor other Democrats — with the exception of then–California congresswoman Jane Harman — “ever objected to the techniques at all.” Rodriguez alleged that some lawmakers, such as Democratic West Virginia senator Jay Rockefeller, actually pushed the CIA to be even harsher. “All of these people knew exactly what we were doing,” he said.
Watch the exchange here: Democrats are acting like this is all news to them.

With the midterms over, both parties are turning their focus to 2016. Democrats, who were the clear losers on November 4th are struggling over leadership and the direction of their party. It's hard to imagine Elizabeth Warren harshly criticizing the Obama administration just a few years ago. The age of Obama is over. Peter Schroeder of The Hill:
Democrats assail Wall Street ties in Obama administration President Obama’s nomination of Antonio Weiss to serve as the Treasury Department’s top domestic finance official is drawing fire from an unusual sector: his fellow Democrats. Liberal lawmakers like Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have been quick to oppose Weiss, a major investment banker with Lazard. Among their grievances is the fact that Lazard’s work is primarily in international finance and he is nominated for a domestic position. They’re also critical of his role in structuring several tax inversion deals, which have drawn criticism from the president himself. But an underlying thread to the Democratic opposition is a fatigue with filling top-ranking administration spots with officials that have spent significant time working for or on behalf of Wall Street titans. Warren penned an op-ed in The Huffington Post criticizing the administration’s approach under the headline “Enough is Enough.”
The discord isn't limited to the Warren wing of the party. There's plenty of scorn to go around.

It's easy to forget how many stupid things Democrats have said over the last year. Fortunately, David Rutz of the Washington Free Beacon has put them all together:
Turkeys The Worst of the Democrats in 2014 The Democratic Party had a really bad 2013. Somehow, it got worse. President Obama admitted in August that “we don’t have a strategy yet” in battling the terrorist group known as the Islamic State, just months after dismissing the organization as a mere “JV team.” Vice President Joe Biden, in an impressive feat even for him, managed to offend Jews and Asians in the span of one day, and he also referred to Africa as a “nation.” Soon-to-be Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) also offended Asians when he joked he had trouble “keeping my Wongs straight” at the Asian Chamber of Commerce, and he also made headlines this year with his bizarre rants about the philanthropist Koch brothers. Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.) stepped in controversy when she remarked Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker had “given women the back of his hand.” It didn’t work in dissuading voters; Walker won his third election in four years.
Here's the blooper reel:

Can Elizabeth Warren save the Democratic Party's voice in the U.S. Senate? Harry Reid seems to think so. After the historic losses suffered by Democrats last week, Reid wants to give Mrs. Warren a promotion. Manu Raju and John Bresnahan of Politico reported:
Harry Reid wants Warren in Senate leadership Senate Democrats want to enlist a progressive firebrand as a member of their leadership: Elizabeth Warren. The incoming Senate minority leader, Harry Reid, is engaged in private talks with the Massachusetts freshman to create a special leadership post for the former Harvard professor, according to several people familiar with the matter. It’s unclear exactly what the new job would entail — but luring the populist liberal into leadership could inject fresh blood into a team reeling from significant midterm election losses. Adding Warren, Democrats say, would bring in a nationally known name who could help sharpen the Democratic message as it goes toe-to-toe with the new Senate Republican majority. The move would likely be viewed favorably by an increasingly liberal caucus.
The Democratic Party's hard-left progressivism was soundly rejected by the American people last week. Their solution to the problem? Even harder-left progressivism! That being said, maybe Elizabeth Warren will finally get big money out of American politics...

On the eve of the 2010 midterms, I noted that Democrats were about to be politically decapitated in Congress:
The Democrats face a political decapitation tomorrow. Dozens of senior Democratic Party leaders in the House and Senate, and in Statehouses around the country, are likely to lose. Unlike Republicans in 2008, there is no next generation of Democratic leaders. Who are the Democratic Party equivalents of Marco Rubio, Mitch Daniels, John Thune, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan or Eric Cantor? The Republican Party has numerous rising stars. I cannot think of a single Democratic Party rising star. Can you?
And so it came to pass in November 2010 -- other than a few figureheads, Democrats in the House (in particular) lost their leadership generation, as I laid out in my Brilliant Thoughts from Post-Tsunami, Hurricane-Ravaged, Earthquake-Shaken America:
The Democrats received the feared political decapitation. The Democrats lost, in a single night, two generations of leadership: Numerous members of the old guard, including multiple committee Chairmen, lost, as did dozens of newer members from the 2006-2008 cycles. Because the Tsunami struck in one cycle, there are no young Democratic guns waiting to step into the breach. The Democratic Party in the House is worse than a chicken with its head cut off, it is a chicken with its head and feet cut off.
The devastation of 2010 continued into 2011, as dozens of Democrats, including senior figures like Barney Frank, announced retirement. It just wasn't going to be much fun for them in a House run by Republicans.

I don't know about you, but I look forward to many more moments like this in the coming weeks. White House spokesman Josh Earnest was grilled by the White House press pool to admit that the midterms were bad for Democrats and a good laugh was had by all. The Washington Free Beacon reported:
White House Spin on Midterms Leaves Reporters in Disbelief The White House is still reeling from Tuesday’s elections, and has continued to deflect any questions on the subject. Press Secretary Josh Earnest did his best to keep the mood light and respond to the press Thursday, however, his audience was not impressed. “Would you say that Tuesday night was a big loss for Democrats?” a reporter asked. To the dismay of his audience, Earnest declined to answer directly since it would not be appropriate for him to offer any sort of “punditry.” “There are lots of people who get paid a lot more money than I do, who are responsible for offering up analysis and spinning the elections,” Earnest said. “I’m not going to do that.”
Watch and enjoy: As I said, I look forward to more of this.

Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana made some stunning comments about her constituents this week. While speaking to NBC's Chuck Todd, she implied that if she loses her bid for reelection next week, it could be due to racism and sexism. The exchange was captured on video: Her remarks were certainly newsworthy but some people in the media saw a different angle to the story which was much more important; the Republican reaction. This happens quite often, as noted by Jim Treacher: The article in Treacher's tweet is by Melinda Deslatte of the Associated Press:
Sen. Landrieu's remarks on race anger Republicans Republicans are calling on Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu to apologize after she suggested Thursday that President Barack Obama's deep unpopularity in the South is partly tied to race. In an interview with NBC News on Thursday, Landrieu was quoted as saying that the South "has not always been the friendliest place for African-Americans."
Isn't it strange how the very first word in the AP article is "Republicans?" Surely that's an isolated incident, right? Nope.