The Broken Democratic Party’s Blame Game

There is a good article published this morning over at Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos, it’s titled “Free Us From the Hard-Left“. You should take a few minutes right now to go read the entire article before continuing to read this article, it’s valuable knowledge and reading it first will help you not be biased by what I write.

I mean that sincerely, read Dave Cieslewicz’s article first.

Now that you’ve read Cieslewicz’s article we can move on.

I think Cieslewicz raises some interesting points especially that the moderates need to take back the Democratic Party. I do have some issues within the article that I’d like to highlight, but these aren’t issues that contradict the conclusion that the moderates need to take back the party.

Right out of the gate, Cieslewicz tells us that…

“Democrats have an identity crisis. They are perceived to be something they’re not, which is out of the mainstream. They can thank a vocal minority in their ranks — the hard-left — for that perception.”

That seems reasonable and I agree to a point, however…

In my opinion; yes, Democrats have an identity crisis but Democrats are not being perceived as something they’re not, as Cieslewicz claims, and blaming the vocal minority hard-left for the perception of Democrats as a whole is only partially true. There’s more going on here than meets the eye. This blame game is conveniently skimming the surface and hiding some deeply rooted issues.

The hard-left has been willfully and intentionally enabled by the Democratic Party because it was politically expedient to do so. I think it’s a cold hard fact that the hard-left could not have gained their foot-hold in the party without across the board politically expedient enabling. Just to point out a few things that’s led me to this conclusion; moderate Democrats have openly supported/support extreme ideological causes that the hard-left has pushed, moderate Democrats did nothing to counter the in-your-face extremism from the hard-left, moderate Democrats joyfully leapt in with the open border and sanctuary city nonsense, moderate Democrats jumped on the guilty until proven innocent unethical and immoral cancellation bandwagon, moderate Democrats jumped in bed with the defund the police and racist BLM movements, moderate Democrats unethically rationalized the “mostly peaceful protests” where they burned down parts of some cities, moderate Democrats have willfully joined in the anti-free speech chorus and called for censoring opposing speech, many of the moderate Democrats willfully jumped on the slippery slope towards totalitarianism, and of course, Democrats have been so entrenched in their hate for Republicans and their efforts to gain political power that they automatically vote for anyone with a (D) after the name – no questions asked – no matter how extreme they are. My gut tells me that if Harris had won the election, the slow slide towards totalitarianism would have accelerated and the moderates in the political left would have been completely fine with that, after all, Trump wouldn’t have won the election and the ends justify the means. So for Democrats, voting for Democrats has become virtuous (regardless of truth) vs evil Republicans (regardless of truth).

Why do I think the moderate Democrats openly enable the hard-left and/or remain willfully silent in their opposition to the hard-left’s extremism and vote for them anyway;

1. The political left was politically benefiting from the extremism.
2. Moderate Democrats have been intimidated into silence.
3. The voting core of the Democratic Party has literally been indoctrinated into believing the false fear mongering propaganda without a shred of critical thinking and they now actually believe (facts be damned) that Republicans are evil and must be kept out of office.
4. The ends justify the means.

Now that the election is over and the political left didn’t win by using their 21st century go-to fear mongering extremist rhetoric that they enabled, moderates are crawling out from under their ends justify the means immoral rocks and demanding to take back their party. Here is how the political left has been operating for roughly 15 years, pure political expediency; this is when politicians and voters prioritize what’s convenient in the moment to gain power over what’s best for the country in the long-term.

Next point I’d like to cover is that Cieslewicz tells us in his tenth paragraph that…

“…Trump’s attack ad with the devastating punch line that Harris was “for they/them” while Trump is for “us” was so effective. It wasn’t just about transgender rights; it implied that Harris was far out of the mainstream on a lot of things. She wasn’t and it wasn’t fair, but it worked.”

Cieslewicz seems to think that Harris wasn’t out of the mainstream. Let’s look into that a little bit.

Harris was/is a political Chameleon and the false rhetorical facade of lies they tried to build around her for the campaign was transparently obvious to those of us that were paying attention. Harris had been showing her extremist colors over the years using her own words and her campaign tried to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes hoping that all the anti-Trump fear mongering would push them over the finish line. Even Cieslewicz wrote that “Harris spent the next few weeks recasting herself as a cheerful moderate.“. It’s really hard to effectively put lipstick on a pig and have it pass as a young lady, the same can be said for an overnight recasting of a hateful extremist into a cheerful moderate. The Democrats failed, miserably.

What I see as the core problem of the Democratic Party is that most of the supporting foundation of voters in the Democratic Party, the moderates, knew the truth about the Harris’s extremism and they walked straight into the voting booth and voted for the false facade extremist anyway simply because she had a (D) after her name and she wasn’t Trump. Now don’t get me wrong, they had every right to cast their vote for anyone they wanted for any reason they saw fit, and that’s exactly what they did. From my observation point in south central Wisconsin, it appears to me that a vote cast for Harris falls in four distinct categories,

1. They swallowed the Harris’s false facade.
2. They knew Harris was a liar and they voted for her anyway.
3. They swallowed all the anti-Trump propaganda because they’re gullible.
4. They simply voted for the (D) because they’re Democrats and Democrats vote for Democrats, aka sheeple.

Harris was the worst Presidential candidate that the Democratic Party has ever presented in my lifetime and the (D) tunnel vision of the supporting Democratic Party voters was very obvious in this election.

Cieslewicz seems to think that the ads against Harris for President weren’t fair. Let’s look into that a little bit.

Cieslewicz seems to think that “she wasn’t” an out of touch extremist (but yet she needed to be recast as a “cheerful moderate“) and it “wasn’t fair” for the political right to point out that there was an obvious false rhetorical facade built around the undemocratically anointed Democratic Party Presidential candidate?

Wasn’t fair? Really? By what convoluted measure was it unfair?

How about we talk a little about this delusional concept, massive double standard, and hypocritical concept of being fair.

To my knowledge, with the exception of President Lincoln, I don’t think there’s ever been a President of the United States that has been treated as badly by the opposition party as Trump has been treated. Trump has been FALSELY publicly smeared for years as a fascist, Hitler, Nazi, racist, white supremist, misogynist, rapist, insurrectionist, traitor, threat to democracy, etc. Republican voters have been publicly smeared for years as fascists, Nazi’s, racists, misogynists, insurrectionists, traitors, garbage, anti-law, anti-LGBT…, violent, uneducated, deplorables, etc. Remember, the sky was going to fall if the deplorables elected Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton, but we saw that the USA and the Constitution survived a Trump presidency just fine. The open demonization and fear mongering lies about the political right has been constant for nearly ten years. Even Cieslewicz has jumped on the extreme demonization with statements like it’s not very debatable if Trump is really a fascist, or “Trump is the closest thing to a fascist who has ever held the presidency“, or “four years of a near-fascist government under Donald Trump“ (follow the links to get the full context and make your opinion). Were all those false propaganda narratives plastered by Cieslewicz and others across the USA for years and years “fair”?

Well, were these false smears fair?

Cieslewicz seems to think that Harris building a transparently obvious false Chameleon rhetorical facade around herself for a few months in an effort to hide her extremism and get elected as a faux moderate was fine but the Republicans making an effort to point out the blatantly obvious Chameleon hypocrisy of Harris was somehow “unfair”? Again, Cieslewicz wrote in one article “Harris spent the next few weeks recasting herself as a cheerful moderate.“ Why would they need to recast Harris if she wasn’t out of touch with voters. So they recast her from a hateful extremist into a cheerful moderate overnight and voters were just supposed to swallow it as fact? If the Democrats knew that Harris was so out of touch with voters that they had to recast her, then it’s quite clear that they didn’t think they could sell the old extremist Harris to voters and they chose to lie, yes, LIE! That’s what recasting into a new false narrative is, a lie.

I’ve got one word for Cieslewicz’s unfair claim,

HOGWASH!

By the way; I don’t remember ever reading Cieslewicz openly condemning the constant false demonizing, fear mongering, and smearing of Trump and Republican voters as specifically being unfair, if he has done this please share a link to what I missed.

In my opinion; “fair” is an unmeasurable psychological construct that deludes individual minds into believing that fair actually exists but it’s usually based on pure emotion. Fair to one individual may not be fair to any other individual on the planet, it’s a scientifically undefinable delusion.

Next point I’d like to cover is that Cieslewicz tells us that…

“the hard-left is so outspoken, it gets heard and it drowns out the more moderate, mainstream views of most Democrats”

I completely agree, but again, it’s a choice for the moderates to allow their voices to be drowned out and/or silent. If they really wanted to be heard, it wasn’t a hard thing to do since they had nearly the entire main stream media in their pocket to do their bidding.

Next point I’d like to cover is that Cieslewicz tells us that…

“Moderate Democrats, who actually form a solid majority of the party, have to also retake the party. We have to become the voice and image of the party.”

I completely agree. The problem is that it appears that there are far too many easily intimated weenies in the moderate majority of the Democratic Party that will remain silent because they are in real fear of being canceled if they dare to disagree with the extremists.

I’m here to tell the weenies, that there is power in numbers and either you bare your teeth and raise a major ruckus in your party or you’ll be completely dominated by the extremists in your party. The choices are yours and remember, choosing to do nothing is also a choice and it also has consequences.

Yes, there’s a bit of necessary repetition in this blog post.

[UPDATE: 12/6/2024 I fixed a couple of typo’s and corrected some grammar.]