The Patriot Post® · Democrats Foul Meaning, Foment Rage
“[R]evolutions broke out in city after city… caused still new extravagances of revolutionary zeal, expressed by an elaboration on the methods of seizing power and by unheard-of atrocities in revenge. To fit in with the change of events, words, too, had to change their usual meanings.” —Thucydides, Greek historian (c. 460 – c. 400 BC)
Today’s “Democrats” are both lip service experts and linguistic contortionists. Ironically, despite the donkey mascot, they don’t believe in democracy or the pioneering American spirit. That unfortunately ended with JFK’s New Frontier optimism and the subsequent tragedy of his and brother Bobby’s assassinations. Recall that Kennedy’s Camelot was quickly appropriated and replaced by something unrecognizable, Mr. Johnson’s “Great Society.” Mind you, LBJ also still conveniently called himself a “Democrat,” but he was the first modern-day progressive, and his hard leftist policies were a radical departure from Mr. Kennedy’s.
What did LBJ do? As any good fascist, he cleverly exploited the memory of his murdered predecessor into a governing mandate for his own policies. After all, how could the American people have realized then the radical differences? (They don’t even realize them now!) LBJ promised superficial hope and continuation; a calm voice in calamitous times. Reeling from existential grief, the voters did what they thought to be a reasonable thing: they elected Mr. Kennedy’s V. P. Specifically, in 1964, LBJ garnered 61% of the vote: the widest popular margin in American history.
On the level of policy, what did LBJ do? For starters, he nearly doubled JFK’s government spending to $42 billion and added 13% to the national debt. (These figures are quaint compared to Mr. Obama’s $9 trillion of $19 trillion in total, and counting.) Similarly, Mr. Obama has also expanded government with, for example, his takeover of 1/6 of the economy soon to be known as the Obamacare debacle. Likewise, LBJ had his failed War on Poverty. Related to the latter, what is clear in hindsight 50 years later? Per the 2013 U.S. Census Bureau, 14.5% of Americans are poor, basically unchanged since 1967. In the interim, $22 trillion has been squandered, and generations of the nuclear family in the black community have been economically and socially decimated. This phenomenon is known as the Democrat’s poverty plantation.
Fast forward to today to see the stark parallels between both men. Ironically, under America’s first black president, the black community has suffered the most of any segment of our society. Look to the unprecedented, black-on-black murder rate of Mr. Obama’s community-organized Chicago. Another telling sign: the black teen unemployment rate hit a staggering 39% in July 2012. Likewise, in a report for the Center for Economic and Policy Research, economist Dean Baker writes, “The drop in labor force participation was sharpest for African Americans, who saw a decline of 0.3 percentage points to 60.2 percent, the lowest rate since December of 1977.” To this end, Obamacare’s restrictive employer mandates have contributed mightily to generally declining hiring practices. Equally astonishing is the fact that better than 90% of black voters choose Mr. Obama despite their unmistakably diminished prospects.
In any case, as with LBJ — and the fresh-faced Mr. Obama — with Kennedy nostalgia, the electorate saw what it wanted to see: a fun house mirror for its own hopes and dreams. In this regard, lacking the specifics of a track record was only a boon to BHO. He was a virtual unknown, totally untested, a political neophyte. He was also a polished, empty suit that symbolized what black people aspired to be. Likewise to white voters, Mr. Obama appeared to be the manifestation and realization of MLK’s “Dream.” Once again, understandably, the trusting American public pulled the lever. A mistake made twice to our collective detriment. What America wanted was another unifier, ideally perhaps JFK and MLK rolled into one. What we got was the opposite: another big government ideologue, a Johnson style bait-and-switch.
By the totality of his political philosophy, JFK would likely be a left of center mainstream Republican in today’s world. He was pro-military, supported economy-stimulating tax cuts, was against deficit spending and was rabidly anti-Communist — and specifically, anti-Castro. In what universe could one imagine JFK going on a bended knee “apology tour” to America’s geo-political foes? (To that end, he would have rightfully fired Hillary for her embarrassingly inept Russian “reset button” stunt.) Furthermore, what’s the probability Mr. Kennedy would ever vacation in Cuba or embrace authoritarian Castro in warm friendship? How about that U.S. military Mr. Obama has gutted? Or those Obama hell-freezing-over-first tax cuts? Our current president calls himself a “Democrat,” but he also claims a Christian faith for what that’s worth. But, what of an apples to apples comparison of Mr. Obama to true Democrat Mr. Kennedy, or Ben Carson as a typical Christian? What is then seen in the former is a pretender who doesn’t know the meaning of these concepts beyond lip service to them.
Obama, Clinton and Sanders are all ruling class elitists, happy to play obscuring word game patty-cake with the MSM. Notice the nebulous and fluid labels they use to define themselves:
“OK, well what’s the difference between a socialist and a Democrat?” Chris Matthews asked again.
“I can tell you what I am, I am a progressive Democrat,” Hillary Clinton responded.
“How is that different than a socialist?” The MSNBC talking head asked a third time.
“I am a progressive Democrat who likes to get things done.”
Well, isn’t that a bit like hubby Bill’s “It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”? “Democrat-Socialist” indeed! That’s about as contrary and nonsensical as Big Brother’s title for his Ministry of Peace that, in actuality, makes war. (Incidentally, that’s why neither DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz nor front-runner Hillary Clinton can articulate the nonexistent difference.) More to the point, when a term like “liberal” loses its sale value (as during the Reagan years) these chameleons — anti-American, big government fascists, one and all — shift to the common usage of a different, positive-sounding buzz word like “progressive.” The fact that this word is very similar to the word “progress” is intentional. Given, as examples, the widespread advancements in medicine and technology, who in the 21 century is not for more of that? The fact that both ideas have nothing whatsoever to do with each other is the point. Language becomes imprecise and overtly hazy. Therefore, a progressive is a good association code word to confuse — and ultimately dupe — uninformed voters. (Millennials, this means you!) Likewise was Mr. Obama’s vacuous hope and change slogan. Or Mr. Obama’s ominous fundamental transformation of America. Sound-good surface words that have brought wheels-falling-off ruin to America.
Think of a curse word for a donkey and that’s the only aspect that has remaining relevance to these would-be “Democrats.” Their ilk only believe in one thing: perpetual top-down rule of an ever-expanding debt-ridden government they control. It’s Uncle Sam reconstituted as nanny state wet-nurse. Recall that economics is freedom. As is peaceful self-expression and individual choice-making. In the final analysis, are Americans more free or less so after Mr. Obama’s almost eight years in office? For a strong indication, the able-bodied 93 million unemployed can check their bank account balances, the rest can check their part-time paycheck stubs.
In no way do progressives/socialists resemble Democrats’ roots: “go your own way” Classic Jeffersonian Liberalism. They are, in reality, their opposite number. Specifically, today’s “Democrats” are that in name only. Mr. Obama has enjoyed and exploited an unquestioning quasi-religious fanaticism by the propagandist MSM and his fellow political travelers in government. The state is their God, and political power (via faceless, unaccountable bureaucratic government) is their catnip. Make no mistake, they are against all traditional American ideals: Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (via self-determination).
These folks use soft, meaningless euphemisms like “climate change” and political correctness as political smoke — sleights of hand — to distract from the abject failures of their policies. Hence, “leadership from behind,” and America’s economics, military strength and political power are in absolute contraction. Specifically, a corrupt IRS that continues to target conservative groups is just the tip of the iceberg. Politicians like Mr. Obama lie about Obamacare and globally about his failed record as president. His would-be successor, Hillary Clinton, lies about her roles in Benghazi, Server-gate and Charity-gate. Added mightily by a sycophantic, water-carrying MSM, they know: say the lie loud enough and long enough and the sludge filters down as “truth” to the voters. Words mean what they say they mean. And, in this chaotic background, Black Lives Matter anarchists openly proclaim disorder and “Pigs in a blanket. Fry ‘em like bacon.” Overseas, radical Islam similarly chants “Death to America.” Lefties habitually destroy and loot. Contrarily, conservatives and the Tea Party preserve and protest peacefully. They don’t target cops for assassination or burn down American cities like Ferguson and Baltimore. They also don’t vote for responsibility-phobic, two-faced politicians to whom truth is a foreign concept. Want more of the faceless, lawless mob mentality we have now? Ignore my honest, unvarnished words. Keep voting for Hillary’s caliber of person who promises a dystopian Obama third term.
David L. Hunter is on Twitter and blogs at davidlhunter.blogspot.com. He is published in The Washington Post, The Washington Times, Patriot Post, FrontPage Mag, and extensively in Canada Free Press and American Thinker.