Another vintage liberal whine is about to be uncorked. Brace yourselves for a wave of rationalizations and excuse-making, as the media and other liberal elites try to explain away the whuppin’ Obama and the Democrats got – slaughter at the ballot box.
The party in the White House usually suffers modest midterm losses. But this election was a greater blowout than 1994, when Republicans picked up 53 House seats and took control of both the House and Senate. Now, the talking-heads are spinning like Linda Blair in The Exorcist.
To admit that the president and his party were decisively rejected due to their agenda would call the whole liberal worldview into question. (“You mean people don’t like being treated like children? Next you’ll tell me they’d rather spend their money themselves.”)
Here are some of the lame excuses the Democrats’ whine-stewards are about to serve.
Republicans bought the election – The Democrats plaintive cry toward the end of the campaign: We’re being overwhelmed by mystery money. “Everything was going great and all of a sudden secret money from God knows where – because they won’t disclose it – is pouring in,” Nancy Pelosi lamented.
Princess Botox was referring to independent spending by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. But the Supreme Court – that body which Democrats revere above all others – says independent-expenditure campaigns, left and right, don’t have to disclose their donors. Pelosi and company would love the names to be made public, so the president could sic his ACORN goon squads on them.
In the Chamber’s case, the White House concocted this weird conspiracy theory: Because some Chamber members are foreign corporations doing business in the United States, the election was being influenced by “foreign money.”
What about 2008, when illegal overseas contributions flowed into the Obama campaign, like $33,000 from Hamas-infested Gaza? The president’s campaign claimed it was for the sale of “Obama for President” t-shirts (hot items in Gaza City) – or was that cocktail napkins?
Even with independent expenditures, the two parties spent about the same on House and Senate races this year.
According to the New York Times (October 26), Democratic Congressional candidates outspent Republicans by about 30% ($119 million to $79 million). Ah, but 80% of third-party spending (independent expenditures) went to Republicans – “$60 million into competitive races since July” – the paper disclosed. But if you add the two together, Democrats still retain a slight edge ($131 million to $127 million), by the establishment’s own estimate.
Being Marxists at heart, liberals believe everything is economically determined, including elections. They’re also bloody hypocrites – decrying campaign contributions while they rake it in with both hands (from big labor, big business, Hollywood, and billionaires like George Soros and Ted Turner).
And what was the support of their media cadre worth to the Democrats in this election year? Most political reporting is political advertising for liberal candidates.
The 2010 election was driven by anger and fear – Supposedly, the Tea Parties turned Middle Americans into zombies roaming the streets with outstretched arms, looking for Democrats to devour. “In Colorado, Voters Voice Uncertainty and Anger,” read an October 24 headline in (where else) the New York Times. Vinegar Joe Biden implored a campus crowd not to allow Republicans to turn the election into “a referendum on the people’s anxiety or anger.”
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.