Home / Culture and Society / Dems Like Howard Dean Just Don’t Get It

Dems Like Howard Dean Just Don’t Get It

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

The aftermath of Scott Brown’s historic win last week, when he was voted in to fill “The People’s Seat” in Massachusetts, is quite fascinating. Pundits and politicians have been scrambling and speculating about why a predominately liberal state would elect a Republican to the Senate. Those on the right are taking a victory lap and may be seeking advice from Brown, while a handful of Democrats are doing some soul searching. Senator Evan Bayh sees it as a wake-up call and Senator Joe Lieberman urges the Democratic party to move more toward the center. Then there is Governor Howard Dean.

As the news broke over this election, Rachel Maddow interviewed Dean. His analysis included blaming Bush for the Democrat’s loss and, a few breaths later, affirming, “People who blame others are losers.” In an awkward and spirited exchange between, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Dean over Brown’s victory and the future of the Democrats’ health care reform bill, Dean came up with some interesting conclusions. “Yesterday, the problem was that people wanted more,” stated Dean. Matthews pointed out the differences between the two candidates: Martha Coakley, who is very progressive and in favor of a public option versus Brown, who said that he would “kill the bill.” Asked Matthews, “Why didn’t they vote for the candidate for the public option?” Dean’s response? “They want real change”!

Let me see if I have this straight. In essence, what Dean is saying is that the Independents and Democrats who voted for Brown wanted the public option in the health care bill, so they voted for the candidate who campaigned as “Mr. Forty-One; the vote to filibuster.” Were the voters sending smoke signals or is Brown secretly a progressive, masquerading as a conservative?

While Dean continues his delusional interpretation of the Massachusetts Senate election outcome, many have turned to second-guessing the mood of the country, including President Obama. Why are the people “angry” and “frustrated?”

Let’s take a look at what transpired during the past year: bank bailouts, the GM takeover, and the passing of the February 2009 $787 billion stimulus package, which was marketed with the assurance of economic recovery and the creation of jobs, yet our economy is still in the dumps and unemployment has risen to 10%. Okay, so Obama inherited an economic mess, but what about tone and direction?

Elitism and Arrogance

The elitist mentality of the White House staff and amongst the Democrats is palpable; they think that their skills, abilities or wisdom render them fit to govern, without full consideration of what the people want, their arrogance has been demonstrated time and time again. All criticism has been met with attempts to dismiss, discredit, and demonize, and an entire news network was rebuked. Democrats and the left-wing media have talked down to the people, labeling us with everything from stupid to angry mobs and Astroturf, from un-American to racists, and our own president has mocked us.

Broken Political Promises

Every political campaign comes with promises of a better, cleaner, and more noble government, with the declaration that they will represent “the will of the people.” Obama arrived on the political stage with his speeches about “hope and change,” and most likely, good intentions. He was clear and confident that he was going to be the one to usher in bipartisanship and government transparency –– a message that resonated with the majority of American voters.

Candidate Obama promised to veto any bill with earmarks, yet the amount of pork in the bills passed by Congress last year would give the healthiest American athlete an immediate heart attack. The Democrats’ widely unpopular and massive health care bill is a key example of how a multitude of promises were broken. Starting with the fact that Republicans were shut out of the process and despite C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb’s letters to leaders in Congress, urging them to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public––access thus far has been denied and the people left in the dark.

The most angering aspect is in the process: it reeks of corruption. What is transparent is that, instead of taking a bipartisan approach and listening to the American people, President Obama, Senator Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have chosen to deliberate behind closed doors, using bribes such as the $300 million “Louisiana Purchase,” the “Cornhusker Kickback” ($45 billion for the first decade), and more. To add insult to injury, last week Obama made a back-room deal with the unions. According to The Washington Post, this deal “would exempt union members from a proposed surtax on expensive insurance plans (so-called Cadillac plans) until 2018, five years after the legislation would take effect.” It seems that Obama’s resolve to take on special-interest groups and their perverting influence on the entire legislative process only applies to the ones he is not connected to. Nevertheless, Governor Dean may be right from one perspective: the legislative process under this administration may be politics as usual, and Americans want real change –– we need more than health care reform, we need “sausage making reform.”

Expansion of Government

President Obama came out fast and furiously, expanding his executive power by appointing a record number of ““czars”” and filling other key positions of influence in the White House with a coterie of radicals, socialists and socialist sympathizers .

I am not ready to echo Glenn Beck’s accusations of conspiracy in this area. However, I will say that since Obama’s agenda is a moving target and remains a mystery, it does lead many Americans to pause and wonder. What we do know is that this administration is comfortable with demonizing success, yet they want to use the rich to pay for all of their government programs and have been quoted as saying that “redistribution of wealth ,” is a good thing.

Out of Control Debt

When President George Bush took office, the national debt was $5.73 trillion. When he left, it was $10.7 trillion. That is a difference of $4.97 trillion in eight years. A year ago our national debt was $10.7 trillion and now it is at $12.3 trillion and rising. So what is driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? The answer lies in analyzing the nonpartisan details.

Back in December, Congress raised the debt ceiling by $290 billion and this past week the Democrats opened a debate to push for the ceiling to be raised by $1.9 trillion, so they can borrow and spend more money.

Many Americans are disturbed and frightened by the fact that legislation like ObamaCare, cap-and-trade, and many others coming down the political pike are destined to raise taxes even for the middle class (broken promise), will expand all aspects of government, and jeopardize many of the freedoms we, the people enjoy today. It looks like hope and change is morphing into government control and debt.

Lawyers for Terrorists

With recent cases like the White House party crashers, the Fort Hood shootings, and the Christmas underwear bomber, it seems that we have an administration that has trouble keeping the White House secure and connecting the intelligence dots. What is frustrating to many Americans is their attitude toward terrorists and how they are handled. I am personally against any type of torture, including water boarding, because our respect for humanity is what separates us from the evil we are fighting. However, treating terrorists like common criminals and giving them a lawyer, doesn’t make sense. Part of the rationalization floating around for this decision is “Bush did it.” If Bush jumped off a building would they follow? Speaking of Bush, that brings me to my final point.

Blame Bush

The blame Bush game, which President Obama and the Democrats, with the support of the left-wing media, have used to escape or deflect culpability, has gone on long enough, tiring even non-Bush supporters. Did they get the memo that Bush is not the president anymore?
Even a day after Brown won the Senate seat in Massachusetts and in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, President Obama gave his assessment of the vote and the mood around the county, “People are angry and they’re frustrated, not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”

Why are the people angry and frustrated? Only time will reveal why and what it really means in the political arena, but for now it looks as if some just don’t get it. And as one voice of the people, an average American voting citizen, may I remind those at the White House and on Capital Hill that, “pride goeth before a fall.”

Powered by

About Christine Lakatos

  • Cannonshop writes:

    “Republicans at least admit they don’t like taxation, and tend to not want to increase it on anyone else while trying to avoid it themselves. I see no reason for any reasonable person to support someone who wants to impose the bill on said reasonable person, while avoiding paying his or her share-even to the point of felony tax-evasion.”

    I don’t understand you. Under Republican Dwight Eisenhower, the highest tax rate was 92%.

    The highest rate any Democratic President has suggested in the past 20 years has been 39%.

    Your argument is false based upon historical fact.


  • cannonshop

    #34 Check the congressional record, Beatrix.

    Chuck Rangel. (Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee-the Committee that WRITES tax-laws.)
    Chris Dodd.
    Tim Geithner (Secretary of the Treasury)
    Joe Biden…

    When you mess up your taxes and owe a grand, you’re stuck with 125% interest compounded quarterly. (I know, I had a three hundered dollar mistake that turned into three grand in just under two years.)

    Geithner misfiled for about forty grand, ten years before he was caught-no interest, no jail time.

    Rangel is in for a few hundered thousand, again, no interest as long as he pays it back-and his was OVER THE COURSE OF A DECADE.

    An entire democratic congress that voted ot bail out Wall Street and leave us commoners hanging over the course of the time between 2006 and 2009, tripling the national DEBT, not just the Deficit, in January to February of 2009.

    Democrats always harp about how we need to pay more taxes-and it turns out they don’t pay THEIR taxes, and when they get caught, it’s not even a slap on the wrist.

    Another one: Teddy Kennedy pushed throughout his career for an increase on inheritance taxes, while hiding his own money in blind trusts to avoid those self-same taxes.

    The only people who get hit by Democrat “Soak the Rich” taxes, are the middle class-because the Dems ARE the guilty rich, and do everything in their power to shift the burden onto the rest of us.

    Republicans at least admit they don’t like taxation, and tend to not want to increase it on anyone else while trying to avoid it themselves. I see no reason for any reasonable person to support someone who wants to impose the bill on said reasonable person, while avoiding paying his or her share-even to the point of felony tax-evasion.

  • beatrix

    Who, specifically, are you speaking of when you say,
    “The real problem is that the people who’ve told us for years we should be paying higher taxes are the same people we find out have been NOT paying their own taxes-the money that they, under the laws they crafted, owe-and they’ve gotten away with it.”

  • Cannon: very well put!

  • cannonshop

    Healthcare is just the ‘current’ focus issue. The real core of the voter frustration problem isn’t whether a bill on health-care is strong, or weak. The real problem is that the people who’ve told us for years we should be paying higher taxes are the same people we find out have been NOT paying their own taxes-the money that they, under the laws they crafted, owe-and they’ve gotten away with it. The frustration is watching the Left party paying off crooked Wall-Streeters right beside the GOP’s leadership-with money taken from US.

    The frustration is doing what you were told is the right thing (holding back, saving up, waiting to buy a house until you can at LEAST afford a normal down-payment) then having to pay the mortgages of the people who didn’t do that, and got burned because they assumed their homes would always increase in value, and that they could always get another loan.

    It’s seeing guys and gals who ‘talk union’ turn around and vote to cripple our industries and put us out of work, vote to export our jobs in ‘free trade’ scams with countries that don’t have laws equivalent to our own, and realizing these guys who did this are paying industries to go overseas as part of the deal.

    It’s realizing that NOW, the same people who’ve ripped us off, cheated on the taxes they themselves levied, the same people who care more about what the lobbyists on K-street say than what we tell them, intend to seize MORE of the economy, promising more things they won’t deliver, while lying to us about what it’s going to cost-and this time, we KNOW they’re lying!

    It’s a reaction to being fucked over, over and over and over again-eventually, normal people, people who aren’t masochistic, get tired of it, and stop just blindly trusting what they’re told by the shills in MSNBC or Government.

  • Don’t be so certain about poll results from the MA Senate election. The MSM wrote off this election as a forgone conclusion in Martha Coakley’s column. To paraphrase a line Granny used to say, “Main stream media plans, voters laugh.”

    Americans have short attention spans. To ask a voter two days after casting one’s ballot, Lord only knows what kind of answer they shall provide. The MSM blew it. The Dems blew it. The voters got it right — regardless of where Brown falls on issues, his election has sent a wake up call to Congress. If it took a Republican taking “Teddy’s seat” — it was worth it — even Teddy might agree with that.

  • beatrix

    Polls of the voters (immediately following the election) who had voted for Obama, and then voted for Scott Brown, or those who had voted for Obama and just stayed home show they want MORE change, not less. They are looking for single-payer, or a very strong public option. That was not present in the current version of the senate bill. The senate bill rewards insurance companies, who, as Eric Massa says, are the problem, not the solution. Therefore, the voters want the current bill killed and a stronger bill created. They are looking for a comprehensive health care reform bill. So, in actuality, Howard is right (as usual).

  • Christine,

    Congratulations on your anniversary!

  • Arch Conservative

    The ___ Party is a tax avoiding answer dreamed up by ___ ___ and his friends.

    If Jeannie is determined to remain as ignorant as possible who are we to prevent her from doing so?

    Regarding Howard Dean…it wasn’t just that scream…….anyone that’s paid attention to him in the last ten years knows that he’s one of the most partisan, rigid, duplicitous, narrow minded hacks on the national political scene.

  • In fact my one year “blogging anniversary” is coming up in March!

  • Silas, #21,

    This is not the answer;The Party movement, as flawed as it may be, is a logical manifestation of voter frustration.

    The ___ Party is a tax avoiding answer dreamed up by ___ ___ and his friends.

    I wont even type this whole comment on my keyboard,…yuk

  • Thanks Heloise, I am new to blogging and politics is just a hobby!

  • Yup, you gotta be politically correct i.e., use the proper buzz words. In this case it’s “populist anger.” Or I like this slip better: Populust Caution.


  • Heloise, I thought I was addressing the “populist anger.” I think I referred to it as “the people.” Did I not use the proper lingo? I agree––”it’s the jobs stupid!” Obama is NOW trying to change his tone. The State of the Union is coming….we will see more.

    Silas, I am going to get the Game Change book this week. Only political book I’ve been excited about since Jonah Goldberg’s, Liberal Fascism. Heard the story about Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer against Hillary. They are jerks.

    Jeannie: Big Hug!

  • Christine what’s with you? You’re slipping. No talk of “populist anger?” That’s the economic bottom line. People are angry. They got the change memo, signed up for, drank of the glass of change, voted their anger and puff we got Plouffe and Obama and Axlerod and Emmanuel in the WH.

    I am a true centrist. I have been blogging about the evils of Summer, Geithner and Bernanke as the beasts that ate the people’s money. In this case the street trumps populism…period.

    It’s not that complicated. People want jobs and want to stop hurting financially. My stock portfolio took a beating but I got most of my money out in time. Other people need to retool and did not see this meltdown coming. Who knew that teaching and living in Texas would be a pancea for prosperity?

    People are in a panic. Dems and GOP have to deal with it. It ain’t over for either party. Scott was listening, he had his ear to the populist ground and came up a winner.

    I take credit cards 🙂


  • Jeannie, let me drive a point home here. I agree Scott Brown is NOT the answer but he is a conduit. The election results are an affirmation of the voters’ disapproval of politics as usual. Sure there are issues where I side 100% with Martha Coakley — especially social issues. That being said, there are times when overall dissatisfaction with the process must transcend specific issues. Reversal of Roe v. Wade, for instance, was not of major concern to me. Why? Because Scott Brown made his case very clear. Roe v. Wade is the law of the land — and that’s Brown-speak. Coakley supporters attempted to make the case that a vote for Brown was a vote against women. Wrong again. Anyone remotely familiar with Brown, his wife and daughters knows damn well that Mr. Brown is far from the sexist Keith Olbermann has made him out to be.

    Neither party has all the answers, Jeannie. The Tea Party movement, as flawed as it may be, is a logical manifestation of voter frustration. White voters are scared because their so-called “majority status” is coming to an end. There’s a race problem in America that no one is willing to discuss. Along with it there remains a distinct battle of the sexes as is evidenced by the simple truth Hillary Clinton should be President today by conventional political wisdom.

    The new book Game Change has opened my eyes to a few things which no one seems willing to discuss. Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer are sexist. That’s right, I said it. They didn’t want Hillary to be the nominee because they were scared of Bill. You know what, Jeannie? The voters are a bit smarter than that. Whatever Bill Clinton’s shortcomings may be, voters would have cast their ballots for Hillary based on her merits. The pundits and spin-meisters would have attempted to marry her to Billy-boy but it would not have stuck. There’s a mistrust of the electorate, Jeannie. And it thrives in both parties. The voters feel it and the voters have responded. The tables have been turned. It’s now we, the people, who don’t trust them – the keepers of the government. Regardless of political affiliation one thing is quite clear for me — incumbents must go, period.

  • Christine, #9

    That is what every person in America is saying right now. It’s not because O is in power, it is because the American citizen is not in any.:(

    See ya later, my favorite Conservative.:)

  • Cindy is always recruiting, Christine.

  • Silas,

    I came back to this thread to see if Christine had a comment for me. and I am happy that she answered me.:)

    I know I am not the most amicable commentor here. But I don’t change my political convictions, or any other beliefs that I hold dear to my heart at the drop of a hat,in-order to fit in with whoever is more popular at the moment.

    So with all due respect, realize that Scout Brown is not the answer either!

    Christine doesn’t flip flop back and forth with the wind.

  • Wow, sounds great. Is it the BC Party? I’ll sign up as long as we get permission from Cindy.

  • Yes, thus far we have three members: Cindy, Mark (Eden) and I. Jeannie and Silas are “potentials.” And Archie is waiting on the wings.

  • And yes, they are all “spinning it” to their advantage!

  • Roger are you starting a new political party? lol

    Silas, I agree politics are local, however, whether the election was a reflection of Bush/Obama or not; it (and the elections in November I think it was) is scaring a lot of Dems and it makes more for the pundits to analyze and talk about.

  • Well, here’ on op-ed piece, Silas, in support of your take. And I tend to agree.

  • Five days later and the pundits still spin the election results. The dynamics of the Massachusetts Senate race really had little to do with Bush or Obama. On the day Ted Kennedy was laid to rest, the MSM and the political parties were certain that the seat would remain with the Democrats. After all, the Bay State is allegedly blue. No exit polling was in place — the MSM figured the seat was already in Coakley’s possession. HA! Guess again.

    Even die-hard life long Democrats weren’t convinced that Coakley was the “one”. And, believe it or not, Vicki Kennedy’s “endorsement” in the days before the election wasn’t convincing. Many of us felt that she was coerced into campaigning for Coakley. Scott Brown won Ted Kennedy’s own precinct in Hyannis which speaks volumes to the inadequacies of the Coakley campaign. Like it or not, politics are local and this campaign in particular has proven the point.

  • should be “Jeannie.”

    And I may as well add Christine into the mix.

  • You are getting radicalized, Jenny.

    Here’s a suggestion: join the party of Cindy.

  • Jeannie, It is tough these days to trust any politician. It seems that power corrupts most. So who the heck knows what any of us should or will do. 🙁

  • That should have been SCOTUS! sorry.

  • Christine,

    After reading your article, I have a couple of points to make.

    I agree with you that our government is getting way too big and definitely way too powerful. Look at the latest SCOUTUS ruling.
    The first point is that this elitist attitude you have cited really became apparent to all during W’s administration.
    The way I understand the transition from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration, is that the bipartisanship, if there ever was any, was thrown right out the window.

    Secondly,wasn’t the introduction of the position of “CZAR” was also started by George W.? Along with the formation of Homeland Security, which all but stripped the other offices such as FEMA of any real power?
    This, and the fact that so many of these appointments were filled by friends of the president, instead of the best most competent choices, leaves me very wary of both parties.

    So, not being a Democrat or a Republican, “What the hell am I supposed to do here in America?”

    My party does not exist. 🙁

  • Dan, I was focused on the bosses not the metaphoric aspect of your comment (doing more of the same and expecting a different result, insanity, I think?)

    Thanks for the more thorough clarification.

  • Christine,

    They did something pretty stupid, lost the race and decided that in order to do better next time they needed to do more of the same. Sort of like, “the beatings will continue until morale improves.”

    As you note in the article,

    “Yesterday, the problem was that people wanted more,” stated Dean. Matthews pointed out the differences between the two candidates: Martha Coakley, who is very progressive and in favor of a public option versus Brown, who said that he would “kill the bill.” Asked Matthews, “Why didn’t they vote for the candidate for the public option?” Dean’s response? “They want real change”!

    If the Obama Administration wants to pull its fat out of the fire, it should stop doing what it’s been doing so poorly and listen to the folks in Massachusetts and elsewhere to learn why the independents are deserting. They may well want “real change;” that does not mean they want the change pushed by Dean, et al


  • OK, Dan I think I get it now. lol

  • Dan I see your point on the bosses..just not quite following how it applies here.

  • Christine,

    It seems to be axiomatic that if something does not work, more of the same is all that’s needed.

    When I was in Venezuela years ago, I was told a story about a crew race. One boat was Venezuelan, the other German. The Germans won. The German boat had one boss and the rest were oarsmen. The Venezuelan boat had one oarsman and the rest were bosses (jefes). In the postmortem, the Venezuelans tried to figure out why they had lost. They decided that they hadn’t had enough jefes.


  • I remember all throughout the second G.W. Bush term, street stencil graffiti saying “Bush Lied”. I feel like stamping the pavements with big bold red or flourescent-white “Obama lied”. Perhaps it is time for American voters to realize that, as I heard it said, the Republicans and the Democrats are two faces of the same coin. How about a massive civil disobedience campaign to tell people to stay home and NOT vote – in a protest. I imagine a 10% voter turn out – would send a message.