« New Gitmo poll | Main | Not panicking yet, but... »

Last thoughts on Dick Durbin

All right, this is the last thing I'll say about it, I swear. I'm still reading posts by infuriated and disheartened Democrats who ludicrously insist that this is precisely why their party always loses -- because Democrats always apologize, and Republicans never do.

A question for these people: Remember Trent Lott? He apologized until he was blue in the face. He even went on BET for an embarrassing bow and scrape session, and he still lost his leadership position.

What's the real difference here? What is the real lesson to be divined? In the case of Trent Lott, it was conservative bloggers and pundits who were clamoring for his head, and that's what made the difference. You want to learn how to be a more effective party? The lesson here is not "Don't apologize!" It's "Purge your party of its extremism."

Clinton understood this, but the lesson was promptly forgotten by your party as soon as he left office. Until you guys rediscover it, America will continue under one-party rule, and believe me, I am only marginally happier about that than you are.


Check out our views on this bull shit!

Excuse me, but have you gone by FreeRepublic.com lately? The last thing that the Republican Party has done is purge itself of its extremists. Indeed, its extremists are its most virulent foot soldiers. The Democrats are losers because they have no balls, not because they don't kick out their extremists. Frankly, I was surprised that the Democratic leadership didn't line up to apologize for hating America when Rove trotted out his rant about how Democrats hate our troops love Osama yada yada yada. If you want to know what a Democrat with balls sounds like, you have to go all the way back to 1948, when Harry S. Truman was making his "Give'em Hell, Harry!" tour of America.

As for Clinton, Clinton won because H. Ross Perot served to suck up half the conservative vote -- he did not win a majority of the popular vote in any of his elections. Frankly, I've always been befuddled by the hatred or adoration that various people feel for Clinton. By every standard I can think of, he was a mediocre politician and a mediocre president, whose sole salvation was pure blind luck in having H.Ross Perot around. The only thing he had going for him as President was that he had a true opposition party keeping him from expanding government the way that Bush has done with no true opposition party to rein in his spending sprees, and divided government kept the Federal government mostly paralyzed, which is a good thing in my book since I'm no believer in a big federal government. Sadly, with no opposition party in Washington D.C. today, there's nobody reigning in the federal government and its bold power grabs -- which is a shame.

-- Badtux the Libertarian Penguin

Post a comment