« Moonbat economics | Main | Wellstone redux? »

Angry Dems?

When I think of "angry Democrats," Hillary Clinton doesn't normally spring to the top of my list. She has her moments, but as a general rule I find the senator to be calm, measured and even-tempered. Hence I'm a bit mystified by Ken Mehlman's characterization of an "angry" Mrs. Clinton.

To be sure, there is plenty of Democratic anger out there. I just don't think Mrs. Clinton typifies it for the most part.

But why do angry Democrats so angrily deny being angry? I've never really understood that. It's understandable, in the case of Hillary, as I've said, but it was patently absurd when the topic was Howard Dean. He was, in fact, the focal point and mouthpiece of pent-up liberal anger and frustration, and everybody knows it.

Yet Democrats will bristle at the first suggestion that any among them might be angry with the direction the country is heading, as if the word "angry" is some kind of grievous slander.

What's wrong with being angry? Hell, if I believed half the crap the moonbats claim to, I'd be angrier than a bucket of snakes.


Hillary is NOT one of the angrier Democrats, in my view.

She IS a consumate politician in a Party that doesn't have too many of those.

Howard Dean is certainly an angry idealogue and a lot of their more well-known supporters of late, from George Soros to Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan certainly are.

Even now, the biggest problem that voters have with Republicans isn't that "they've gone too far on the war on terror," nor "they've cut taxes too much," BUT instead that Republicans "haven't done enough to protect our borders and reduce immigration," and "Republicans are spending too much."

You'd think the smart course would be to jump into that breach and fight for stricter border controls, the eradication of illegal immigration and if not embracing the "Supply Side" notion that favors tax cuts AND reduced government spending, then at least embracing something other than "Big Government Liberalism" (perhaps its reverse - true Free Market economics), but the Democrats of late have resisted every opportunity and turned their backs on every new chance to re-connect with Middle American voters.

That's the shame...and Hillary Clinton is NOT really a part of that problem, but Howard Dean, the Moores, Sheehans and Soros' certainly ARE.

Post a comment