Wednesday, August 3, 2011

Can We Get This Donkey a Balls and Spine Transplant?

Columnist Eugene Robinson of The Washington Post put it best in his column this morning: this debt deal was a major defeat for all progressives. But, he added, the next round is soon upon us (next month) and if the Dem side stands tough and is prepared to fight they might actually prevail, as opposed to caving again!

Don't hold your breath!

Somehow, "fight" doesn't appear to be any more in the Democratic Party lexicon than in their DNA. They appear to be congenitally predisposed to pusillanimous surrender, appeasement, Stockholm syndrome and persistently snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Even now, Wussie Dem Senate "leader" Harry Reid is mouthing platitudes to the press that he "really wants" to have on the Dem side of the super congress people who are "flexible" and "willing to consider entitlement cuts". (Though he did say that the repukes' refusal to include revenues makes the last difficult for him. Oh pity poor widdo Harry!)

For people who maybe have been living in caves, the "super congress" or super "committee" is the unaccountable group of 12 congress critters: 6 from each side, who will determine the next round of cuts (some $1.8 trillion) before Thanksgiving. If they can't come to any agreement, then automatic cuts will be effected to defense and Medicare. Though the Re-Pugs, as is their wont, managed to craft the "defense" cuts to their side to be one third inclusive of: foreign aid, Homeland Security and other ancillary props not really part of defense proper.)

What Harry is dithering about then, is appointing people to HIS side who are "flexible".

Well, sorry Harry, but you are already negotiating a prescription for FAILURE!

YOU really need to read Sun Tzu's The Art of War, to the effect that a "battle is generally won before it begins". What he meant is that before the opposing forces even face off, all the preparations that majorly assure victory for one side and defeat for the other, have essentially been made. In the latter case, they are almost always deficient compared to the preparations of the winners!

The Reeps and Mitch McConnell have made it abundantly clear that they intend to "stick with the program". Their hostage taking terrorism worked so well last time they will do it again next month, and hence ALL of their side will be strong, Teepee-oriented spending cutters. NO one for raising revenues!

This means that to even preserve a semblance of balance, Reid must appoint Dem hard liners on his side, else we will be faced with perpetual wuss (or blue dog, junkyard mutt) Dems aligning with Reeps on every vote to target only social spending and never defense. This despite defense now is the most bloated budget there is, sucking up 58 cents of every federal dollar spent. The U.S. now spends more on defense than all the other nations of the planet combined! What, are we going to start invading them all?

Thus, Reid doesn't have the freaking luxury of "flexibility", and if he thinks he does, he's not only the worst wussie to lead the Senate (worse than Tom Daschle, another appeaser), but a dumbass wuss besides. The reason is simple: the ONLY leverage the forlorn donkeys are left with (since they're so inept at bargaining) is defense cuts. If that leverage is ceded, then everything is lost and the Reeps win 99% of what they want again! This we cannot tolerate. Indeed, we won't. All hell will break loose if Reid appoints anyone to that committee of 6 who's not a diehard, hell bent progressive!

In that sense, let me show Harry Reid who exactly needs to be on his committee, from the House and Senate:

House Dems (3):

1) Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (Missouri)

2) Rep. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio)

3) Rep. Diana DeGette(Colorado)

Senate Dems (3):

1) Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vermont)

2) Sen. Barbara Boxer (California)

3) Sen. Chuck Schumer (New York)

There is some latitude in the choices, provided those of similar political tilt and temperament replace those listed. (For example, Sen. Diane Feinstein can replace Sen. Boxer, if need be).

But we don't want to see Warner from Virginia, Tester from Montana, Liebermann from Connecticut or Max Baucus!

Those are deal breakers, Harry!

As for the Dems' and their contribution mongering, begging for money donations, they can go suck salt or pound sand until I see some evidence of balls and spine. I will NOT give money to appeasing wussies.

Maybe after you losers win the next round, in Sept., with revenue hikes and especially massive defense cuts, we'll see about further campaign contributions!

No comments: