« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Good Mourning, Democrats.

To paraphrase somebody or other, from here on out your day only gets worse.

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  September 27th, 2010 at 08:30 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Citizens For The Republic would like to take this opportunity to remind the American people that elections have consequences:

Andrew Malcolm calls the “Mourning in America” ad “powerful,” and it is: it’s a deliberate updating of the classic “Morning in America” ad, and as Kathleen Parker notes its power lies in how… sad… it is, compared to the original.  It is, indeed, sad: it is also devastating.  The central problem for the Democrats right now is that they own an economy that has grown measurably worse since they took Congress in 2006 and devastatingly worse since they took all three branches of government in 2008; and unlike 2008, the American populace knows which party is running Congress.  Which is why people are quietly preparing for a shift of power in at least the House, and quite possibly the Senate as well.

Before a lurker privately scoffs at that last part of that sentence, contemplate: a year ago the first part of it would have been the object of mockery.  Now it’s a perfectly reasonable assumption, based on the current data.

Moe Lane  (Crosspost)

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • charlesmartel

    Up until that last line: “A smaller, more caring government.”

    “More caring?!!” Really? Sounds an awful lot like “compassionate conservative.” Which sounds a lot like “spend a truckload of money on worthless social programs.” The last thing I want is the thought of my government giving me a hug.

    Unpleasent Schwarzenegger comparisons aside, I like my government like I like my killer robots from the future – ruthlessly efficient, cold-hearted and uncorruptable.

  • spim

    not so much “touchy feely” kind of caring

    but “caring about and remembering whose country this is – the citizens’ who actually create the jobs and make things happen and pay their taxes”

    but I’m just guessing

  • banzaibob

    As in the DemocRATS mouning the loss of their jobs.

  • izoneguy

    N/T

  • skorrent1

    “Caring” about “us” in the ad means caring about the baby born with debt, the people without jobs, the decisions taken away from “us”, all by government policies that have failed. In all, a great ad with great impact.

  • johnt

    And Parker’s “his ideas were too big” misses the point, and implies at least a limited approval, [maybe she got that from Spitzer].
    The country is pretty much where O wants it, not electorally of course, he miscalculated just how much the media could cover his sorry ass, but economically & in additional federal power.
    Granted he wanted to do much more harm but I think he goes to bed at night with his gargantuan wife reasonably satisfied, and with the prospects of devoutly desired tax increases passed by a lame duck Congress, almost too giddy to go to sleep.
    I wonder if Mrs O snores? Does she take her teeth out at night?
    Isn’t she beautiful ?

  • throwback59

    the net.
    Very powerful. And sad. And worst of all, true.

  • http://www.FranBaker.com frankieb

    Especially the first three paragraphs. The last two … shudder. LOL!

  • WY_Cowboy

    I know why some would be suspicious of that kind of language, however we need to keep in mind that a caring government can me one that cares about personal freedom and responsibility. It could mean caring about a lot of things that don’t mean increased spending on social programs and central planning. Heck, it could just mean a government that cares about your opinion and would take that into consideration in formulating policy.

    All of the above possible meanings of caring would be a shift from the current administration and Congress, would not infringe on personal freedom, would not mean more spending, and would be a change for the positive.

    I am willing to put the phrase “a more caring government” into a conservative context and change for the better. I do think that is what they are aiming at. In addition, we do know that to motivate people to change thier behavior in a way that we would like (voting for conservatives), we have to connect at an emotional level of some kind and the “caring” term does that. The bottom line is that “caring” is fine so long as the agenda behind it is a truly conservative agenda. I believe that is what is being communicated here.

  • WY_Cowboy

    Let’s keep it respectful.

  • etlib

    Don’t forget about caring for the enumerated powers clause.