The American Spectator : The Democrats' Chronic Leadership Shortage

Text Size

Political Hay

The Democrats' Chronic Leadership Shortage

By Ron Ross on 9.15.11 @ 6:08AM

It can't be that they've run out of weirdos.

It has to be depressing to be a Democrat right now. They are extremely disappointed with Obama but they have no obvious replacement.

Consider some possible scenarios. What if months from now Barack Obama is in the same or worse condition than he is now? What if he and everyone else realize that he is dead-candidate walking? One option would be to do an LBJ and announce that he's not going to run for reelection. Another would be for some other Democrat to successfully challenge him in primaries.

The Democrats will not want to abandon Obama, but they want even less to lose the White House along with several House and Senate seats. A lopsided loss would do long-term damage to the party and liberalism. If the S.S. Obama is headed to the bottom of the sea, they will be jumping ship.

Their dilemma is, however, who do they have to replace him? Hillary Clinton is the name mentioned most often, but even Democrats have serious doubts about her as demonstrated by her 2008 primary loss to Obama. New York governor Andrew Cuomo has also been mentioned as a possible alternative. Besides those two choices their menu is not very appetizing -- Joe Biden, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, or Debbie Wasserman Shultz. I can't imagine any of those possibilities exciting even Democrats.

Now compare that situation to what's going on among Republicans. If anything, the Republicans have too large a selection of attractive alternatives. It frustrates me that there can be only one nominee. I like most of the announced candidates as well as several others -- Marco Rubio, Sarah Palin, Chris Christie, Rudy Giuliani, and Paul Ryan, for example. The difference in bench strength between the two parties is like night and day.

This is not a new problem for Democrats. Although they have managed to win presidential elections over the past few decades there is usually something off kilter with their candidates. For example, there is something a bit weird about Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Howard Dean, John Edwards, and Barack Obama. They are not what most people would consider normal. Each in his own way has at least a borderline personality disorder. All of them have difficulty being up front and honest about who they are and about their true objectives.

Now contrast those Democrats to Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, Bush 41, Bob Dole, and Bush 43. There is a genuineness about most all the leaders of the Republican Party. They tend to be people who are comfortable in their own skins.

John Edwards was John Kerry's running mate in the 2004 presidential election. It would be hard now to find a Democrat who would say anything positive about Edwards. He was obviously an extremely flawed choice and most non-Democrats could see that from the outset. Howard Dean had significant support in the 2004 Democrat primaries until his "I have a scream" speech, and it became obvious that the guy is not all there. Nevertheless, Dean was later appointed head of the Democratic National Committee and served in that capacity for four years. Anthony Weiner was a popular rising star in the party until some Internet missteps revealed his serious character flaws.

Why do the Democrats have a propensity to support weirdos? What is it about the Democrat party that prevents normal, well-adjusted people from rising to the top of the party? What does their rogues' gallery of leaders say about the Democrat base? I don't have good answers to those questions, but there is obviously something going on and it demonstrates a striking difference between the two parties.

However someone rises to the upper echelons of the Democrat party, the process is not very productive. Whatever kind of farm team they use, it simply isn't sending many qualified players to the majors.

Democrats love to fall in love with their leaders. Although love is the most wonderful thing in the world, it can be brutal when it comes to judgment. A wise friend of mine once told me, "When love walks in the door, judgment crawls out the window."

Democrats clearly fell head over heels for Barack Obama. A lot of them have now fallen out of love with him and are scratching their heads wondering, "What were we thinking? This guy is not who we thought he was." The answer, of course, is that they were not thinking. They were love-struck. Especially when love is new you do not want to hear anything negative about your sweetheart. That might explain why Democrats so often make choices they subsequently regret.

The Democrat dearth of viable leaders is not likely to disappear anytime soon. The Republican Party is certainly not problem-free, but a shortage of strong candidates is not one of them. That should give them a valuable advantage for years to come.

About the Author

Ron Ross Ph.D. is an economist who lives in Arcata, California. He is the author of The Unbeatable Market. Reach him at rossecon@gmail.com.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (69) | Leave a comment

Kenny| 9.15.11 @ 6:50AM

Good point.

The Democrats are lead by kooks. Maybe that the price their parasite constituency base has to pay for its government benefits

Brian Mc| 9.15.11 @ 9:33AM

But, they're not paying, Kenny. They believe to the last that they already paid, and now it's time for payback. Jealousy is a bitter thing, even worse when it is the capstone of your political party.

wodiej| 9.15.11 @ 6:52AM

borderline personality disorder...lol. That's an apt and kind description.

Right now Dem's are still trying to salvage Obama. The next pres election is more than a year away. But if they want to bail, they will have to do it soon. Frankly, as you aptly stated, they've got no suitable candidate to run. Obama's failed policies has been so disastrous that I don't think there is any way he can win no matter how many political favors he gets. Gov. Sarah Palin is undoubtedly going to announce her candidacy in the next month or so. It will be a game changer. Finally....someone the American people can look at and be proud to call a real leader.

scotchieguy| 9.15.11 @ 10:00AM

Everything was going fine in this article/comments until you brought up Palin's name. She should be running as a democrat just based on her borderline personality. Yes, she says all the right things we conservatives want to hear re limited gov't and a strong military, but she ain't the next Reagan. Far from it. What Palin suffers from is she is emotionally a trainwreck. With that screecing, sneering, childish voice, there simply is no way she could do anything but embarrass the republican party if she were to run. Right now there are eight running, three serious candidates--Bachmann, Perry and Ronmey--all potentially excellent nominees who could easily crush Obama in 2012. Let's leave lil Sarah on the sidelines for this one, shall we?

hummer| 9.15.11 @ 11:05AM

You are completely wron about Palin! Check out what she did in Alaska. She had to buck the whole system of Democrats and "Good Ole Boy Republicans. She got the big old companies back on track and gave them a deadline to start drilling. Check the facts before you start shooting off your mouth!

Dan Hirsch| 9.15.11 @ 12:35PM

You all need to take another look at Gov. Palin. Listen to the point in her Tea Party speech in Indianola, Iowa last week.

Read it here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09.....Zl8xOiUg7g

The New York Times' Anand Gridharadas wrote on Sep 9, 2011:

"Here's a sample: But when her throat was cleared at last, Ms. Palin had something considerably more substantive to say. She made three interlocking points.

First, that the United States is now governed by a “permanent political class,” drawn from both parties, that is increasingly cut off from the concerns of regular people.

Second, that these Republicans and Democrats have allied with big business to mutual advantage to create what she called “corporate crony capitalism.”

Third, that the real political divide in the United States may no longer be between friends and foes of Big Government, but between friends and foes of vast, remote, unaccountable institutions (both public and private)."

Sarah is right, even the New York Times gets this point!

It will not be our decision to leave Sarah on the sidelines - it'll be hers. Once she gets to that debate stage and they try the the Rick Perry treatment (Every question aimed at making him look bad to moderates, straight and bank shots both!) and she responds through that microphone directly to the American people, the whole country will hear her.

That's what happened with Reagan; he struggled to get past the MSM filters when he first ran - he didn't break through until the entire country heard him debate Jimmy Carter. They saw that he was not crazy, that he loved the country and its history, and his ideas could work. Carter, obviously, not so much.

The polls had Reagan down to Carter 10 points in late October of '80, Reagan turned him into peanut butter! The only people who don't want a President Palin are those in her "permanent political class" and those who have uncritically listened to the members of the PPC and fear that Sarah would lose to BHO. I say she won't.

If you have seen any footage of her debates you would be absolutely frothing to see her work BHO over in a debate. That damn stage would end up so clean, and BHO would be so wrung out, that the Secret Service'd have to lead him off the stage back to his damn bus by the hand, and pushing from behind!

Think about what Sarah is saying: is that not what we are all seeing and feeling? It is the elites, much more so than the liberals, that are the problem. John Boehner has far more in common with Harry Reid than he does with any conservative posting here. He's a "ruler," we are "subjects." They decide how much of our income we can keep, whether we can keep our land, how we can use it, how we and our kids are to be educated, what we can eat, what we can drink, what kind of cars we can drive, what our employers can and cannot do, whether and how our doctors treat us.

Exactly what freedom do we have left?

Face it! We are now serfs! Serfs.

Is Mitt Romneycare Romney really going to change that?

Is Rick Open borders Perry?

Is John doesn't Huntsman?

Michelle Bachman, maybe, but damn she's opportunistic with her slashing, trumped up attacks...

Don't even mention on-Ray aul-Pay, Please don't .

Newt can't live his professed beliefs for more than fifteen minutes.

Do we miss Tim Pawlenty?

Rick, you're a nice guy, but you gotta command respect - whining for it doesn't work.

Stop believing statists - those are the people who already have their place in the permanent political class. They don't want anything to change, nothing. They'll just keep kicking the can down the road, cutting thousands of dollars in spending from our trillion dollar budget deficits, until some Chinese guy - soldier, banker, whatever- picks the can up, throws it in the trash, and tells us about our upcoming re-education. They have done it before, no reason why they won't try it again... Hope you don't wear glasses-that was fatal in China in days gone by...

Take a deep breath, WAKE UP, smell the coffee.

I don't care if Sarah Palin is President or not - just so our leadership understands the evils of the statist, permanent political class. The SPPC!

Don't Tread On Me!

Man, oh, man, I hope this thing is 'on.'

Eternal vigilance...it's not about British frigates anymore.

Tiddly| 9.15.11 @ 12:44PM

Yes, Sarah Palin says all the right things. I support her. But couldn't she use a different voice? Men can only stand so much.

Dan Hirsch| 9.15.11 @ 1:22PM

Most of us stay married for a long time...

I suspect that the "screech" factor is code for a less-admirable reason to oppose a female candidate. Boy, wouldn't you vote for Maggie Thatcher in a New York minute?

I have heard Sarah speak live, she's no worse than half the women I've heard speaking out.

Besides you would hear from a President Palin no more than once a month. Unlike the unloved BHO who is so in love with his own voice that he can not hear it often enough....

Don't fall into the trap of having to have a perfect candidate. There is only one and RWR's already served his two terms and is now enjoying his eternal rest.

DTOM

Conrad Spiracy| 9.19.11 @ 3:22AM

"Boy, wouldn't you vote for Maggie Thatcher in a New York minute?"

Yes, and I would have voted for Jeanne Kirkpatrick in a New York second.

Con Spiracy

EXCELSIOR!!!

TrueBlue| 9.15.11 @ 12:09PM

Can't really blame someone for the sound of their voice, for the most part it's beyond anyone's control how they sound. That said, Palin unfortunately has too much baggage attached to be a good candidate, even if most of it was made up by the media and swallowed by the general public. She can do the most good running around the country, leading the MSM idiots on a wild goose chase and keep them wondering what her plans are until she endorses one of the remaining candidates early next year. That way whoever she does endorse gets the benefit of her supporters without having the annoyance many centerline people have with her

It's funny that the majority of people that say they don't like her list only her voice as a reason by the way. She's far from an emotional trainwreck, and she's pretty dang consistent and open about her views, which puts her ahead of most politicians.

scythe| 9.15.11 @ 7:10AM

You're just noticing now?? If they weren't messed up they'd be Republicans. The Democrat party is the emotional base of the mentally unstable. And it has been for decades. You cannot advocate for Democrat social/fiscal policies, which are really part of the same social scheme, without being a full blown nutjob. Look at those whom they appeal to. Every last "constituency" is at war with someone else. They are the party of hatred, greedy, envy, jealousy, bitterness, failure, and perversion. You cannot be a Marxist and pass the emotional IQ test. And that's just for starters.

rongordo| 9.15.11 @ 7:14AM

Consider that the Democrat party cannot actually be up front about its true goals, and it's easy to imagine why only the best liars rise to their top ranks. Those open about their fondness for communism and corruption, the Waters's and Franks's, have to be content as the party's malcontent megaphones, rallying their core base in places that the rest of us tend to avoid.

Darin| 9.15.11 @ 7:35AM

It's a simple matter of identifying on what a person's morals and ethics is based. For too many Democrats, it's individual and situational, and thus highly flawed.

black knights 1802| 9.15.11 @ 7:37AM

Great photography. From left to right, Mr. Mumbles, Mr. Bumbles, Mr. Braindead, Nancy Airhead, Upchuck Chuck and Mr. Make it up. The only one missing is Mrs. Pantsuit.

Mrs Vito| 9.15.11 @ 7:35PM

HA! Although I would call Pelosi the 'bird-brain of alcatraz'...

Juan Jose Morales-Castillo| 9.15.11 @ 7:40AM

Ever since 1976 the Dem Party, not being able to nominate a real Kennedy--Edward--has always nominated candidates whose main--sometimes ONLY--qualification is that they look and/or sound like JFK and RFK.
My prayer for the Dem Party is that it will finally learn that candidates should be chosen on the basis of their character, experience and record of distinguished service, not because of a resemblance to JFK and RFK that simply does not exist.

P.Smith| 9.15.11 @ 7:47AM

The Democrats are like the woman who suffers abuse from her parents as a child, and then as an adult marries an abusive husband who beats her when he angry or drunk. She refuses to press charges when the cops show up at her front door, and when her friends and family tell her she a fool for not leaving she says “I just need to stop making him angry and everything will be okay.” She loves him dearly for this is her normal world, but in the end everyone knows it’s going to end very badly for both of them, but the bigger problem is the kids and neighbors will get caught up in violence also.

Timothy L. Pennell| 9.15.11 @ 8:02AM

There was a study done, not too long ago. It determined that 20% of the American People suffer from a Mental Disorder.
Gallup tells us that 20% of American Voters identify themselves as LIBERAL.
In 2008, roughly 20% of America voted for Obama.
Ergo: Liberalism is a Mental Disorder.
Their Leaders would, naturally, be just like them, only more so.
To try and live in a World that doesn't exist, instead of the one that DOES is what a CRAZY person does. (Which is what they do every day. Be it - Economics, Foreign Policy, Criminal Justice, Education, Global Warming, Energy, and on, and on, and on.)
Someone once said, and it might have been Tocqueville, that: "The American people get the LEADERSHIP they deserve."
Indeed.

Drunken Sailor| 9.15.11 @ 1:50PM

Liberalism is a mental disorder
Michael Savage sure thought so.

Mike D.| 9.15.11 @ 8:29AM

They function in the realm of the emotional. Complete ignorance of history and of the human condition which governs human behavior. The farther the population falls into ignorance the stronger they grow. They are academic utopionists, where "intent" is the criteria for judging accomplishment, not results. Throw in a moral superiority complex, self-intellegencia intoxication, and complete disdain of the masses as any form of human life worth existing on their level and you have it in total. Create a government program, no matter how incredulous and failure prone, mentally self-pleasure themselves for doing it, skim $$$ for themselves as the price for being the lights of mankind and you have the MO for a leftist.

Bill| 9.15.11 @ 9:01AM

I must say I'm not all that concerned with some lack of leadership among Democrats. Good leaders or no good leaders, their policies and platform are nuts and demonstrably destructive to this country.

What I AM concerned about is the lack of noticeable leadership and charisma among Republican politicos. THAT's worrisome.

Mike Hawk| 9.15.11 @ 10:55AM

I have to agree. It's kind of tough for RINOs to be called leaders when they are reaching across the aisle, cheering the opposition, compromising principle and letting the opposition set the agenda. Prime examples are Capt McQueeg and Huntsweenie. Leadership??? My arse. Leaders like Reagan lead by showing the way, RINOS look for where the crowd is going and jump in front and say "follow me" without knowing where in Hades they are going.

Al Adab| 9.15.11 @ 11:43AM

A good analysis Mike. We have followed the accomodationists to defeat too often to follow them again.

Alice Moore| 9.15.11 @ 9:16AM

Rush Limbaugh had mentioned yesterday that the Democrats have Election Insurance in the form of the federal and state bureaucracies. They are the commissars and middle managers for life. Most of them are hard left. They have been staffed over the decades. They are the unofficial 4th Branch.

If the elected branch of the Democrat Party suffers an electoral catastrophe handing control of the White House, Senate, along with the House; there will be the bureaucracy.

JayDick| 9.15.11 @ 12:54PM

Having spent over 35 years in the bureaucracy, there is some truth to what Rush/you say, but you have overstated it quite a bit. It takes strong leadership for each agency/bureaucracy, but if an agency head knows what he wants to accomplish and hires a few good assistants, changes can get accomplished. I have seen it happen.

PattyMor| 9.15.11 @ 9:23AM

Their lack of leadership is due to a flawed philosophy. So they can't win without lying and concealing their true intentions. So you get frenetic pronounciations like: our troops are like Nazis or Pol Pot, This War is Lost, The Tea Party can go to Hell, and they want to hang us on a tree.

They are nothing but liars, thieves, and demogogues. And are implementing a counter-revolution to the Constitution. Its been going on for over 70 years. The excesses of BHO has awakened the electorate from their indifference and slumber.

Brian Mc| 9.15.11 @ 9:27AM

I would venture that there is still a large portion of fence-sitters who smuggly voted for the annointed one (for whatever reason) and refuse to this day that they made a mistake.. They will grasp at every media plum that helps them to justify their vote.

scotchieguy| 9.15.11 @ 10:10AM

They are like children--all of them. Bill is a serial bullshit*ter. His wife is a monstrous bitch. She is insecure as can be. Just watch her at any rally, phony in her waving at people in the crowd. She is a fraud. Gore is wooden, clumbsy and full of himself...also condescending and patronizing. Pelosi is a weird, old bag trying to be sophisticated, yet dumb as a box of rocks. What can one say about Weiner? Or Edwards? Or Franken? All narcissistic frauds. It's a sad lot. All of them adult-children simply taking advantage of a completely clueless electorate. Like Obama w/ his jobs speech, they really think we are all a bunch of idiots.

Mike Hawk| 9.15.11 @ 10:57AM

I have a box of rocks and a bag of hammers. both are smarter than Stretch Pelosi.

Dan Hirsch| 9.15.11 @ 1:25PM

Scotchieguy,

I think the rules of conservative civility (as opposed to Democrat civility) demand that you apologize to bags of hammers and boxes of rocks everywhere.

Your comments might even be a cause of legal action for hammers and rocks!!! Hope you have an umbrella liability policy...

HeeHaw

DTOM

Dan Hirsch| 9.15.11 @ 1:26PM

You, too, Mr. Hawk!!!

Mike D.| 9.15.11 @ 6:27PM

Your obviously an anti-hammerite and anti rockite, you, you racist.

Dick Nome| 9.15.11 @ 6:56PM

Why should Hawk apologize. He states his rocks and hammers are smarter than Pelosi. He did not say she was as dumb as...etc.

Mike Hawk| 9.15.11 @ 6:59PM

Harrrummphh, what's the rub here. I like my rocks and hammers and take care of them. I would not let them near Pelosi and offend them with her stupidity. She wounld't know what to do with a hammer or a rock for that matter. Now that is dumb.

Ed | 9.15.11 @ 11:34AM

Modern Democrats seem weird and kooky because they are caught up in a Big Lie. In order to get elected, they have to hide their true selves. If this is not a personality disorder, it ought to be classed as one.

JayDick| 9.15.11 @ 12:56PM

Spot on. Plus, all that lying, hiding, and spinning has to have an adverse effect on one's mental health after a while.

Dan Hirsch| 9.15.11 @ 2:05PM

Having fundamental principles that are too embarrassing to say out loud makes answering questions really, really hard, especially without sounding like Obama with his uh's and ohs, starts, and stops...

Think of it: ask (or any serious conservative) Ronald Reagan a question about his beliefs and he would routinely answer clearly and briskly making perfectly clear what was in his head AND his heart. It's easy.

Ask President Obama a question and he has to do the following before he opens his mouth:

1. Forget what his real belief is, like "We gotta spread the wealth around.." Can't say that.

2. Figure out who he is talking to and whether he is one of 'your' people or not. Do I have to answer this question at all?

3. Remember whether he, Obama, or his party already has promised to do something on the question and whether they really intend anything about it.

4. Consider what the gunions, trial lawyers, the CBC, and LA Raza, the Muslim Brotherhood, and George Soros all really want and make sure you thread the needle between all of their competing desires.

5. Then having remembered all of these things, say something to your questioner that has something to do with his question that is at least consistent within the answer itself.

That's why BHO is so smart and Reagan such a dunce. Notice how much smarter Bill Clinton sounds than BHO. (Didn't Bill Clinton tell Teddy Kennedy in 2008 that 'two years ago he (Obama) would be getting our coffee for us' didn't he?

When the entirety of your core principles comes down to "Where's mine?" and you can't let anyone find that out, it's really tricky looking like you can chew gum and talk at the same time...

It's not really their fault, after all.

DTOM

"Gunions" New word, pronounce it as GOON yuns and you'll get the idea... DH

Al Adab| 9.15.11 @ 11:41AM

Actually the Democrats have a great deal of leadership which acurately represents their views. Debbie, Harry, Nancy and Barry are the leadership. The second tier contains such notables as Sharpton, Frank, formerly Weiner and a few others. They are not the exception, they are the vision of the Democrat party. Is there any wonder we are engaged in a great battle for the future of this nation and our Liberties?

Louis Jenkins| 9.15.11 @ 12:11PM

At the risk of sounding off key, a "hard d--- has no conscious." The liberals get really lathered up and in a moment of passion they spend their lusts on a doubtful candidate. Some people think with their heads (Conservatives) and other people think with other parts of their body (liberals). Most of us knew that Obama was a shot in the dark when he was elected. Not a good way to elect the leader is it?

irish19| 9.15.11 @ 1:26PM

As someone else once put it, "The little head rules the big one."
I think that sums up the Dems quite nicely.

Al Adab| 9.15.11 @ 2:48PM

Louis, Irish:
Exactly so. They, The Left, only think and operate on emotion not on reason. That is why they cannot be trusted with governance. Anytime one of them says, "it's the right thing to do" run fast.

JimP| 9.15.11 @ 12:20PM

Let's not forget that there were a lot of Republicans who fell in love with Obama too and still grudginly continue their 'romance'. Also, numerous "moderate" GOP 'experts' assured us that Obama wasn't "Some crazy socialist".

Rev. Jim Whittle| 9.15.11 @ 12:52PM

Ron you asked how this has happened? The answer is easy. The mainstream media vets Republican candidates ruthlessly and gives Democrats a pass. It shows up especially in the choice of cabinet members and high level appointees. Republicans have been vetted and Democrats have not. Republicans often complain but in reality they're doing Republicans a favor. The irony is that if the mainstream media would actually do their job and vet the Democrats, then their agenda would be advanced with strong leaders.

Drunken Sailor| 9.15.11 @ 1:55PM

I disagree. The left has no shortage of Leaders. They just have a shortage of good leaders. They prefer to stick with "Evil Leadership" Types in a quest for power.

Evil leaders tend to fit one or more of these profiles:

■The dictator
■The assassin
■The two-faced politician (is that redundant?)
■The warlord
■The megalomaniac
■The evil genius
■The double agent

Now tell me you can't name a dozen democrats without even trying hard that fit one of these types?

Dan Hirsch| 9.15.11 @ 2:09PM

Drunken,

Don't all of their laughs start with:

"Bwah...hah...ha?"

HeeHaw!

DTOM

Drunken Sailor| 9.15.11 @ 2:36PM

And they all own white persian cats.

Mike D.| 9.15.11 @ 6:28PM

Your obviously an anti-persianite.

Drunken Sailor| 9.15.11 @ 7:28PM

No, just the white ones. Must make me a persianite racist.

skip| 9.15.11 @ 10:46PM

No, Mr. Sotted Salt, we all expect you tea partiers to diiie.

Oldefarte| 9.15.11 @ 2:11PM

Ron's excellent, though somewhat politically correct, editorial basically fleshes out what I've been screaming for months here [and been accused of being a partisaned hack for same] that IT'S THE DEMOCRATS, STUPIDS. The DP has slowely evolved through subversion into the radical socialist organization with its radical-monarch-in-chief of today. Many of the current Republican politicians were former Democrats who, due to this transformation the the DP, simply could no longer stand same and jumped ship to the RP [ie Reagan, Perry, etc]. The DP is simply only open philosophically to Acornists, homosexuals, radical feminists, artsy-fartsy college professors and their brainwashed sudent populations, Hollywood un-actors able to read three script-words from a teleprompter while completely naked and lusting after their same-sexed cast members, and the entire minority communities of various sectors proclaiming racism/sexism/gentrification/discrimination/disenfranchisement etc. The NORMALS of society that work for their financial livlihoods, pay taxes that financially support most Democrats, raise families, attend churches, coach childrens' sports leagues, etc are purposefully excluded by the DP due to their un-radicalness and normalcies. The sadly stupidity of this fact is that these Paulestinians claim that there is no distinction between the RP and the DP simply for their own selfish political purposes of providing support for their idolatry of their supreme idiot leader. There always has been a increasingly distinction between the two parties, but none so great as exists today. There is much difference of opinion rightfully at present as to which Republican should be nominated, but there is no [except by the kookism noted above] such as between the selected Republican versus the current Democrat president. The choice could not be clearer, and the consequences of making the same fatal mistake that was made on 11/3/08 could not be more pronounced!!!!!!!!!

autoacct628| 9.15.11 @ 2:39PM

You are missing the point. the real power in the Democratic party is with Soros. If he wants Oama to run, run Obama will. If he recognizes a loser when he sees it....Obama will dance to the LBJ March 1967 Waltz when bandmaster Soros strikes it up....and if Obama won't dance? Soros will think of something.... I won't say what as it is too evil to contemplate. I've written it down and put it in a sealed envelope and given it to a friend. If it happens, I will share it with all my faithful AS friends....but remember, I predicted that Obama won't be the nominee in 2012...one way or another.

scotchieguy| 9.15.11 @ 10:37PM

I agree. He won't be the nominee. Something is in the air. I can smell it! Big change comin!

Marc Jeric| 9.15.11 @ 3:11PM

McGovern, Dukakis, Mondale, Carter, Clinton, Gore, Dean, Edwards, Obama - what a gallery of rogues, bloviating gasbags, disbarred felons, functional morons! Did I forget anybody? Yes, Hillary Clinton!

Beer f.m.h.| 9.15.11 @ 5:47PM

Marc,

You will not be getting a Christmas card from any of them this year I assure you.

Cheers, Buddy

carol| 9.15.11 @ 4:55PM

The republicans choose rino's which is why they loose
wake up don't do it again I can't take it...I want a conservative I can vote for and not the better of two evils again

shipley130| 9.15.11 @ 5:47PM

I see six dirty words in this picture posted with the article.

DaveS| 9.15.11 @ 8:52PM

The history books of the last century spoke of the 19th century's Henry Clay, John Calhoun and Daniel Webster - yes the usual well-known by now suspects. Who will be the subjects for the books written one-hundred years from now? I only have an inkling, but I guarantee prominence will not be given Reid, Pelosi, Shumer, Obama - except as bit players who get equal time from insistent schoolbook publishers. A national party of millions and millions - and this is what we get? Even when there's a good but unusual war going on (where statesmen rise to the occasion), these dopes are perversely anti-American.

Paul from SA| 9.15.11 @ 10:07PM

Look for Obama to replace Joe Biden before the main campaign begins.

Merlin| 9.15.11 @ 10:33PM

Many have noted that democrats generally have no sense of humor. Is this a symptom of a borderline personality disorder?

Serious comment; The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. Demos are ambiguous about the very existence of GOD. I suggest that this is a disconnect from reality and may be the source of their insanity. Even non-Christian conservatives have a Christian world view.

prsmith| 9.16.11 @ 12:57AM

"I like most of the announced candidates as well as several others -- Marco Rubio"
--------------------

Neither Marco Rubio or Bobby Jindal is eligible to be our POTUS. Neither man's parents were U.S. citizens therefore they are NOT eligible to be POTUS or VEEP ; the exact same problem Obama has. If Rubio and Jindal are true patriots and supporters of the Constitution, one or both of them will immediately call a press conference and announce that he is not a ‘natural born citizen’ because his parents were not U.S. citizens and that he cannot accept any invitation to join a presidential ticket. For more eligibility info, see: http://naturalborncitizen.word.....-citizen/.

Help me make that happen. Go to rubio(dot)senate(dot)gov/public/index.cfm/contact or http://www.gov.la.gov/index.cf....._governor. Tell Rubio and Jindal that you expect them to do the right thing so that we can both fix the constitutional crisis we currently face and forever prevent another from occurring. This problem should have been resolved following Chester A. Arthur’s administration when it was discovered that his father was not a U.S. citizen when Chester was born – but it wasn’t. Let's finally put this question to rest.

If Rubio or Jindal will stand tall and make that announcement, it would immediately shine a spotlight on Barry's ineligibility and force the SCOTUS/Congress to act. Help me make that happen! It will only take a couple minutes - please do it now!

Buck Ofama| 9.16.11 @ 1:43AM

The best part of this article:
"What if he and everyone else realize that he is dead-candidate walking?"

Buck Ofama| 9.16.11 @ 1:44AM

>Nancy Pelosi, or Debbie Wasserman Shultz.

The funny thing is, Jokebama- aka Ovomit, Otoken- is even more a CVNT than these bitches!

Buck Ofama| 9.16.11 @ 1:49AM

Since we're considering the grave mental disorder afflicting these liberals, let's call a SPADE a SPADE- they desperately need an Obatomy NOW!

Yes, Spade is a term for Niggneramous.

POST American| 9.16.11 @ 4:36AM

----------------------FINAL WORD----------------------

-----Capstone cardboard, left side spectrum.

Rob H.| 9.16.11 @ 1:20PM

I think the answer to your question may be that liberalism sees normality as itself suspicious. The liberal mindset is truly "progressive" - that is, they always strive for change. Anyone who exhibits nothing but normality, stability and humility is seen as being part of the existing order - being "conservative", in other words. Part of the old world, the suspected world, the part of America that needs to be changed. They are attracted to abnormality and it is evidenced in all of their choices, whether they are ideas or leaders.

Robert Rizzo| 9.16.11 @ 3:55PM

A very fine artical'But u left out client 9 Spitzer in NY former Gov- -Jim MC Greevey former Gov of NJ-truck stop--searching for homosexual love-And The weiner congressman from NY

Rick| 9.16.11 @ 8:39PM

Theres' NOTHING wrong with Barak Obama! Your just a rasist and a bigget! And Rommey and Backman are rasists! Also Perry is a dunse and a bigget!

Von| 9.18.11 @ 7:06PM

Obviously a product of the wonderful public school system. Its racist, dunce and bigot you dolt.

Von| 9.18.11 @ 7:11PM

I'll just re post the whole thing for you.
There's nothing wrong with Barrack Obama! You're just a racist and a bigot! Romney and Bachman are racists! Perry is a dunce and a bigot!

I'm normally not a spelling nazi but DAMN dude. Is this the intelligence level of the average liberal?
How do you expect to be taken seriously when you can't even spell your own messiah's name right.