5 Bad Omens for the Left’s Prospects in November
It’s become apparent as of late that the Left has a new obsession. Christine O’Donnell’s dabbling in witchcraft in high school and her 1995 stance against masturbation (when she was a conservative activist) have truly captivated her critics. Whether it’s Bill Maher, Maureen Dowd, Richard Cohen, or Frank Rich, all the Left can talk about is witchcraft and masturbation.
However, as I have noted, all of this creepy talk from the Left is actually a sign of weakness. Why? Because there is no way on earth they would be talking incessantly about witchcraft and masturbation if unemployment wasn’t so high and their poll numbers weren’t so low. If you read the tea leaves properly by really taking a look at popular culture–and even the so-called liberal media–it is painfully obvious that victory just isn’t in the cards for the Democrats this November and a few of them are slowly starting to realize it.
So, without much fanfare and ado, I would like to share with you five bad omens for the Left’s prospects in November.
1.) “Saturday Night Live” is finally mocking the Obama Administration.
It’s no secret that late night comics have been terrified to mock Barack Obama since day one. In fact, Maureen Dowd even wrote the following in a column titled, May We Mock, Barack?–
Many of the late-night comics and their writers – nearly all white – now admit to The New York Times’s Bill Carter that because of race and because there is nothing “buffoonish” about Obama – and because many in their audiences are intoxicated by him and resistant to seeing him skewered – he has not been flayed by the sort of ridicule that diminished Dukakis, Gore and Kerry.
“There’s a weird reverse racism going on,” Jimmy Kimmel said.
Furthermore, “Saturday Night Live” repeatedly mocked everyone under the sun during the 2008 presidential election–including Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, George W. Bush, and even Todd Palin–except Barack Obama. Take that back. SNL attempted to mock Obama last February, but instead, they chickened out and wound up making fun of George W. Bush and Joe Biden (who everyone knows is not really in Obama’s inner circle). Lame.
Not to mention, SNL spoofed Christine O’Donnell recently, and they have even gone so far as to make fun of the Tea Party (see the video embedded below). However, Obama’s off limits? Seriously??!
This not mocking Barack thing is a such a big deal, because other past presidents have been repeatedly spoofed on SNL by comedic icons. Who could forget Dana Carvey impersonating George H. W. Bush (“Wouldn’t be prudent”), Phil Hartman and Darrell Hammond spoofing Bill Clinton (“You gonna eat all of them fries?”), and Will Ferrell impersonating George W. Bush (“Strategery”)?
(By the way, does anyone know what “catch phrase” Fred Armisen uses when he impersonates Barack Obama? Oh yeah, I forgot. Armisen doesn’t use a catch phrase, because Obama’s character is poorly developed due to the fact that SNL is intent on giving him the kid glove treatment. But, I digress.)
This past Saturday night, SNL broke with tradition and mocked Rahm Emanuel’s goodbye ceremony at the White House. OK, they didn’t exactly come at Obama, himself, like a spider monkey, but they did mock his administration–and in particular, Rahm Emanuel (who has been his right hand man for the last two years)–pretty intensely. To be specific, SNL portrayed Mr. Emanuel as an “abrasive” jerk who “uses ugly strong arm methods”, and portrayed Pete Rouse as a weak future chief of staff who is signing up for a job that no one wants anyway. And finally, Andy Samberg (who brilliantly played Rahm Emanuel) ended the skit by wishing Pete Rouse good luck with “the new angry Republican majorities in Congress.”
So, when you have SNL basically admitting that there are going to be large Republican majorities in Congress come November–when they have bent over backwards not to give Obama the same treatment that they’ve given to other past presidents–then that’s a pretty bad omen for the Left’s midterm election prospects.
2.) Charles “Minstrel Show” Blow says that the Tea Party might not be so dumb after all.
Most of you probably know Charles Blow as the nasty New York Times columnist who referred to the Dallas Tea Party as “a political minstrel show” and “a bizarre spoof of a Benetton ad,” simply because they had African-American and minority speakers on stage. Oh, but that’s not all. Blow also wrote a column where he accused the Tea Party of being a “Frankenstein movement” motivated by “racism.” And in an earlier column, Blow called the Obamacare town hall protesters “hooligans” who were “hooting and hollering” and “terrorizing legislators.”
(My, that Charles Blow sure is quick to resort to name-calling and incendiary language. However, I confess to having a lot of fun at Chuckie Blow’s expense in the past, but I digress.)
So, when a guy who has previously referred to the Tea Party as a bunch of “racist hooligans who are terrorizing legislators and putting on a minstrel show” now says that the Tea Party might not be so dumb after all, it kind of makes one stand up and take notice. To be specific, Blow wrote the following this past weekend with regard to the Tea Party:
Big-city liberals and their blogging buddies love to paint Tea Partiers as yokels with incoherent candidates and language-mauling signs. (Some have even dubbed their misspellings and grammatical gaffes “Teabonics.”) On some level, this may be true. But there is also a certain hypocrisy to these taunts.
The unpleasant fact that these liberals rarely mention, and may not know, is that large swaths of the Democratic base, groups they need to vote in droves next month – blacks, Hispanics and young people – are far less civically literate than their conservative counterparts.
Therein lies the hurdle for the Democrats: How can they excite this part of the base that is not engaged and knowledgeable in an off-year election? How can they motivate these voters to help Democrats maintain their Congressional majorities when, according to a poll released this week by the Pew Research Center, 42 percent of blacks, 42 percent of Hispanics and 35 percent of voters ages 18 to 29 years old don’t even know that Democrats have a majority in the House? It’s sad. Pathetic, really. But it’s a political reality. (Only 71 percent of Democrats overall knew that Democrats had a majority in the House. By comparison, 82 percent of Republicans knew it.)
Instead of focusing like a laser on this problem, part of the White House’s new strategy appears to be to pick a fight with the left’s ivory tower intelligentsia.
Vice President Joe Biden said at a fund-raiser on Monday that the Democratic base should “stop whining.” The “professional left” may be whining, but underengaged Democrats are simply wandering. And, by the way, many Democrats don’t even know who the vice president is. In the Pew poll, 64 percent of Hispanics, 51 percent of young adults and 45 percent of blacks could not name Biden as the vice president. (Only 35 percent of Republicans got it wrong.)
Now, if you want to see actual proof that Blow is right, one need to look no further than the Jaywalking video below where Jay Leno asks a bunch of young people, as well as a college instructor, (in other words, people who are part of Obama’s base) at a park in California some basic questions about our nation’s history. Only “Grandpa” knew the correct answers.
Please, allow me to put this in another light. Can any of you even imagine the outcome if Jay Leno were to ask those exact same questions to a bunch of people at a Tea Party or at a Glenn Beck rally? I would bet you dollars to donuts that almost every one of those “crazy teabaggers” in their tri-cornered hats would know who we fought to get our nation’s independence, who George Washington was, and why he crossed the Delaware River. Enough said.
Anywho, reading the above excerpt from Blow’s column reminds me of a line from The Devil Went Down to Georgia where Charlie Daniels says, “The Devil bowed his head because he knew that he’d been beat.” And no, I am not comparing Charles Blow to the Devil. I am simply pointing out that, well, he knows that he and the rest of Obama’s base are about to be soundly beaten come November. So, better to be beaten by people who are somewhat knowledgeable, than by a bunch of “racist, hooting and hollering hooligans” (because that would be really embarrassing).
Put it this way–Charles Blow would rather shave his head with a cheese grater than say anything nice about the Tea Party. So, the fact that he is backtracking on what a bunch of dumb dumbs they are is another really bad omen for the Left’s electoral prospects in November.
3.) Jon Stewart seems to think that the Democrats kind of suck.
This one really should be somewhat self-explanatory. Jon Stewart has always been a well-known staunch progressive and a vocal Obama supporter/Republican lampooner. Stewart is most famous for telling Fox News to “Go F**k yourself”, and then hilariously setting it to music. So, when he starts turning on Barack Obama and the Democrats, it’s quite an attention getter.
For example, last July during the Shirley Sherrod brouhaha, Jon Stewart let the White House have it with regard to her firing. He also pointed out just how quick Obama and his cronies are to throw people under the bus. Furthermore, Stewart refused to buy the leftist talking point that Fox News was somehow responsible for Sherrod’s firing and laid all of the blame at the feet of the Obama administration.
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c|
|Lost in Race|
Then this past week, Stewart went on a tear about Barack Obama’s elitism, Joe Biden’s boorishness (in telling the Democrats to “stop whining”), and the Democrats’ overall incompetence when it comes to passing no-brainer bills, like middle class tax cuts.
|The Daily Show With Jon Stewart||Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c|
|Indecision 2010 – Democratic Campaign Woes|
So, when the guy who is most famous for telling Fox News to “Go F themselves” is saying that the Democrats’ motto should be “We came, we saw, we sucked,” then that’s a really bad omen for the Left’s mid-term electoral prospects.
4.) Bill Maher and the liberal MSM are still talking about witchcraft and masturbation non-stop.
Last Friday night, Bill Maher played a new video of Christine O’Donnell saying the same old stuff that everyone already knows–you know, that she experimented with witchcraft, Buddhism and other alternative religions in high school before she found Christianity (language warning for the video, but like you needed me to tell you that). (Oh, and then later in the show he called Republicans “a deadly enemy.” Do you smell the fear yet?)
Now, why is this a bad omen for the Left’s November prospects, you ask? Well, first of all, because it shows that they are totally out of ammo as far as Christine O’Donnell is concerned. I mean, if Maher had something else on O’Donnell besides the fact that she wasn’t always a Christian, don’t you think that he would have played it by now, instead of continuing to recycle his “Burn the witch!” tapes (or saying that he’s “afraid that she’s going to try to pass anti-masturbation legislation when she gets into the Senate”)?
(“Next up on Live News at Five–many people who are now Christians didn’t start off as Christians. That story will be followed by a story about a dog biting a man.”)
Second of all, as I have previously written about in great detail, the Left’s obsession with witchcraft and masturbation demonstrates extreme weakness, because it reveals that they have nothing else to run on. I mean, what else are they going to run on–Obama’s long list of great achievements?! Don’t make me laugh.
Furthermore, as Vodkapundit pointed out in his hilarious column, Christine O’Donnell is not a perfect candidate, but nobody really much cares about her lack of experience or Evangelical past in the nineties promoting abstinence (like she was in the Mafia or something). People just want someone in the Senate to vote against the Democrats and the Obama agenda. Period. (Oh, and it doesn’t exactly hurt that O’Donnell’s opponent, Chris Coons, is a borderline Marxist who never met a tax hike he didn’t like.) The only hope the Democrats have is to “otherize” their opponents as “crazy witches.” (It’s really right out of the Alinsky playbook if you think about it. You know, the whole “pick a target, personalize it, polarize it, ridicule it” business?)
And finally, the Left’s whole “Burn the witch!” strategy is a really bad omen not only for their November prospects, but also for their future prospects in general, because it’s potentially going to wind up alienating them from a whole lot of voters–including their own base. In other words, whether or not Christine O’Donnell wins or loses, this whole witch-hunt the Left is on is not a wise move and reeks of utter desperation.
Have any of you all ever ventured onto the Daily Kos out of sheer curiosity? They have a very large Wiccan community that blogs there. In fact, they even have weekly Wiccan updates. Moreover, one of their most popular bloggers goes by the handle “Irishwitch”, and she describes herself thusly:
Two master’s degrees–Communications and library science; librarian in inner city schools and in 2 public library systems; published author of fantasy and erotica–and a bellydancer. And the World’s Oldest Living Goth. World’s Worst Typist.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that. In fact, I welcome all Wiccans into the conservative ranks as long as they are for low taxes and smaller government. See, unlike the Left, we conservatives aren’t judgmental and believe in a big tent party.
Anywho, my point is that I fail to see how demonizing Christine O’Donnell as some crazy witch, because she was a Wiccan for a short time in high school, is going to endear the Left to their own supporters. How is making fun of your own base a good campaign tactic?
What’s more, the Left already had a “witch” problem long before Christine O’Donnell came around. I have written in great detail about how ever since Hillary Clinton ran for president in 2008, the Left has been demonizing every woman who has managed to get in Obama’s way as a “witch.” (Hillbuzz has several pictures of Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin depicted as witches, but I have pasted several additional pictures below of the Left depicting women as witches.)
Above is an image of Hillary Clinton that was very popular on all of the so-called liberal blogs during the 2008 Democratic primary.
Above is a picture of Sarah Palin that was very popular on all of the Leftist blogs during the 2008 general election.
Above is a picture of Arizona governor, Jan Brewer, that is still very popular on all of the so-called liberal blogs.
And finally, of course, you could all guess that the Left would make Minnesota congresswoman, Michele Bachmann, into a witch–and this picture is still very popular on many of the leftist blogs.
Whoa! That’s some pretty damning evidence against the Left … but, I’m not finished.
Oh, looky what I found! Below is a picture of Christine O’Donnell depicted as a witch that is very popular on the leftist blogs.
And, below is a picture of Christine O’Donnell from none other than MSNBC being depicted as a witch.
Now, MSNBC admitted that the witch picture of O’Donnell might have been a bit much. Oh really??! You think so, Sparky?! Because not only did it make MSNBC–and the Left in general–look like a bunch of flaming, sexist asses, it also made them look childish (like a little kid who doesn’t like his teacher, so he paints a picture of her as a witch). Could any of you even imagine Brit Hume acting the fool like that (or the fallout from the Left if Fox had done something like that)?! No, you couldn’t because Hume’s not a loudmouth idiot like Ed Schultz and Chris Matthews, who routinely depict women as witches. I rest my case.
Oh, and another reason why the Left’s whole witch-hunt is a bad idea for them in the long haul, is because a lot of voters out there weren’t always Christians. Many dabbled in other religions, and then had a “come to Jesus moment” (hence, the term “born-again Christian”). Furthermore, a lot of Americans have non-Christian friends and family members. For instance, I have a Hindu sister-in-law, and Obama has a Buddhist sister. I fail to see how mocking millions of Americans is a good long term get out the vote strategy.
And finally, here is the dirty little secret about Bill Maher–as well as many on the Left. Maher isn’t bothered by the fact that Christine O’Donnell dabbled in alternative religions in high school. He is bothered by the fact that she is, now, a devout Christian. (Hence, his repeated statements that he’s “afraid of O’Donnell introducing anti-masturbation legislation”…rolls eyes.) You see, Bill Maher is a bigot who hates pretty much all religious people, and he thinks that they are “stupid” and “crazy.” See the video below for yourself if you need convincing, because after viewing it, there should be no doubt in anyone’s mind where Maher stands with regard to respecting people’s individual religious beliefs.
“Vote for the Democrats–we will call all women that we don’t like witches and mock your religion, but we’re the tolerant party” is a terrible slogan. The only possible reason why they are using it now is because of sheer desperation. (I don’t recall Obama running on the witchcraft and masturbation platform in 2008.) They are figuratively burning the whole village in an attempt to burn one “witch.” In other words, when wealthy, urban leftists realize that their policies aren’t popular with most Americans, they get bitter, and cling to witchcraft, sexism, masturbation, atheism and antipathy towards people who aren’t like them–which is a really bad omen for their November election prospects.
5.) Many Obama apologists in the MSM seem to be already making excuses for him or bailing on him altogether.
For example, New York Times columnist Bob Herbert recently wrote the following with regard to the Democrats and their election prospects:
The Democrats are trying to put the best possible face on this terrible economic reality, imploring voters to give them a little credit for preventing matters from becoming much worse. No matter how valid, that’s a tough case to make to families whose properties are being plastered with foreclosure notices. Or to the breadwinners whose 99 weeks of unemployment insurance have been exhausted without anything in the way of a decent job materializing. Or the former middle managers now working for peanuts at Home Depot or Wal-Mart.
And, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd recently wrote this about Barack Obama’s inability to connect with voters (after she wrote a lot about witchcraft and masturbation, of course):
He has never shaken off that slight patronizing attitude toward the working-class voters he is losing now, the ones he dubbed “bitter” during his campaign. There is no premium in trying to save people’s jobs and lift them up and give them health care if they feel that you can’t relate to them.
Dowd also wrote the following where she quoted her Republican sister, Peggy, who voted for Obama but has now grown weary of him:
He hasn’t saved the economy, and now he’s admitting he’s made very little progress. You can’t for four years blame the person who used to be president. Obama tries to compromise too much, and he doesn’t look like a strong leader. I don’t watch him anymore. I’m turned off by him. I think he’s an elitist. He went down to the gulf, telling everyone to take a vacation down there, and then he goes to Martha’s Vineyard. He does what he wants but then he tells us to do other things.
He got that look public figures adopt when they know they just took one right in the chops on national TV and cannot show their dismay. He could have responded with an engagement and conviction equal to the moment. But this was our president–calm, detached, even-keeled to the point of insensate. He offered a recital of his administration’s achievements: tuition assistance, health care. It seemed so off point. Like his first two years.
There is a similar theme running through all of their writing–“Barack Obama is a detached elitist.” In fact, he is almost a stranger. As a nation, we thought that we were electing a moderate when we elected Obama; however, he has turned out to be anything but. As Americans, we don’t really know who Obama is anymore, but we do know two things for sure. We don’t like Obama’s policies and we don’t think that he feels our pain. Vanity Fair columnist Michael Wolff summed it up perfectly when he wrote the following:
The answer is that nobody likes him as much as they did, or as much as they thought they would, or even as much as they thought they should.
At this moment, we have a largely unrecognizable figure in the White House. The weirdly continuing questions about his birth place and religion may be not so much a slur as a demented metaphor for his real lack of identity–and friends.
There’s a guilty sense, too. People are edging away from him because they now feel they got it so wrong. It’s buyer’s remorse with recrimination–self-recrimination.
How did everybody get it so wrong is a question many people seem to be asking themselves–not least of all these people slinking out of the White House.
It is not just that he has turned out to be something different. In fact, reasonably, he isn’t that different. The more powerful sense of remorse or at least sheepishness may come from people now asking themselves how and why they came to think of him as different than he was. More confounding, they may not really now be able to remember just who exactly they thought he was.
So to refocus the story: Some mass misperception put Barack Obama in the White House and now nobody knows what to do with him.
Can there be a more awkward situation?
No, there really isn’t a more awkward situation than to have the majority of the American public looking at Barack Obama like he’s the wrong entree that a waiter brought by mistake. The majority of Americans are looking at the Democrats right now and shouting, “This isn’t what I ordered!” which is an extremely bad omen for their election prospects come November.
So, in conclusion, the majority of the Left right now is similar to the Roman Emperor Nero. They are fiddling while the economy is burning, all the while indulging themselves in a bacchanal of witchcraft and masturbation. However, many of them are blissfully unaware that there are barbarians at the gate. While they have been busy on a witch-hunt, we on the Right have been preparing for battle. And, because they have let their hatred of conservative women blind them so, much of the Left has been unable to read the tea leaves, or really see the bad omens that foreshadow the disaster that awaits them. They will be caught somewhat unaware in November–they are anticipating some losses, but not epic war. They will be soundly defeated in the midterms, but they won’t have ever seen it coming.
P.S. I think that Robert Stacy McCain is right–Bill Maher is going to cry come November.
The L.A. Times has a heartwarming story of literary giant Ray Bradbury who at 90 is not afraid to tell
Obama’s shutdown gambit has provided plenty of poignant symbolism, if only we had a responsible media to highlight it appropriately.
A University of Illinois instructor of the school’s Introduction to Catholicism and Modern Catholic Thought course was fired at the