neilios

How’s that for a sweeping generalization?

I’m someone who identifies far more with the ideals of the Democratic party, rather than the Republican ones, but quite frankly I can’t imagine what the problem is with Democratic party leadership.

Dave Winer, one of the inventors of blogging, posted a copy of a Clinton “phone call” yesterday. Listening to it, I was amazed at how her staff members don’t know how to talk to normal people. Is it really necessary to speak of “disenfranchisement” and “delegates not being seated” rather than simply saying that people’s votes aren’t being counted? Does it make them feel better to use language that part of their (potential) constituency won’t understand or are they simply so far out of touch that they have no idea? Can we somehow find a way to work antidisestablishmentarianism into a sentence?

Another side of this issue is that Democrats don’t know how to defend themselves. If someone calls you a “tax and spend Democrat,” why aren’t you responding with “borrow and spend Republican?” It’s actually funny the term “tax and spend Democrat” because that’s precisely what government does. It funds itself on revenue collected by taxes and uses that to purchase things (services, mostly) on behalf of the people. That’s what government does. It’s like going into a store and saying to the shopkeeper “you dirty money-taker and product-giver!” He’d say “um, yeah, that’s what a STORE is.”

I just don’t get it.