Liberal Spirits in the Material World

Wisconsin Senator Jim Holperin (D) caught in Illinois by Illinois Tea Party members

Robert Tracinski writing at Real Clear Politics has an insightful piece on the dereliction of duty by state legislators in Wisconsin and Indiana.

In case you haven’t been following, Republicans in Wisconsin and now Indiana have been grappling with out-of-control spending and ways to return some sanity to state fiscal policy.  In addition to direct cuts to government, another option they’re looking at is curtailing the privilege of government employee unions to engage in collective bargaining.

For ages, unions have siphoned the wages of workers (through union dues) into the pockets of Democrat politicians because, sharing a love for the Marxist philosophy which underlies unions, Democrats have worked to protect and empower unions–usually at taxpayer expense.

Like so many free rides, in our current state of economic collapse, this one too is coming to an end.  And Democrats are predictably freaking out.  Wisconsin Democrats left the state rather than show up for a vote they couldn’t win, goofing off beyond the boundaries of the state where the governor might send state police to retrieve them.  Soon Indiana Democrats followed suit.

But what is the mentality behind this “tuning out” from the business they’ve been elected to do?  And have we ever seen this sort of behavior before in our country?

Tracinski exposes this underlying thinking, and reminds us of a time when this tactic was tried before.  This is an excerpt from his article:

This is why the left is treating any attempt to fundamentally reform the public workers’ paradise as an existential crisis. This is why they are reacting with the most extreme measures short of outright insurrection. When Democratic lawmakers flee the state in order to deprive their legislatures of the quorum necessary to vote, they are declaring that they would rather have no legislature than allow voting on any bill that would break the power of the unions.

National Review’s Jim Geraghty describes these legislative walk-outs as “small-scale, temporary secessions.” The analogy is exact. One hundred and fifty years ago, Southern slaveholders realized that the political balance of the nation had tipped against them, that they could no longer hope to win the political argument for their system. Faced with a federal government in which they were out-voted, they decided that they would rather have no federal government at all. The Democrats’ current cause may not be as repugnant-holding human beings as chattel is a unique evil-but it has something of the same character of irrational, belligerent denial. More than two decades after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the left is still trying to pretend that socialism is plausible as an economic system.

The Democrats are fleeing from a lot more than their jobs as state legislators. They are fleeing from the cold, hard reality of the financial and moral unsustainability of their ideal.

This analysis blows the center out of they bulls eye. As I have pointed out a myriad of times in the last week, liberals are downright professional in their propensity to run like scalded dogs from reality.

As Tracinski’s column so deftly and clearly points out, liberals are masters at crafting utopian fantasies, and even a few real-world enclaves of limited scope which are by and large insulated from the harsh reality of the real world.

So when conservatives are able to bring irresistible pressure which exposes encroaching reality, liberals run for the hills. Tracinski’s analogy of the “small-scale, temporary secessions” is near perfect.

The slaveholder states of the 19th Century worked hard to maintain a fantasy world where it was morally acceptable and quite natural for one human being to own another human being on the basis of skin color. When the slavers found themselves in danger of having a cold bucket of reality dumped over their heads, they retreated from reality so they could keep their distance and hopefully re-establish a new fantasy enclave beyond the reach of an unpleasant reality.

So it is that these Leftists in the state legislatures of Wisconsin and Indiana are running from a reality they find abhorrent. Like the slavers of the 19th Century, they would rather divorce themselves from the representative process of our nation and states than to acquiesce to the real world where people don’t get a free ride and are expected to carry their own weight.

But we shouldn’t allow them to get away with subverting our republican form of government. When Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 along with a Democrat-controlled congress, those of us who cherish the American way of life knew with foreboding the threat that this Leftist control of our government presented to our republic. Yet congressional Republicans did not hide out from their duty in 2009. No, they grimly faced the music (the notes of which they had written themselves with their failure to show leadership)…and fortunately the Tea Party movement pulled America’s bacon out of the fire.

Legislative Democrats should hope that a Leftist movement of the people like the Tea Party (perhaps made up of union goons and drones) can save their bacon, but they should not be allowed to go AWOL and subvert the legislative process.

They may prefer to live in a fantasy world, but real Americans prefer to live in and deal with the real world.

HT: Free Republic.

21 Responses to “Liberal Spirits in the Material World”

  1. I also disagree with the the Dems running out of the state, but my guess is that it may work in their favor, since the majority of people in Wisconsin do want the the unions to compromise, but do not support the abolition of collective bargaing.

    But it seems like this isn’t much different than when over the last two years the Republicans have used the threat of filibuster over and over to not even allow discussion of a bill on the floor. They are hand-tying the democratic process as well. These Republicans should stand like Americans and fight for what they want, but not prevent democracy from moving forward by hiding behind the fiibuster.

    I also find it hard to understand how the Tea Party’s darling, Sarah Palin, is so admired when she not only ran from her duties but quit mid term. So I guess they feel it is okay for her to cut and run, but not the Dems..

  2. Use of the long-established and approved filibuster rule isn’t even remotely comparable to refusing to show up for one’s job as an elected representative.

    If you did some asking around, you might find that a substantial number of Tea Party folk are considerably cooler toward Sarah Palin in the wake of her resignation–I know because I’m one of them.

  3. I think Sarah Palin did the only thing a conscientious person with the interests of her State at heart could do (and most Alaskans agree). She was under relentless, viscious attacks that were keeping her from being an effective governor and were costing Alaskans millions to defend against. That she has gone on to have a successful post-gubenatorial career seems to bother some folks, but I believe many of these people have been unfairly influenced by the media attack dogs and continue to be so.

    When Palin left office in Alaska she left in an orderly fashion with the reigns of power securely in the hands of her successor. To equate that with what the Dems are doing is absurd. They are clearly guilty of dereliction of duty and will pay dearly in coming elections, if not sooner.

  4. Yes, the filibuster and not showing up for work are different, but their goal is the same- Not to let the people’s representatives in Congress get up and say their fair piece, then let the best person win.

    And the difference between you and Palin is that you would never sell out for money

  5. dr theo

    Are you telling me that you actually believe the reason Palin became a quitter was because,as she stated, she loved her dear Alaska so deeply and it’s people so incredibly much that she went against everything she previously stood for which is to hold your ground and fight.

    Bush caught more crap and vicious family attacks than Palin could even imagine, but he didn’t hand over the reigns orderly and quit. I think a lot of men still defend her because they think a woman shouldn’t have been lead to slaughter, but it is okay to do it to men. You know, the manly desire to protect one of your own !

  6. Yes, I believe Palin did what was best for her State. You question her motives based on what, Brian? Is she living the life of the rich and famous at the expense of taxpayers? Has she violated her principles in writing a book, giving speeches, and tweeting her opinions? Palin accomplished more in her short tenure as Alaska’s governor than most politicians accomplish in a life-time career, yet you defame and ridicule. Your depiction of Sarah Palin as a “quitter” is based upon the vicious invective of the ruling elite and wholly without merit. You should be ashamed. A man of your intelligence should examine carefully the roots of such hatred. It goes well beyond her political views, as I suspect you know very well.

  7. dr theo

    Will take in all you say and do some white matter contemplating. Will start by asking myself just why is it that I dislike her so much.

  8. Maybe it’s the pitch and tone of her voice…

  9. Well, I never really thought of that, but will put that idea in the growing heap I plan on examining.

    However,come to think of it, her pitch is indeed a little irksome- Bet she can’t sing a lick 🙂

  10. A filibuster involves keeping the minority on the floor; what the WI Dems did was run away from the floor.

    And Palin didn’t sell out for money.

  11. Thank you, Dr. Theo, for pointing out a distinction I failed to include in my hasty comment this morning.

    Were Palin to run for president, I would always wonder if she would throw in the towel during a tough time in the Oval Office (she’s certain to get more of what she was getting from the Left as Alaska governor).

    But under the same circumstances, I probably would have done as she did. Hit by wave after wave of frivolous lawsuits that cost endless money, took up valuable family time and valuable time as the chief executive of Alaska, on a personal level, I don’t blame her at all for resigning.

    It just casts a doubt in my mind on her viability as a presidential candidate.

    And as you pointed out, Palin’s resignation isn’t even remotely comparable to the cowardly Dems.

  12. I shouldn’t be so picayunish, but I’m a stickler for voice in public speakers. A voice coach could help her. Her voice gets shrill when she gets louder, and I don’t like it. She also has some pronunciation issues due to her region’s accent. When she pronounces a word that has a long “e” vowel, she sometimes pronounces it as a short “i” sound, as in pronouncing the word “deal” as “dill.” That drives me nuts. Picky, I know, but that’s just the radio speaker in me.

  13. I’m always surprised that more states don’t have laws against barratry; which would have prevented many of these frivolous suits against Palin in Alaska (in Texas, Barratry is a felony.) This is what the Left is all about – without substantive grievances, they automatically bombard their adversary with lawsuits to harass until they get their desired result, which is usually merely to destroy a targeted individual. Despicable.

  14. Carter must have driven you NUTS, then.

  15. What was long established was filibuster use was intended to be rare and infrequent for significant legislation, what Republicans did was use it pretty well everyday to block democracy. One more wonderful thing we can thank them for. Palin might have lost some support over quitting but reality is that it’s finally sinking in that what we have been saying is true. She does not have anything close to what it takes to do the job. She has nothing but one liners she has heard elsewhere.

  16. Have you seen the polls in WI, I think they will stay out until Walker takes bargaining rights off the table or 3 Republicans will vote with the Dems. A recent poll of American say unions should keep all their bargaining rights. It’s folks like you on sites like this that are out of touch.

  17. Yes, I’m out of touch with trendy socialism. I’m just an old-fashioned freedom-lover; always have been, always will be.

  18. Spouse, that’s a good point, but I must admit, I was born in December of 1967, so Jimmy Carter was only a phantom to me, as a child. 🙁

    I now know what kind of wretched anti-American, anti-Israel maniac that guy is, but his voice did not bother me back then, especially since I’m a Texan and southern accents didn’t put me off.