Is It The Democratic National Convention or The Che Convention?
posted at 3:58 pm on September 5, 2012 by Matt Vespa
Peter Ferrara of The American Spectator wrote today that “the most left-wing Democrats in history have gathered in Charlotte.” For whoever watched the Democratic Convention last night, the main theme was Obama good, Mitt Romney bad, and Republicans are clueless. Obama had a wholesome upbringing, while Mitt Romney was just a rich guy. We must move forward, not back. For all the obstacles the Obama campaign faces this year, the Democratic delegates were exuding joie de vivre at an almost disturbing level. Although, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews did say that delegates at the DNC are almost always jovial – even in years where defeat was imminent. The election in 1984 is a prime example.
Ferrara wrote that “the soul of the House under Pelosi’s leadership is the Congressional Black Caucus, which features openly socialist representatives from inner city urban districts where the only political competition is between left and lefter.” The grassroots arm is dominated by the public employee unions. The social interest wing of the party is also dominated by LGBT, pro-abortion, and transgendered organizations. It’s not wonder why Ferrara calls this the “Che Convention”.
The ironic thing about the “forward” and “not back” narrative is that the Democratic platform is much more aligned with the latter. Yes, I know we on the right find this to be an axiomatic statement, but Ferrara cites two good examples of where Democrats have utterly failed in terms of economic management.
He cites two states “where Democrats are in full, uncontested control, such as California and Illinois, which resemble Greece in fiscal, financial matters. In California, still more tax increases are on the ballot for this fall. In Illinois, after raising taxes on ‘the rich,’ and on business, surprise, revenues are running short of projections, and deficits continue.”
IMcitizen posted a similar story in the Independent Journal Review on July 12 called “Do Democrats Destroy Cities?”
Here are the findings.
The year and the percentage of the population at or under the government-defined poverty level are included.
Concerning government spending, Ferrara rightfully calls Obama and the Democrats the biggest government spenders in history.
He [Obama] proposed in his 2013 budget released in February to spend $3.8 trillion in fiscal 2013, which starts next month, an all-time world record for one year of government spending. For 2022, he proposed spending $5.820 trillion, an increase of 53%, another world record. For the next 10 years, the President’s own 2013 budget proposes to spend $47 trillion, the most in world history by far. President Obama cannot say George Bush made him propose all that record shattering spending!
Obama’s runaway spending spree is so left-wing it makes Franklin Roosevelt look like a Republican. The most Roosevelt ever spent in one year (during peacetime) was 10.7% of GDP, at the height of the Great Depression. Over Obama’s four years of office, federal spending has averaged 24.4% of GDP. Since World War II, up until Obama, federal spending actually was fairly stable around 20% of GDP. But Obama and his Che Guevara Democrats have already broken through that consensus, raising federal spending by about one fourth.
CBO further projects that on our current course, under current policies, federal spending soars absurdly, to 30% of GDP by 2027, 40% by 2040, 50% by 2060, and 80% by 2080. Add in another 10% to 15% for state and local government spending, and we will have smashed right through Swedish socialism, all the way to full blown communism, where the government takes and spends everything. You see what I mean by Marxism?
It should be to no one’s surprise that the “CBO also projects that on our current course, under current policies, the national debt held by the public would rocket to 140% of GDP by 2030, 220% by 2040, and 320% by 2050, on its way to over 700% by 2080. That is a roadmap to a Grecian-style sovereign debt crisis, which would arrive long before that, unless we change leadership, and change course.”
Now, let’s take a look at their 2012 platform. We know God has been omitted from the platform. According to Guy Benson at Townhall.com wrote today:
The paragraph has been restructured to say this: “We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth – the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.” The Brody File has calls into [the] DNC to explain why God’s name has been dropped from the platform. Some critics will suggest that when you have planks in your platform that support abortion rights and gay marriage then it’s no wonder that God’s name would be dropped as well. Delegates will vote on the platform on Tuesday.
Additionally, Benson wrote that concerning “Jerusalem, the new platform has been brought into line with the Obama administration’s policy of not recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and supporting its division. Jerusalem is unmentioned in the 2012 document, whereas the 2008 and 2004 Democratic Party platforms declared ‘Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel…it should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.”
On abortion, Benson wrote that the new platform:
…strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. That last part–’regardless of ability to pay’–is an endorsement of taxpayer-funded abortions, a policy that President Obama has personally endorsed. Obama wants Medicaid to pay directly for elective abortions, and Obamacare will allow beneficiaries to use federal subsidies to purchase health care plans that cover elective abortions. According to a 2009 Quinnipiac poll, 72 percent of voters oppose public funding of abortion and 23 percent support it….The 2012 Democratic party also endorses an unrestricted right to abortion-on-demand.
So, the platform endorses America becoming less economically viable by ruinous debt, Jerusalem that is not long endorsed as the Israeli capital, and abortion that is taxpayer funded – to name a few. The majority of the platform is politically unpalatable to Americans. Even some DNC delegates admit to this, as Benson noted one DNC guest who said “I’m proud of our work, but I’m glad [the platform] isn’t getting a lot of attention in the media…because there are parts of it that might be problematic if people focused on them…some of the abortion things might not be very popular, and there are certain groups in our coalition that could be upset about some things.”
Recently in the Green Room: