The Continuing Saga of the Dumb-o-crats

Will Rogers once said that he "belonged to no organized political party," and then went on to say that he was a Democrat. Yesterday, the continued disorganization of the Democratic Party was on full display.

In what should have been a slam dunk, in what is often referred to as the most blue of the blue states, the Dumb-o-crats managed to blow a near sure thing to the Repugnican'ts. Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley gave a textbook lesson in how not to run a campaign. Her opponent, Scott Brown, apparently won because he drove a pick-up and actually campaigned.

Coakley, it will be forever noted, took off about three weeks from the campaign during the holidays. Blowing a more than 20 point lead she exemplified the Dumb-o-crats approach to politics - let's try to lose any advantage by stupidity. At a time when the Repugnican'ts have been fully reputed and are on the ropes, only a Dumb-o-crat could lose to one.

But the ultimate stupidity here is that until 2004 there would have been no special election to fill the seat. Up until then the governor would have appointed the replacement. In 2004, however, in a bit of certainty that John Kerry would be elected president the Massachusetts legislature, full of Dumb-o-crats changed the law so that the then Repugnican't governor, Mitt Romney, would not appoint a member of his party. Flash forward six years and now we get the most unlikely of all results - Ted Kennedy's Senate seat goes to a person with almost completely opposite views.

Making matters worse is that the election of Brown imperils health care reform. So after the Dumb-o-cratic leadership spent a whole year trying to screw up health care reform and waste all the time they could on what should have been completed in a month, now they find themselves behind the eight ball again.

In an all too frequent example of the fake news being more on target than the real news, comedian Jon Stewart of the Daily Show points out that the Repugnican'ts got anything they wanted, like tax breaks for the rich with only 51 votes. In fact, as Stewart noted, George Bush seemed able to get anything he wanted with 51 votes.

The fact that the Dumb-o-crats can't get anything done even when they have 60 votes just demonstrates how pathetic they are at politics. Say what you want about the Repugnican'ts, they know how to put their principles in place (and reward their wealthy donors and screw the rest of us) when they are in power. Dumb-o-crats on the other hand always manage to blow it at the worst possible time. Scott Brown is just the latest in a line that includes Bush and Reagan.

In one year the Dumb-o-cratic leadership has managed to waste countless opportunities such as giving us real national health care, bringing the banks under control and providing for infrastructure development among other things. Had they done any of these things they would have destroyed the Repugnican'ts.

Unfortunately, Will Rogers was right. Were it not for the inability of the Dumb-o-crats to get anything done except bicker internally, the Repugnican'ts would be a faint memory.

If the Dumb-o-crats ever hope to get anything right they need to take a page from their opponents play book - act like you know what you're doing and push your legislation. You only need 51 votes as the Bush era taught us. If the Repugnican'ts want to filibuster, let them. For once, play hardball. Let them talk until they collapse, and then have the vote.

It seems like the leadership of the Dumb-o-crats are more interested in playing nice with the Repugnican'ts than in listening to the people who elected them. That's how to lose power, that's how they lost the safest seat in the Senate, that's how they became Dumb-o-crats.