By Hank Beckman -
It is an article of faith among many that Democrat losses in recent elections prove that the party is generally out of touch with the average American.
There’s no need to list all the examples given for this conclusion by most conservatives, and not a few liberals. Suffice it to say that when the Democratic Energy Secretary cackles like the Wicked Witch of the West when asked about increasing oil production so that gas prices might ease, one gets the distinct impression that we’re not dealing men and women of the people.
But all this speculation over Democrats’ chances to retain control of Congress next year misses a point raised by only a few commentators. It could be that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is willing to lose that control if it means passing far left legislation that will help transform the nation into a European-style society with cradle-to-grave benefits.
Why not let Democrat office-holders go down to defeat babbling about systemic racism, defunding the police, and having only a decade or so to save the planet if it means crafting an FDR-style legacy historians will be sure to be writing about for decades?
After all, when the 2010 Affordable Care Act was passed, attempting to redesign one-seventh of the American economy, with Pelosi absurdly saying “we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it,” the Democrats did lose their Congressional majority. But she still got what she wanted.
Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer are both in safe blue territory, so there isn’t much risk for either of them. The worst that can happen is that the party loses control of Congress for a time, or even loses the White House in 2024, but that’s happened before and they survived.
Pelosi could retire knowing that her legacy will consist of transforming American society, and if that transformation—with sky-high energy prices, open borders, and permanent administrative state dictating every aspect of our lives—turns out to be a disaster for the rest of us, it won’t affect her. She’s got enough money to remain protected from any of the negative fallout from misguided policies.
As for Schumer, he can probably stay in the Senate for as long as he wants. But if by some miracle, he actually loses his seat, there’s always K Street.
But since Democrats will still have to govern eventually, there remains that nagging question of just how much the party leaders actually know about many of the people they seek to govern. (Or rule over, if we’re being honest)
Considering a couple of anecdotes about today’s most prominent Democrat, Barack Obama, the answer is: not much.
The 44th President recently conducted a podcast with Bruce Springsteen and the subject of the late Clarence Clemons, the Boss’s legendary sax player, came up.
Obama noted that most of Springsteen’s fans were white and while they loved Clemons on stage, if they ran into him at a bar, “the n-word comes out.” Springsteen agreed, casually throwing under the bus the very fans that made him a rich man, a revered figure in the music industry, and cultural icon. So much for loyalty.
Why is Obama so sure that Springsteen fans would react this way, even to a beloved figure like Clemons? Does he have a lot of experience hanging out in predominantly white bars? Not likely.
Has he ever been to one of Springsteen’s shows and partied with any of his fans? If so, I’ve yet to hear any of the stories; and you know that Obama wouldn’t hesitate to regale us with any story that would show him as a champion of the common man. Does he even know any Springsteen fans?
I’ve spent more time than I care to admit in one predominantly white drinking establishment or another, and I can say that my experience has been that the time when white bar patrons would casually toss of racial slurs in a public place has, thankfully, long since passed.
The last time I heard it used in the barroom context was sometime in the seventies, and then it was used by some bikers who had become way too comfortable patronizing one of my favorite local drinking establishments. Thankfully they eventually took their business elsewhere when the owner began a practice of playing an endless loop of Sinatra songs on the jukebox whenever they showed up.
I can only think of one time when a black guy showing up in a bar I was in got hassled, and even then I didn’t hear the N-word. The hassler was one noted for hassling everyone, and it race had any factor in his actions—and it very well could have—he didn’t tip his hand by tossing off any racial slurs.
The idea that white people automatically start hurling racial slurs every time a black person walks into a bar is preposterous on the face of it. If nothing else, calling a black guy the N-word to their face could easily prove to be bad for your health.
This isn’t to say that there aren’t white Springsteen fans who might harbor racial resentments. I’ve heard more than a few diatribes about affirmative action or unfair accusations of racism against white people. But even then, people of my generation are not generally disposed of using racial slurs in public. As kids whom came of age during the Civil Rights movement, it is just not how most of us were raised or educated.
Obama can’t know this because he’s really never had any experience dealing with the people he’s talking about.
Just like he never had any experience dealing with the people in small Midwestern towns.
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama was caught on tape opining about the motivations of small-town voters in rustbelt towns that had been devastated by globalization and the modern economy.
“They get bitter,” he said, “and cling to their guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them, or anti-immigrant sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
There’s nothing unique about his reasoning; it’s been said since by many in our media/political class; in the last 10 years enough money to feed a small nation has been spent by political consultants trying to figure out what motivates voters in these small towns. The prospect of losing valuable Congressional seats provide powerful incentive.
But in 2008, before J.D. Vance’s 2016 Hillbilly Elegy was published and jumpstarted the recent obsession with the rural Americans in flyover country beset by unemployment and opioid abuse, what experience informed Obama’s opinion?
Did he ever live in one of these small towns? Or engage in a serious academic study of the rust belt and its problems? Or even know any people from the Midwest? If I’m being unfair and leaving out some significant part of his life story, forgive me, but it was a part about which he certainly kept quiet.
His entire adult experience before running for any elected office consisted of law school, a short stint at a law firm, “community organizing” on the South Side of Chicago, and being a law school lecturer at the University of Chicago, He did grace us with his autobiography, but that hardly focused on the rustbelt.
It’s obvious that any knowledge or expertise that Obama picked up about small midwestern towns came not from anything he actually did, or any serious academic study, but from other people, likely in the faculty lounge, the liberal media, or one or another of his leftist friends.
This dilettante’s view of the common man, especially working class whites, is strong evidence that the Democratic Party is out of touch with the American people. The fish rots from the head down, as an old saying of disputed origin has it.
And this is a charitable interpretation of Obama’s statements. We should be open to another possibility, one that we hope against hope isn’t true, a view rarely expressed in polite company.
It could be that he knows his views are false and the issues involved are more complicated and can’t honestly be explained by labeling an entire group of people as bigoted, but he finds it politically expedient to go with that narrative.
Maybe the sad fact is that our first African American president, the man who was heralded as the one to usher in a new, post-racial society, is a race-bating con artist and always has been.
