The joke's on you, kids

Democrats from Obama on down are blaming their electoral rout on failure to explain their agenda, but maybe we have heard too much of their agenda.

A Washington Post column by liberal commentator Eugene Robinson asks why Democrats are not standing up “for what they say they believe:”

What I'm hearing is frustration, and it's getting louder. I'm hearing the view that the Obama administration, which has done much good, can do better - by speaking clearly, standing its ground - and, when pushed by bullies, shoving back.

 Robinson notes the ‘enthusiasm gap’ among the party’s base of minorities, women and young people.

But who could be enthusiastic about a party that is bankrupting the country and crippling our industry, undermining our freedom and diminishing our standing?

Young people in particular are ill-served by the Obama spending tsunami and job-destroying agenda.  Yet they are led down the garden path of statism by ‘hip’ media stars, like Keith Olbermann and Jon Stewart, who cloak their views in ridicule and derision of everything that is good about our country.

Columnist Paul Mulshine, discussing Olbermann’s campaign contribution to Rand Paul’s opponent, notes the fallacy promoted by “all of those television talking heads that the younger generation finds so amusing:”

 This crowd is confused.

Paul… is easily the most anti-establishment candidate elected to the Senate in recent memory…

Paul is, in other words, exactly the sort of candidate a young person should support. We baby boomers are on the edge of retirement. Once we stop working, someone's going to have to pick up the trillions of dollars in debts we've been running up. And that someone is the college kid who thinks Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Jon Stewart, et al. are so darn witty.

Well, the joke's on you, kids. We boomers will be laughing all the way to the bank, where your hard-earned money will be direct-deposited in our accounts…

If you're young, the federal government is not your friend. Yet the more somebody hates the federal government, the more Olbermann and his ilk hate that somebody. The mere mention of the tea party, for example, will send Maddow into that smirk she employs as a substitute for a sense of humor. Like the others, she wants to pose as anti-establishment. Yet she opposes the single biggest anti-establishment force in recent history.

The comedy and derision crowd paints tea party conservatives as Neanderthals and know-nothings, racists and rednecks, mocking the very people who are attempting to preserve American prosperity and freedom for the next generation.

Progressives share a lot of delusions, not the least of which is that young people should be enamored of the Progressives’ disdain for our founding principles and anyone who believes in them.

Is it possible that Mr. Robinson’s ‘enthusiasm gap’ is due not to insufficient explanation, but rather to the fact that many of us, young and old, have heard more than enough from the Democrats?

Democrats from Obama on down are blaming their electoral rout on failure to explain their agenda, but maybe we have heard too much of their agenda.

A Washington Post column by liberal commentator Eugene Robinson asks why Democrats are not standing up “for what they say they believe:”

What I'm hearing is frustration, and it's getting louder. I'm hearing the view that the Obama administration, which has done much good, can do better - by speaking clearly, standing its ground - and, when pushed by bullies, shoving back.

 Robinson notes the ‘enthusiasm gap’ among the party’s base of minorities, women and young people.

But who could be enthusiastic about a party that is bankrupting the country and crippling our industry, undermining our freedom and diminishing our standing?

Young people in particular are ill-served by the Obama spending tsunami and job-destroying agenda.  Yet they are led down the garden path of statism by ‘hip’ media stars, like Keith Olbermann and Jon Stewart, who cloak their views in ridicule and derision of everything that is good about our country.

Columnist Paul Mulshine, discussing Olbermann’s campaign contribution to Rand Paul’s opponent, notes the fallacy promoted by “all of those television talking heads that the younger generation finds so amusing:”

 This crowd is confused.

Paul… is easily the most anti-establishment candidate elected to the Senate in recent memory…

Paul is, in other words, exactly the sort of candidate a young person should support. We baby boomers are on the edge of retirement. Once we stop working, someone's going to have to pick up the trillions of dollars in debts we've been running up. And that someone is the college kid who thinks Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Jon Stewart, et al. are so darn witty.

Well, the joke's on you, kids. We boomers will be laughing all the way to the bank, where your hard-earned money will be direct-deposited in our accounts…

If you're young, the federal government is not your friend. Yet the more somebody hates the federal government, the more Olbermann and his ilk hate that somebody. The mere mention of the tea party, for example, will send Maddow into that smirk she employs as a substitute for a sense of humor. Like the others, she wants to pose as anti-establishment. Yet she opposes the single biggest anti-establishment force in recent history.

The comedy and derision crowd paints tea party conservatives as Neanderthals and know-nothings, racists and rednecks, mocking the very people who are attempting to preserve American prosperity and freedom for the next generation.

Progressives share a lot of delusions, not the least of which is that young people should be enamored of the Progressives’ disdain for our founding principles and anyone who believes in them.

Is it possible that Mr. Robinson’s ‘enthusiasm gap’ is due not to insufficient explanation, but rather to the fact that many of us, young and old, have heard more than enough from the Democrats?

RECENT VIDEOS