Liberal politicians have always had a tough time selling their agenda. Lecturing Americans about how foolish they are to want to control their own economic futures, how foolish they are to dare to want to control their own healthcare decisions, and how foolish they are to want to choose where to send their children to school has always been a tough sell. It’s so hard that liberal politicians spend small fortunes on political consultants who teach them various political strategies and tactics to win elections by never telling people their true positions.
The campaign of Bernie Sanders is a near perfect example of this. Sanders has promised his supporters a truckload of “free” government programs and initially expressed support for tax rates as high as 90% to pay for his proposals. That support evaporated almost immediately when his endorsement of such an outrageous expansion of government became public. Clearly some high-priced political consultant got to Sanders and told him that he needs to learn to lie better. I can imagine the conversation going something like this:
“Hey Bernie, we really need to stop the talk about that 90% tax thing, we can’t really tell people that the ‘free’ stuff we’re planning to give them is paid for out of their wallets.”
And Bernie responding, “My apologies, I forgot. I should have known better than to tell the truth. It won’t happen again.”
To the far-left the ends will always justify the means, and ethics and morality are absurd constructs which only the Bible “clingers” care about.
One of the strategies liberal politicians frequently employ to overcome this honesty deficit is to divide the electorate and convince them that there is a “war” against them. Barack Obama successfully employed this strategy in his reelection effort by convincing Americans not to vote for him, but to vote against Mitt Romney.
The 2012 exit poll data paints a clear and conclusive picture on this point. On nearly every question asked of the voters as they left the polls, including on Obamacare, taxes, and the role of government, Mitt Romney won. But when the same voters were asked, “Who is more in touch with people like you?” Barack Obama won overwhelmingly. Why were these outcomes so dramatically different? The answer is simple. Barack Obama, and the far-left political machine, spent months not discussing their plans to cancel your insurance, hike your taxes, and add mounds of regulatory red-tape to your businesses; instead they disingenuously and maliciously accused Mitt Romney of killing a woman with cancer, engaging in a “war on women,” and not paying his taxes. Regardless of where you stood on Romney this is pretty despicable stuff. But it worked. To the far-left the ends will always justify the means, and ethics and morality are absurd constructs which only the Bible “clingers” care about.
The Obama administration is a tad more clever with their deployment of division politics and it takes a little more work getting to the bottom of their motives. I’ve been closely following the administration’s attack on American auto dealerships using widely debunked charges of racial discrimination, and, thanks to a recent piece by Dustin Howard at NetRightDaily, it all makes sense. Although the piece is understandably careful in drawing any conclusions, it does present some interesting information about the administration’s close ties to Tesla and their desire to break up the current auto-dealership network for their benefit.
I will not speculate further because the point of my article is not to drive home the dangers of crony capitalism, but to describe how the far-left uses division and racial animus as weapons to target enemies and reward friends. Sadly, I know that I’m preaching to many in the choir with this piece but I hold out hope that the many proud JFK Democrats out there in the pews wake up to the sad state of affairs in their party and start pushing their friends towards a more respectable future because the country deserves better.