College Democrats of America Reveal Themselves

…and we learn that they’re rather ignorant of politics, history and economics. To be fair, I was too at their age, and since then, I’ve grown wiser and put away belief in childish things…like fairy dust and the power of unicorn farts.

There used to be a video – it was removed from Vimeo at 11:37 PM EST on 6/27 (presumably by the maker, and presumably because it was being skewered throughout the Innerwebz)) – but despair not! I found another copy of it! Fortunately, before the video was removed, I had transcribed it, and I’ve included my own commentary following each statement.

OK, you’ve watched it. Let’s go.

“I’m a Democrat because…

…because I believe hope is the stuff of dreams, and I believe in keeping that hope alive.”

[Dear Lord, they started with this guy? Yo! Spongebob Wishpants! "Hope" won't pay your college loans when you're unemployed!]

…because of the Patriot Act..?”

[Would that be the same Patriot Act that the Democrat-led Senate passed and President Obama signed with the Robo-pen thingamajig from France? That Patriot Act? He sounded as if he thought there was more than one Patriot Act.]

…because I’m a Christian, not in spite of it.”

[Right - because Christians believe in aborting kids, spending other people's money, enabling folks to remain in destitution, gay marriage (well, I guess some do, but then, are they really Christian?), etc. etc.]

…because I believe in the right of every child to have a fair and high quality education.”

[Except for the aborted ones.]

…because my two governors are Scott Walker and Rick Perry.”

[Does he mean he wasn't a Democrat until after they became governors?]

…because my grandfather was the person in his family who earned a high school education, the first in the family to go to college, the first in the family to graduate from law school, the first Italian American judge in Delaware…blah blah blah…no difference between a janitor and a judge…”

[Beware of activist janitors!!!]

…because I believe that anyone can make it in America.”

[Except for those who get aborted.]

…because I believe the government should take of its citizens.”

[...even if the government is incapable and incompetent to do so. Oh - and except for its aborted citizens.]

…because I love HBCU’s, and College Democrats of America reach out to HBCU’s and get them involved.”

[Those would be 'Historically Black Colleges and Universities'. Yeah, Republicans hate 'em, which is why Reagan signed EO 12320 (which strengthened Carter's EO originally signed in 1980), and Bush 41 signed EO 12677, and Bush 43 signed EO 13256, because Republicans hate HBCU's. Every President has signed an EO bolstering gov't support for HBCU's.]

…because we are the party of Civil Rights.”

[And way back when, Democrats celebrated civil rights by wearing white party hoods.]

…because I want to fight for those who don’t have a voice.”

[...like the unborn! Oh, wait.]

…because I believe that through government, we can come together and do what we can’t do individually.”

[...I'm speechless. Utterly.and.totally.speechless.]

…because I support candidates who believe in the power of gumnabibble.”

[Well, you tell me what the heck he said. I listened to it four times and I still think he's saying "gumnabibble."]

…because I love being part of a party that starts organizing in my community and my neighborhood.”

[Democrats aren't in favor of people doing or thinking things for themselves, because they believe that people aren't capable of doing or thinking things for themselves. And she's proud of that - and more than likely, someone taught her that, because she's obviously not capable of thinking things for herself, because she's admitted she's a Democrat.]

…because I believe in equal pay for equal work.”

[That's funny - because the Democrat party doesn't believe that. They're perfectly happy with public sector employees earning a heck of a lot more than their private sector counterparts.]

…because America is a democracy, not a theocracy.”

[And the Smug Punk Elitist-Wannabe Award goes to...Hey doofus - America is a Limited Representative Republic, not a democracy! Democracy = Mob Rule (kinda like what we saw in Wisconsin earlier this year). Someone needs to smack him and his tweed jacket into Thomas Sowell's office.]

…because everyone deserves to a good public education and to marry whomever they want.”

[...except for the aborted. They don't deserve either. And - under the Democrats, very few get a good public education, and even if Democrats were totally in charge, you still won't be able to marry your sibling or your fireplace...well, I probably shouldn't speak so definitively about that. The way things are going...]

…because we know that the programs Democrats are for, they help people, they really help people.”

[...except for the ones who get aborted. Or euthanized. Or have their livelihoods taken away in order to protect the blue-bottomed dancing gecko. Or GM and Chrysler bond-holders.  Or...]

…because the Democratic party is moving forward and moving our nation forward, and not constantly looking back.”

[...like, at history, and stuff, and like, precedence or tradition or any of that stupid stuff, like the Constitution and other old books and things like the Bible.]

…because I believe in investing and innovation.”

[Code for 'finding creative ways to screw the taxpayer'.]

…because my party casts a wider net.”

[...except for those bigoted homophobes and misogynistic neanderthals and bitter clingers and redneck gun-owners and pro-lifers and folks who support traditional marriage and small-business owners and smokers and people who like to eat fast-food and the unborn and the really old and the disabled and kids with Downs' Syndrome and people with large families like the Duggar's and...]

…because I’m tired, sick and tired, of NAFTA-style trade agreements that are shipping good paying American jobs overseas.”

[...and whoever signed NAFTA in the first place ought to be hung, drawn and quartered and...what? That was President Clinton? That's not what my poli-sci prof told me!]

…because I believe more women ought to be involved in politics and the Democratic Party is….are….called to do so.”

[...and the 24 Republican women in the House and 5 Republican women in the Senate don't count; nor do the 4 Republican women governors count either. And Sarah Palin as the VP candidate in 2008 doesn't count. Because none of 'em are Democrats.]

Kids are so cute at that age, aren’t they?

Thank God so few of them actually vote.

s/s Hot Air

39 Responses to College Democrats of America Reveal Themselves

  • Foxfier says:

    [...like, at history, and stuff, and like, precedence or tradition or any of that stupid stuff, like the Constitution and other old books and things like the Bible.]

    You’re thinking small, man! These folks don’t even look back at what they said ten minutes ago, if it’s not handy….

    Those of us who do vote get to be driven insane by the Boomers who are still at this stage….

  • Alice Polarbear says:

    Perhaps College Democrats should reflect upon the fact that the Democrat president practically worshipped as a god, FDR, was also the president who slapped thousands of Japanese-heritage American citizens into internment camps, just because they were Japanese-heritage.

  • When I was head of the College Republicans at my school we handed out a “test” to people to help figure out which “way our campus leaned.” As you can imagine our questions were well thought out and it turned out 89% of the people that took the test were Republican … and yet they self-identified as Democrat based on “issues of the day”

    This isn’t about different values at that age, it is about popularity and intellecutal dishonesty. Only later does it turn into a deep seated intellectual disorder.

  • Jay Anderson says:

    I’m not a Republican, and have somewhat limited experience with groups like the Young Republicans or the College Republicans, so maybe someone who is can answer this for me. Do YRs and CRs put out crap like this? “Why I am a Republican”? I honestly can’t imagine that they do, but I could be mistaken. I could see them putting out something like “Why I am a conservative” or “Why I believe in limited government”, etc. You know, ideas-oriented or principles-oriented messaging. But not this sort of party-worshipping “This is my tribe” gobbledygook.

    It really does seem that Democrats view their party as their religion and/or as an innate part of who they are. And among Catholic Democrats, there seems to be some confusion that their party and their religion are actually the same thing, believing the crap about the Catholic Church being the Democrat Party at Prayer. Perhaps that explains why they treat an attack on their party as if it is an attack on their religious faith. Although the impression that I get is that the loyalty to the Democrat tribe runs more deeply than the loyalty to the Catholic Church (or it’s just assumed that “What’s good for the Democrat Party is good for the Catholic Church”), as evidenced by the defensiveness shown whenever issues like abortion or defense of marriage or the left’s rampant secularism are brought up.

    That kind of loyalty to a political party? I don’t get it.

  • Foxfier says:

    Jay Anderson-
    most of the young Republicans I know (as opposed to Young Republican group members, of which I’m not aware of knowing any!) tend to be pretty quiet on the “I am a Republican” thing– it may be a social matter, though, since most conservatives I know tend to find it crass to go off about politics at the drop of a conversational hook, and most liberals…don’t. (Not an original observation– I think it’s called “cocktail party liberalism”?)

    Of course, most Republicans I know also go with the GOP because it best promotes what they find most important; the label doesn’t much matter. Some of those for whom the label does matter, it’s mostly because they’re sick of the social defense mechanism of “I vote republican, but–”

  • Pinky says:

    There are two kinds of Young Republicans: hard-drinking activist types, and landed nobility. The former include pro-lifers, libertarians, and tea partiers. They’re more likely to put out something sarcastic online. The latter are just killing time while trying to figure out if Harvard or Yale is easier.

    I do have to jump on one line of the fisking, though. Since the Enlightenment, the word “democracy” has included any form of government in which authority resides in the people. The speaker is using the term correctly. It’s “theocracy” that he doesn’t understand, if he think that Texas government has more in common with Iran than California.

  • Terry says:

    Perhaps College Democrats should reflect upon the fact that the Democrat president practically worshipped as a god, FDR, was also the president who slapped thousands of Japanese-heritage American citizens into internment camps, just because they were Japanese-heritage.

    Arguably one of the most conveniently forgotten facts in all of American history.

    And as someone who works in higher ed at a private, but secular institution, an addition to Foxfier’s observation is that there’s an assumption that everyone here: faculty, staff, and students, are liberal/Democrats. Conservatives remain quiet not only out of polity, as mentioned, but also out of necessity at times. Voicing opposition to something like what just happened in New York could place you in professional peril. Truly “Tolerance for me, but not thee,” as Mr. Anderson is fond of saying.

  • Foxfier says:

    Donald-
    must you hand out straight lines like that to a poor Navy gal like myself? :lol: :mrgreen:

    Seriously, though, you’re right– even just among my geek buddies, we range from tear-out-your-hair mindless liberal and defensively liberal (“if I say this, they can’t get mad at me”) through thoughtful liberal around to knee-jerk Libertarian (in the subset of “anarchist that likes being paid”) through apolitical and into various flavors of conservative. (No standard philosophical libertarians, although most of the conservatives are strongly libertarian flavored– to be expected, considering how Libertarianism is rather designed instead of grown.) Lotsa contrarians, too.

  • Donald is correct. I was a submarine reactor operator once upon a time, and not only was there a great variety of intellectual diversity on the submarine, but the intellects were absolutely first rate. Realizing that mental errors can result in permanent submergence does help focus the critical thinking process

    Today (almost 30 years since I got out of the Navy) I have the opportunity to train college graduates at my various places of employment (past and present). It’s amazing that what we took for granted in Naval Nuclear Power School – a basic understanding of thermodynamics, physics, water chemistry, materials and metallurgy – is devoid in any student. Additionally, these poor young ones don’t even know how to write in grammatical English, and yet they have to write procedures, specifications and plans for the nuclear products that we provide for our customers. Often I find myself teaching more basic English grammar (e.g., active vs passive voice, proper capitalization, the difference between “their” and “there”, and “its” and “it’s” etc.) than anything else. I thank God for a great Latin teacher whom I had for four years back in the 70′s, and who ensured rigorous adherence the rules of diction and grammar, both English and Latin.

    If this is what Academia produces, then no wonder these kids say they are Democrats! Sorry, I don’t mean to slur anybody by that remark, and perhaps I ought to be grateful for the poor education provided in Academia that has assured me my job as a trainer.

    PS, I’ll wager that this trainer has made some kind of editorial or grammatical error in this entry.

  • American Knight says:

    Speaking of typos, “…because I believe the government should take of its citizens.”

    [...even if the government is incapable and incompetent to do so. Oh - and except for its aborted citizens.]”

    In the video, I think the Democrat said, “take care of its citizens” not “take of its citizens”, although the latter rings far more true.

    The tribal, group-think, I am a Democrat because it is more hip is reflective of the banality of today’s youth (those under 30). They are automatons, with not critical thinking skills, they can’t speak or write, but they have some amazingly strong thumbs, and no knowledge of where they come from hence no knowledge of where they are going (sadly, for most of them it is probably a very, very hot place which will make global warming seem like a Slurpee). I am not sure what the Baby Boomers’ excuse is, nor that of those who profess to be Christian. I suppose it is an ID 10 T problem.

  • Foxfier says:

    I’d class it as the banality of the reflexively conformist, AK– it seems more common in the folks my age and below because those are the loudest about their shallowness, but there seems to be no shortage of those over 30 who are Dems because that’s the Done Thing. *shrug*

    Much better to mock and challenge this kind of stuff than to grumble about “kids these days”– there’s a chance of some effect from the challenging and mocking, at least among those who simply hadn’t been exposed to the actual ideas. (See: the surprising number of blogs that go along the lines of “I always thought I was liberal, until someone actually talked to me–”)

  • American Knight says:

    Foxfire,

    There are always exceptions. Not all Baby Boomers are hippies either; however, we can’t ignore the Zeitgeist of a generation. Sadly the generations who came of age when a certain adulterer was president are overwhelmingly liberal. The social engineering of government schools forces them to become customized conformists with no critical thinking skills and no sense of the Divine.

    You are blessed to be a non-conformist, radical counter-culture revolutionary. Most of your age cohort are lost and it is up to us, especially for you since they are your peers, to help them wake up – politically, but more importantly, they must wake up to reality. A reality that is far more exciting and fulfilling than community organizing activity, fortune cookie platitudes about oneness, altruism and being a ‘good’ (civil) person.

  • Foxfier says:

    If they snap out from me just pointing out they’re wrong, they weren’t really Dem in the first place….

    Folks seem to be mostly selfish, which is easy to trace up to the Hippy/Babyboomer sorts and all the way down. Gets called something different each generation, as they try to “find” themselves, but meh.

  • Donna V. says:

    ” I’m a Democrat because( insert barely coherent babble here, basically amounting to ‘because it makes me feel good.’”

    But I have a kid brother (whom I love dearly) who believes the same garbage. You can’t argue politics with him because he can’t argue. All he does is vomit forth the usual emotional spew of “Republicans are evil because …….blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.” We can have civilized, affectionate conversations about anything else, but when it comes to politics he’s no more civil than a certain Michael I. He hung up the phone on our older sister yesterday because she expressed approval of that devil, Scott Walker.

    (I tell ya, I both love my siblings dearly and feel they are the most obnoxious people on the face of the planet. In other words, I feel exactly the same way about them that I did when I was 10.:-)

  • Foxfier says:

    UNRELATED TO TOPIC, FOR SITE ADMIN

    Donna’s reply showed up in my mail box with a big phishing warning that it “may not really be from (Tito’s email)”.

    It hasn’t been doing that before, no idea why it started now. (Posted here instead of mailed because others might be seeing the same thing.)

  • Foxfier says:

    Donna V.-
    I’ve got several cousins like that; it seems to be some sort of defense mechanism, because they really bite at rationally defending their positions, and keep falling into logical fallacies. Shiny rhetoric from a couple, but mostly just angry attacks.

    It really does seem religiously motivated– if they were women, I’d wonder if they were suffering post-abortion trauma or something. I’m pretty sure a female relative is messed up because of her past support for abortion and birth control. (Medical professional.)

    Question: are you familiar with mental defensive responses, and does your brother’s response seem to be linked to a personal defense mechanism? That is, any threat to it is a threat to who he IS? (not that you have to reply here) I started taking that seriously– rather than rolling my eyes at the psycho-babble– when I noticed that a threat to my identity (a “joke” about me sending Kit out on a crusade to her death*) made me respond rather… ballistically.

    (*Note to trolls: only had said effect because was a friend, even stayed at our house and played with her– I had no idea he had that level of disregard for my baby, or ignorant hatred for my religion. Trolls attempting to imitate him will, sadly, just show their true colors to no effect. Since it’s about time for “Nora” to show up on my blog, again.)

  • Donna V. says:

    Foxfier: My dad was a “Scoop Jackson Democrat” – a socially conservative, Catholic Dem who backed the Vietnam War and despised hippies and Communism. But dad died in ’89 and although he refused to see it, his sort of Democrat died long before he did.

    But his 4 children all voted Dem after he died. Well, almost all. I was the first to become a turncoat. I voted for Bush 1 in 1992 – and was startled and shocked to do so. But my sister eventually turned as well (in 2004) and my older brother regrettably voted for Obama in 2008 – but redeemed himself by voting for Scott Walker in 2010. My kid brother is the big holdout and he regards the rest of us as traitors to what he sees as the “family religion.”

    Has anybody else noticed this shift? I have certainly seen it among Irish Catholics. They will give up the Catholicism before they will surrender the liberalism. Catholicism has been displaced by loyalty to the Democratic party.

  • Donna V. says:

    “That is, any threat to it is a threat to who he IS?”

    Oh, certainly, foxfier. Because my brother still sees the Dems as the “party of the little guy” and the “party of compassion,” he identifies very closely with them. It doesn’t help that his in-laws are retired Madisonians who belonged to public employee unions and are extremely liberal.

    I think he decided at age 18 or so that “Dem = good,” “GOP =bad” and is unwilling to even consider anything that may challenge his world-view.

  • Alice Polarbear says:

    “…today’s youth (those under 30). They are automatons, with not critical thinking skills, they can’t speak or write…”

    In all fairness, they are (for the most part) victims of public “education,” an institution run by far left-leaning teacher’s unions. Instead of learning history and civics, they are indoctrinated in politically-correct thought. It takes a rare youth, or a lucky one with parents who teach them tough-mindedness and most are not so exceptionally smart or lucky. There is an old Catholic saying that seems to apply to these poor misguided heads-full-of-mush: “Nemo dat quot non habet”

  • Alice Polarbear says:

    This issue, the sheeplish penchant of college students to cling to the Democrat party, mentally (in MY mind at least) links to a similar problem.

    In America, most clergy are liberals. I know and dearly love an elderly Jesuit who leans as far left as possible while still remaining standing. It occurs to me that many such men, including my Jesuit, went into seminary at about age 17. They’ve never had to struggle to hold down a job, support a family and pay taxes. They have always had an order or a diocese behind them (as long as they behave). As a result, they have never progressed beyond an adolescent view of politics and economics. (I’m not sure about younger priests. Haven’t encountered very many of them.(

  • Foxfier says:

    Has anybody else noticed this shift? I have certainly seen it among Irish Catholics. They will give up the Catholicism before they will surrender the liberalism. Catholicism has been displaced by loyalty to the Democratic party.

    Just a little– the folks that I’ve been around that are Catholic are mostly rural, so we get the blunt impact faster than city Dems. Really kills the alliance to the Dem party– sadly, along with Alice Polarbear’s point, it makes a lot of us realize that our religious often have no freakin’ clue what they’re talking about. Very, very depressing, since my mom’s generation actually had priests that you could talk to, and who were part of the community.

  • Foxfier says:

    Oh, certainly, foxfier. Because my brother still sees the Dems as the “party of the little guy” and the “party of compassion,” he identifies very closely with them.

    Hadn’t thought of that– believing so and so are The Good Guys but not being able to defend it WOULD make folks rather…edgy.

  • “it makes a lot of us realize that our religious often have no freakin’ clue what they’re talking about.”

    Which is one reason why clergy shooting their mouths off on subjects where they have no particular expertise is almost always a mistake. A priest tells me that Christ commands us to always remember the poor and I readily agree. If he then tells me that remembering the poor requires supporting the current welfare state, I judge his views as I would anyone elses.

    I expect the clergy to have extensive knowledge on the Catholic Faith. I do not expect them to have expert knowledge on economics, foreign policy, military strategy, civil government, etc. In those types of areas the clergy are best advised to offer moral judgments according to the Faith, and not attempt to devise policy laundry lists.

  • Foxfier says:

    If he then tells me that remembering the poor requires supporting the current welfare state, I judge his views as I would anyone elses.

    Bingo.

    Telling a bunch of folks who’ve actually lost their jobs to illegal aliens, and who have lost family members because–shocker– said illegal groups don’t follow traffic or drinking laws that they’re required to support efforts to “support” these actions… I would say it gets nasty, but it doesn’t. It just errodes the Church’s reputation, really badly, especially if folks are able to argue for their position from binding teachings.

    Really doesn’t help that I’ve heard more prayers against the death penalty than against abortion. Euthanasia is a far, distant third. (Although, thankfully, my current parish is helping that balance….)

  • “Which is one reason why clergy shooting their mouths off on subjects where they have no particular expertise is almost always a mistake.”

    Related to this, I have found that most Catholic clergy are opposed to nuclear energy because, without a knowledge of the relevant science, engineering and technology, they react to news media sensationalism as anyone else would who lacks such knowledge. A bishop from South Korea recently visited Fukushima Daiichi and promptly denounced nuclear energy as madness. I suspect that no one explained to him that the event at Fukushima Daiichi killed less than a dozen whereas a dam failure from the earthquake killed 1700+. Nor did anyone explain to him that the upgrades doen to BWR/3′s and BWR/4′s with Mark I Containments in the US had not been done to the plants at Fukushima Daiichi, and these upgrades may well have mitigated or prevented what happened. Nor did anyone explain to him that while coal fired power plants kill 30000 annually from lung cancer caused by pollution, no member of the US public has ever been injured or killed as a result of the operation of any commercial light water reactor in the US.

    I think that Bishops and Priests should speak out on issues, but they need to be educated first before they speak out and when it comes to matters not relating to faith and morals, they lack such knowledge, whther that be in economics or science and technology. And indeed, when it does come to faith and morals, often many (not all) are most reluctant to speak out (at least from the pulpit), particularly on issues such as “no contraception”, “no gay sex”, “no abortion”, “no fornication”, “no adultery”, etc., for fear of either reprisal or a massive walkout.

    It’s always easier to say “no nukes” or “social justice now” that to say “repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.” And it’s interesting that the first two are by-lines of the Democratic Party.

  • Jay Anderson says:

    “My kid brother is the big holdout and he regards the rest of us as traitors to what he sees as the “family religion.”

    “Has anybody else noticed this shift? I have certainly seen it among Irish Catholics. They will give up the Catholicism before they will surrender the liberalism. Catholicism has been displaced by loyalty to the Democratic party.”

    Donna, that’s EXACTLY the sort of mentality I was describing re: Democrats in my previous comment. Glad other folks recognize the same thing.

  • Phillip says:

    “…it makes a lot of us realize that our religious often have no freakin’ clue what they’re talking about.”

    That struck home for me about a year ago. The parish priest was retiring. He was getting his own apartment for the first time in his life (had gone from home to seminary to rectories all his life.) Had parish finance committees take care of most business issues it also seems. Most major projects were quickly paid for by a small group of big donors.

    So he talked in his last homily about having to pay rent, utilities, phone etc. for the first time in his life. Also talked about having to do his own laundry and cooking. For the first time in 67 years he had to deal with issues we all deal with every day. And for all these years he had been pontificating on economic issues and how we could easily give more. Guess we’ll see how much he’ll be able to give now that he’s paying for things out of his own pocket.

  • Art Deco says:

    My parish priest was compelled to retire 14 months ago. As far as I know he and his deacon had handled all of the work done in the parish in recent years. He was 92 at that time, transferred from the rectory where he had lived for 60 years to a nursing home.

  • Foxfier says:

    Art and Phillip, pardon a digression…
    reminds me of the old ranchers I grew up with, whose wives ran the home. If, heaven forbid, the lady passed first, the old guys had no idea even where they HAD bank accounts, let alone any financial or home-making matters. Struck me as kind of fitting.

    Amusing because their worthy ladies often deal with statements where…um… informed judgement is lacking in the manner Donald mentioned.

  • Terry says:

    …because everyone deserves to a good public education and to marry whomever they want.”

    [...except for the aborted. They don't deserve either. And - under the Democrats, very few get a good public education, and even if Democrats were totally in charge, you still won't be able to marry your sibling or your fireplace...well, I probably shouldn't speak so definitively about that. The way things are going...]

    Along this vein, my liberal friends (I met them in college) were lathered up on Facebook yesterday about a picture taken outside a NYC business with a sign that read “If you don’t like gay marriage, blame straight people. They’re the ones who keep having gay babies.” If I’m not mistaken, that’s a fallacy of false cause, is it not?

  • Foxfier says:

    *guilty giggle* I’m not sure what it is, but it is kinda funny. The whole unconscious grinding on why it’s still not a real marriage, no matter what they call it, probably makes it actually ironic….

    I’d think it makes an error in assuming too many unproven things– that babies are “gay,” that homosexual marriage comes as a direct result of homosexuality, probably some others I can’t think of.

Follow TAC by Clicking on the Buttons Below
Bookmark and Share
Subscribe by eMail

Enter your email:

Recent Comments
Archives
Our Visitors. . .
Our Subscribers. . .