So I wrote this piece on Thursday, Dec. 6th.
The Democratic Left. The Party of the Shmoon.
And a lot of people read it. And commented as well.
Some of the comments were right on target.
Yea AND nay.
Others?
Phhhhhfffftttt!!!
But finally…late as usual…a Shmoo got down to real Shmoo business.
Parsing parsnips.
By arguing with my fucking MATH regarding the ongoing failure of the Humbert Humphrey/Humpty Hump Dumpty-dominated Democratic Party over the preceding six decades or so.
Read on to experience the Shmoon mind in all of its nit-picking glory.
He wrote:
Math Check
(I had previously written:) In the last 56 years, the U.S. has had a Democratic president for only 4 terms of office.
On purely partisan terms, the Dems are only batting about .285, the Rats .615.
No, this is not a math forum, but it detracts from your arguments when you get key points wrong.
There have been five – not four – Democratic terms. Kennedy/Johnson, Johnson, Carter, Clinton I, and Clinton II.
There have been nine GOP terms. Eisenhower I, Eisenhower II, Nixon I, Nixon/Ford, Reagan I, Reagan II, Bush Sr., Dubya I, and Dubya II.
I’m not sure what you mean by the percentages, but .285 and .615 don’t add up to 1.00. I couldn’t come up with the numbers any way. Actually 5 out of 14 terms is .357. 9 out of 14 is .643.
So, it’s roughtly two to one in number of terms between Goppers and Dems since the start of the Eisenhower administration. BUT there’s an arbitrary quality to that starting point since it included the maximum possible number of Republican terms and ignores the awkward fact that the Democrats held the presidency for five terms before Eisenhower.
In the past 99 years the Democrats have held the presidency for 12 terms and the Republicans for 13. As close to fifty-fifty as you can get with an odd number of terms. In the past 47 years it has been 7 GOP to 5 Dem. Yes, the Republicans have held the presidency more in recent years, but picking 1953 as the start date creates a false impression in the overall balance.
My answer:
Well…EXCUSE MY MATH!!! I hit the wrong key. You are right. The Rats are batting .715 by my count. NOT .615. WITHOUT the fine points that I included in the original.
So?
Here’s the deal, Shmoo.
I consider the Post-W.W. II years…starting at the end of Truman’s continuation of FDR’s mandate…to be “The American Half Century”. A TOTALLY different era from the one that saw the rise to power of the U.S. that took place roughly from the beginning of W.W. I through the Roaring ’20s, the Great Depression and W. W. II.
Thus I start at 1952.
Eisenhower’s term(s).
As the real beginning of the era which is now…hopefully…coming to a close.
The American Half-Century.
The continuing failures of the U.S. in Southeast Asia, South America and the Middle East to effectively impose its economic imperialist will by force of arms and covert action are finally going to call a halt to that half century in the next election. Unless of course you leftiness shmoons and the 30% hard-core right wing assholes of this country manage to successfully screw up yet ANOTHER golden chance for the Dems to come to power. If they do NOT assume effective power and the next administration continues to pursue that failed set of policies, then this country will collapse within 5 to 10 years under the weight of continued, rapidly growing international economic and military opposition.
Bet on it.
Or…it will resort to nuclear force to try to impose its will. A DISASTROUS idea.
Any way you cut it…the American Half Century is over.
And I consider a “term” to be the period of time that a sitting President is in a position to impose his policies on the nation.
Therefore…Eisenhower’s term of influence was from 1953 until 1961, the JFK/Johnson term was from 1961 until 1969 (And I do not consider Johnson as anything more than a part of the right wing criminal coup that killed JFK, so I do not count him as a “Democrat”.), The Nixon/Ford term was from 1969 until 1977, Carter ’77 to ’81, Reagan/Bush (Bush I was Reagan’s handler and controller…the original Vice-Cheney…) from ’81 to ’93, Clinton 1993 to 2001, and Bush II ’01 to ’09.
Effective Dem Presidential time?
Say two years of JFK.
Two years of Carter. OK…make it three. (See below.)
And six years of Clinton.
Want to argue those numbers? Feel free. LBJ was a creature of the right wing. Pre OR post-assassination. He is OUT as far as I am concerned, and I do not care what his so-called domestic record may have been.
Once the helicopters crashed in the Middle East during that supposed hostage rescue attempt, Carter was finished. Spring of 1980.
Clinton? The last two years of his presidency were a dirty joke. He was no longer the President, just some actor in a bad sex film.
So…2 years of JFK, 3 of Carter, 6 of Clinton.
11 years.
From 1953 until the end of Bush II’s term?
56 years.
Percentage of time a Dem actually held the Presidency and could function in a somewhat effective manner?
11/56.
YOU do the math.
19.6%
Dems batting .196.
Rats batting .804.
There it is.
Sorry for the bad math earlier.
Sorry for the almost total failure of the Democratic Party over the past 56 years as well.
You want to argue some of my timelines?
Sure.
Make it Dems at 30%, Rats 70%. Still a shameful failure.
You can suck my calculator..
Any way that you want to parse it, America has gotten JUST what it deserves.
As have the Shmoon who dominate the Democratic Party.
When an effective Dem political group appeared in 1992 it lost its position only because of the totally unhealthy American preoccupation with sexual contact and the truly vicious proclivities of a right wing which will use anything from bullets to dirty jokes to win.
And now the Dem leftiness Shmoon on the internet are waging all-out war against the survivors of that dirty joke. The ONLY Dems to succeed in holding the Presidency with any power since JFK had the back of his head blown off in Dealy Plaza.
The REAL New Deal.
Deal that motherfucker OUT!!! He is dangerous!!!
And you…another fucking Shmoo, obviously.,…want to parse PERCENTAGE POINTS?
GET the fuck outta here!!!
And wake the fuck up.
I sometimes wonder why I continue to try to talk sense on the net.
I really do.
AG
