DDD

Dumb damn Democrats.

Honestly, do they canvas the country to find the chief engineers of failed campaigns and hire them to be consultants to the DNC? I think maybe.

But first, who's bright idea was it to make Harry Reid the Senate Majority Leader? The same braintrust who thought Tom Daschle would be great, too. Both are, or were, senators in conservative states. Neither can keep, or could have kept, his seat without constantly appeasing his state's conservatives. Now ask yourself how well that fits with leading Democrats against Republicans in the US Senate. No wonder we've passed every illiberal, anticonstitutional, fascist and screwed up bill the GOP has pushed this Congress. Hence this week's FISA vote.

Then there's this moronic notion to disenfranchise the Democrats in Florida and Michigan. I don't understand why there had to be any punishment at all for two states that dared to change the date of their primaries, but the geniuses at the DNC felt that kicking their delegates out of the forthcoming Democratic convention, where the next president wil be chosen, obviously are smarter than I am.

Now, if it were me, I'd think (A) this is inconvenient and I wish they wouldn't tinker with the candidates' travel schedules thus, but (B) this is a democracy and people can hold their state primaries when they like. (C) If I disenfranchised their delegates at the national convention, they'd be really ticked off and (D) we would lose the voice of two states in the selection process. (E) That can't be a good idea. (F) Nope. Better let that one go. (G) Sigh.

On a good day, I might even realize how much fun that jackass Wolf Blitzer would have building broadcasts around the problems of the Democratic Party, and decide that (H) I really should just let this go and work toward party unity.

But I'm not the DNC, that selfsame apparatus that thought undocumented immigration would be a good thing to pop off about, and that Hillary Clinton would be a shoe-in. Where do we find these people? Can we dump them and find some new ones, please?

And is it me, or do the Democrats have two electoral colleges when one is already one too many? What's with this "superdelegate" stuff, please? I thought we had "one person, one vote, one Electoral College rule" in this country. But no. Now it doesn't matter who I think we should nominate. (Thanks, Edwards. You dropped out just after I voted by early ballot.) It only matters who Arizona's "superdelegates" think we should nominate. That definitely yanks my chain.

And I can't wait until the "superdelegates" decide that Hillary Clinton will be a better bet than Obama in the general election. Or vice versa. This party's going to end early, and it won't be pretty either way.

It takes work to hash up this much significant stuff. Somebody has to get up early in the morning for days on end and cudgel his brains (no woman could come up with this dookey) all day long to come up with such obviously clumsy, counterproductive, stupid, undemocratic, and infuriating approaches to party unity. Who was it? Karl Rove?