by Diane Benjamin

In June 2012, progressives published a book subtitled  “The Essential Guide to Thinking and Talking Democratic”.  I am withholding the actual name of the book, for now.

The book is the game plan used by President Obama and other progressives in the 2012 election.  It is very apparent that JFK type Democrats no longer exist and wouldn’t be welcome in today’s Democratic Party.   I will be recapping many sections of the book.  Then I will give you the title if you want to read it yourself.

The Introduction has a discussion of ObamaCare.  The debate was meant to be framed as “healthcare is a right”, but they lost that argument when Republicans successfully labeled healthcare a product to be purchased.  The book was published before the Supreme Court decision, but it is apparent they thought ObamaCare would be overturned.  The argument that government could force citizens to buy anything was thought to doom their prized legislation.   Now we know the Supreme Court wasn’t about preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution, ObamaCare was ruled legal.  They were furious the name ObamaCare has stuck, it pins the law directly on the president.

Framing issues to appeal to the masses is the reason the book was written.  It frequently compares the progressive’s stance on issues with the conservative stance.  What is not apparent is whether they actually believe what is written about conservatives or this is just an attempt to make conservatism irrelevant.  Note, they use the word conservative instead of Republican.  Is that an admissions of no clear difference between the 2 parties?

Moral values, according to the book, are complex and triggered by language.  Progressives used language to frame the campaign, remember the War on Women?  Trotting out individuals like Sandra Fluke triggered the swing voter’s liberal morality, therefore they won.

The progressive definition of democracy: 

“For progressives, democracy begins with citizens caring about each other, taking responsibility both for themselves and for their fellow citizens.  Individual responsibility is thus inseparable from social responsibility.  The basic moral values here are empathy and responsibility, for both oneself and others.

This leads to a view of government as having certain moral obligations: providing protection and empowerment for everyone equally.  This is turn requires a vibrant commitment to the Public: public infrastructure (roads, buildings, sewers), public education, public health, public parks, public transportation, public policing, and energy grid, public access to water, and an adequate food supply, and the regulation of commerce.  No private business and no entrepreneur can prosper without such public provisions. ” 

You didn’t build that!

What the book thinks the conservative definition of democracy is:

“For conservatives, democracy is about liberty, individual responsibility, and self-reliance-the freedom to seek one’s self-interest with minimal or even no commitment to the interests of others.  This implies a minimal public system and a maximal private system.  it is assumed that it is natural and moral to seek one’s own self-interest, that it is natural to compete when there are scarce resources, that it takes discipline to succeed in a competitive world, and that there should be no inference with such a natural mode of life, especially from government.”

How they arrived at the definitions could be a Saturday Night Live skit:

Moral values, according to the book, are framed your family.  The progressive family has:

• parents of equal authority
• empathy for each other and children is central
• self-responsibility and responsibility for each other is required
• respect for parents doesn’t come from punishment, but from admiration and a sense of cooperation
• the family has open communication and transparency about family rules, decision making, and need based fairness

They do admit this is the ideal family and therefore projected to other institutions including government, foreign policy, role of business  stockholders, consumers, and workers.

The idealized conservative family is:

• structured around a strict father who is the natural leader of the family
• children are born just doing what feels good rather than what is good, so they must be punished
• father’s authority is absolute and un-challengable
• physical discipline is necessary to produce moral discipline
• discipline is a form of love
• better is discipline too often than too little
• the role of the mother is to uphold the authority of the father, she is subject to discipline for not complying
• spouses and children who are obedient are loved, cared for, and rewarded

Based on the values of discipline and self-reliance taught by the strict father, people who prospered deserve their prosperity and should nor be punished with taxation, nor should they have to pay taxes to support those who are not morally disciplined enough to become prosperous.  

Remember comments from Obama about Republicans wanting to return to the 50’s?  Now you know where he got it.

Their views totally ignore the realities of single parent homes and the changed role of 2 parent households.

Much more to come – it gets even better.

\