And now, a tea party of the left

What conservative populists are doing to the Republican party, liberal populists are starting to do to Democrats:

A political rebellion is brewing inside an old funeral home near the state Capitol here. Frustrated liberals and labor organizers are taking aim at the Democratic Party, rushing to gather enough signatures to start a third party that they believe could help oust three Democratic congressmen.

Now, some of Obama’s supporters are mounting a defiant strike against the president’s party. The nascent third party, North Carolina First, could endanger the Democratic congressional majority by siphoning votes from incumbent Democrats in November’s midterm election, potentially enabling Republican challengers to pick up the seats.

Organizers say they are so fed up with Democrats who did not support health-care reform that they simply do not care.

“Our whole agenda is to turn that apple cart around and say, ‘No more are we going to blindly support you because you're a Democrat,’” said Dana S. Cope, executive director of the 55,000-member State Employees Association of North Carolina (SEANC), which is leading the effort. “We’re going to support you because you’re right on the issues and if you’re not right on the issues, we’re going to remove you from office.”

via North Carolina Democrats’ votes against health care push labor to form party.

It appears that NO ONE approves of the political parties and incumbent politicians. Maybe this could be the basis for a national unity movement.

The Democrats’ tragedy of Greek proportions

Liberal pundits are proclaiming doom and apocalypse at the prospect of Kennedy’s seat in the Senate going to a Massachusetts Republican, even before the election and the bitter news. So reports

For the pundits on MSNBC and the liberal blogosphere, the prospect of a Scott Brown victory in the Massachusetts Senate race has provoked the kind of doomsday rhetoric not heard since a certain Texan was president.

Liberal talker Ed Schultz recently told radio listeners that if he lived in Massachusetts he’d try to vote 10 times, claiming that he’d “cheat to keep these bastards out.”

Conservatives howled that the MSNBC host was inciting voter fraud, so Schultz apologized on the air Monday — well, sort of.

“I misspoke on Friday. I'm sorry, I'm sorry,” Schultz said. “I meant to say, if I could vote 20 times, that's what I'd do.”

“Let me be very clear,” Schultz said a few minutes later. “I'm not advocating voter fraud, I'm just telling you what I would do. That's how bad I want Scott Brown to lose!”

Atlantic senior editor Andrew Sullivan described the election on his blog as “a nihilist moment, built from a nihilist strategy in order to regain power … to do nothing but wage war against enemies at home and abroad.”

Sullivan, a longtime conservative who announced he was leaving “the right” last month, concluded Monday that “Democrats can stop hoping at this point” and predicted a double-digit victory for Brown.

“What comes next will be a real test for [President Barack] Obama,” Sullivan continued. “I suspect serious health insurance reform is over for yet another generation.”

Other pundits have had their own grand pronouncements on the possibility of Democrat Martha Coakley losing the seat once held by Ted Kennedy: “Good Morning America” host George Stephanopoulos —who once worked for someone dubbed the “Comeback Kid” — wrote on his blog Tuesday that a Brown victory “would certainly be the biggest political upset I have seen in my career.” PBS’s Judy Woodruff, quoting someone from the White House, described the situation on ABC’s “This Week” as “a tragedy of Greek proportions if Ted Kennedy's successor is the one … who was responsible for the death of health care.”

If it’s a Greek tragedy (as my former students should know), it involves a hero with a tragic flaw, generally a type of pride known as hubris, which brings his catastrophe upon himself. Who would be the tragic hero here, what is the tragic flaw, and how was he responsible for the catastrophe?

And now, tea parties of the left

From Dana Milbank, who covers politics for the Washington Post:

Tea parties — they aren't just for conservatives anymore.

Liberals are turning against President Obama with an energy that until now has been reserved for Fox News viewers who wear tri-corner hats and wave yellow "Don't Tread on Me" flags:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), in a news conference Wednesday, declares that she won't ask House members to support Obama's Afghanistan troop increase in a January vote. "The president's going to have to make his case," she says, calling it a "vote of conscience."

About the same time, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) holds a news conference to denounce Obama's renomination of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. "When the people voted for change in 2008," he says, "they did not vote to have one of the key architects of the Bush economy be reappointed."

Howard Dean goes on the radio and says of the Senate health-care bill, which Obama is fighting mightily to pass: "The best thing to do right now is kill the Senate bill." calls a protest outside the White House to demand that "the president to stand up to Joe Lieberman and fight for the health care reform principles he campaigned on."

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), who gained fame by saying Republicans think Americans should "die quickly," holds a news conference to denounce Obama's Afghanistan policy and reads a petition on the House floor asking members to vote against sending more troops.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), in a series of outbursts, criticizes Obama over Afghanistan, health-care reform and the handling of the Guantanamo Bay prison.

Where does this put President Obama? Where does this put the Democratic party?

I know where it puts me. I can hardly wait to torment my arch-Democrat brother over the holiday season. I’ll come out praising Obama, telling my brother that he was right to be such a big fan. I’ll say how much I appreciate Obama for embracing George W. Bush’s policies. In fact, I’ll say, he has even pushed them farther than Bush ever dreamed of. Bush gave us one war; Obama gives us two, complete with an emulation of the last administration’s “surge.” Bush practiced deficit spending, but Obama outdoes him multitudinous times over. Bush bailed out the banks and big corporations, but Obama bails them out even more. And then Obama gives us original policies that carry out the Republican fantasies more than Bush ever dared to: A health care plan that enriches the insurance companies! etc., etc. I’ll keep pushing it (beyond what I believe, of course), saying that the Republicans should nominate Obama themselves to form a national unity ticket. Oh, how my brother will squirm, get defensive, and get indignant. The more he will complain, the more I will praise President Obama. And if he should criticize the president, I’ll act shocked and gently accuse him of racism. The very thought of getting together with family during this happy season fills my heart with a holiday glow.