Home | Away

Democratic Concern Trolls Voice Concern About the Future of Democratic Concern Trolling

Falls Church, VA—Citing “clear and present dangers to the party,” a group of leading Democratic concern trolls gathered over the weekend to express their concerns about recent Democratic victories at the polls.  The group, calling itself “Concerned Democrats for America,” announced in a press release that it would hold annual conferences throughout Barack Obama’s presidency in an attempt “to keep the Democratic Party in touch with the concerns of the American people.”

“Obama’s election is a historic event,” said former Clinton advisor Lanny Davis, co-chair of the newly-formed Fox News Democrat Caucus.  “But I’m concerned that Obama may have raised expectations too high.  What will happen when he has to face down the left-wing Congressional leadership or the Daily Kos brigades, who will undoubtedly try to goad him into adopting a narrowly partisan agenda?  I worry that Obama won’t have the courage to cut those people loose when he needs to.”

Journalist Amy Sullivan agreed, adding, “I’m hearing a lot of concerns about where the Democratic party goes from here.  Specifically, I’m concerned that fewer Democrats are going to be willing to take seriously the concerns of people who want to reach out across the aisle and establish a bipartisan consensus that abortion is wrong.  What will happen when the party is no longer concerned about these people’s concerns?  Based on what I’m hearing, I have to worry that it will back itself into increasingly radical and unpopular positions on this important issue.”

Other members of the Concerned Democrats focused more on the 2008 electoral map than on “hot-button” social issues.  Democratic strategist David “Mudcat” Saunders, in a plenary address to the group, noted that Obama had managed to make inroads into traditionally Republican southern states such as Virginia and North Carolina, while sweeping Ohio, Florida, Iowa , and even Indiana, which had not voted for a Democrat since 1864.  “There’s a real problem looming here,” said Saunders, “even if most Democrats don’t want to face it right now.  As the Republican party increasingly becomes the party of old white people living in Appalachia, the Ozarks, and the barren windswept areas of the Louisiana Purchase, Democrats are going to be less and less inclined to listen to advisors who insist that the Democratic Party must choose leaders who are white male Southern Baptists familiar with barbeque, NASCAR, and the music of Lynyrd Skynyrd.  I’m especially concerned about what will happen to the party once those advisors’ concerns are no longer given a prominent hearing.  Will Democrats stop trying to appeal to conservative Southern whites?  Will Democrats become instead a regional party, confined to the northeast, the Middle Atlantic, the Great Lakes and upper midwest, the mountain southwest, and the Pacific states?  All this talk about the Latino vote and the Jewish vote may be obscuring the importance of the Bubba vote, and that concerns me, as it should you.”

Former Senator and newly-elected CDA president Bob Kerrey summed up the concerns of many participants in his closing remarks, noting that “America is still a center-right country.  Every map confirms this simple fact: when you look at the United States, you see that most people live in the center and on the right side of the map.  That’s why the Democratic Party needs preening, distinguished center-right elder statesmen who model themselves on Daniel Patrick Moynihan—now more than ever.”

Posted by on 11/10 at 05:25 AM
  1. “Will Democrats become instead a regional party, confined to the northeast, the Middle Atlantic, the Great Lakes and upper midwest, the mountain southwest, and the Pacific states?”

    Love it. It reminds me of something that Noam Chomsky, of all people, once said (I think it was in that movie Manufacturing Consent): he said that the Republicans would always say that the Democrats were the captive of “special interests”: you know, minorities, labor, members of the educated elite, teachers, the young”—all of which pretty much add up to “the people.”

    Posted by Martin  on  11/10  at  06:52 AM
  2. Thanks for the report. Why didn’t you relay Harold Ford’s comments? Did he get caught in traffic on I-40? And what about Joementum?

    Posted by Sherman Dorn  on  11/10  at  07:26 AM
  3. Here’s something to be concerned about: Get Your War On: New World Order. Better get out your dashiki’s.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  07:29 AM
  4. Yes, I’m not sure that the Obama crowd realizes that if Pennsylvania had different demographics and if he were running against different Republican candidates at a different time how close he might have come to losing the state. Scary stuff. I counsel having zombie Robert Casey Sr. finally give that convention speech.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  08:47 AM
  5. Good point, JP.  In order for the Democrats to prove they really are a “big tent” party, they need to let Zombie Casey Sr. give that speech.  The party has been effectively closed to pro-life zombies for far too long.

    Sherman:  as for Harold Ford, well, who do you think is the other co-chair of the Fox News Democrats Caucus?  But Joementum is another story altogether.  Even this group isn’t touching him now.

    Posted by Michael  on  11/10  at  08:57 AM
  6. Until we know what the imaginary heartland people in David Brooks’s head think, we’re directionless. No one has their finger on the pulse of the people living in Brooks’s head like Brooks does. If the imaginary heartlanders think Obama would be crazy to raise taxes on people like Brooks, then to do so would be political suicide.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  09:43 AM
  7. yes, yes..the center-right is the true oasis of America, not the mirage of Leftist Extremism...and the Democrats, and Mr Obama, must remember to pitch their tent, their big open tent, or umbrella, near this oasis…

    Posted by mark  on  11/10  at  10:15 AM
  8. I must second the concerns of Amy Sullivan.  I am concerned that you are not concerned enough about them.  I believe abortion is wrong, but I also believe that everyone should be able to make their own choice.  Democrats like me believe that people should have a choice about what happens to their bodies, but we are concerned that there is no real good label for us.  The label “pro-choice” doesn’t really work for us.  We are concerned that people are making the wrong “choices,” so we don’t like being labeled “pro-choice.” Can you help us find a label that makes clear that we like “choices” in general but don’t want to be defined by the term since so many people who have choices make the wrong ones?

    captcha- “was,” as in “I _was_ pro-choice until 9/11 but now I’m concerned the label doesn’t reflect me specifically enough...”

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  10:15 AM
  9. Nashe, that’s easy: Pro-correct-choice. (The analogue for pro-lifers who support capital punishment: Pro-deserving-life.)

    Posted by Michael Drake  on  11/10  at  11:36 AM
  10. Let’s be clear. Nobody is pro-abortion. I don’t think the pinko socialist wing of the democratic party has made the case that the number one reason women choose abortion is economic. So if you want fewer abortions lets get on with the real redistribution of wealth not this namby pamby stuff that Obama is talking about.

    So the best way to get to that right/center place that is the real America, make three left turns.


    Posted by  on  11/10  at  11:48 AM
  11. The visible majority that elected Obama now hang around his administration’s neck like one of those unlucky sea birds we in the barren windswept areas of the Louisiana Purchase have never seen. It comes down to numbers. More supporters means more impossible demands on totally overstressed resources means more bitter disappointment means more eventual Republicans. Ipso facto quid pro quod est demonstratum.

    Captcha: nothing. The answer to everything.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  12:33 PM
  12. 11: If we don’t watch out the Dems’ll make the mistake of thinking that the *eastern* part of Nebraska is representative of something that can be remotely labelled “America”.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  01:06 PM
  13. I have a solution for the Concerned Trolls (D-USA) of America!  Join the Republican Party, or the fragments left, I mean, remaining, of it after all the various right-wing operations get cracking, I mean, started.

    Posted by The Constructivist  on  11/10  at  01:11 PM
  14. America is still a center-right country.  Every map confirms this simple fact: when you look at the United States, you see that most people live in the center and on the right side of the map.

    This is almost right.  If you look at a map, you can see that at the center of the right-hand side of the country is Washington, DC.  Since this is a center-right country, the pundits in Washington know the contents of our hearts better than tose in other places could ever hope to do.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  01:34 PM
  15. Until we know what the imaginary heartland people in David Brooks’s head think, we’re directionless.

    Yes, we’re still trying to find that salad bar at Applebee’s.  It must be around here, somewhere, dammit!

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  01:36 PM
  16. Let’s be clear. Nobody is pro-abortion.

    Not to derail the derail, but I am emphatically pro-abortion.

    I’m also emphatically pro-hernia-repair, pro-tumor-excision, pro-fracture-reduction, pro-mammogram, pro-anesthesia, and pro-prostate-exam.

    I am, however, against the rhetorical universalization of privately held opinion.

    Posted by Chris Clarke  on  11/10  at  02:18 PM
  17. I am, however, against the rhetorical universalization of privately held opinion.

    New progressive slogan:

    Just Say NO to the Rhetorical Universalization of Privately Held Opinion!

    *I* think it works.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  02:24 PM
  18. "Just Say NO to the Rhetorical Universalization of Privately Held Opinion!”

    Everybody now! Say it together: “Just say No...”

    Posted by Michael Drake  on  11/10  at  02:31 PM
  19. Four words (three, to be precise): Harold Ickes, Harold Ford

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  02:44 PM
  20. sorry Chris, it’s been less than a week and we’re still drunk with power.


    Posted by  on  11/10  at  02:47 PM
  21. ”...even Indiana, which had not voted for a Democrat since 1864.”

    Yeah, traitor state. Wouldn’t support Old Honest Abe in the middle of the friggin Civil War.  Wouldn’t support John McShame in our country’s dire moment of need. Sounds like Indiana could e a contestant in the non-real America state association.

    Posted by Bulworth  on  11/10  at  02:54 PM
  22. Michael, I’ve read your blog for decades, since that cold morning-after 9/11 when I needed someone to explain to me how other people could explain to me how they saw the world, which is a big and scary world, in case you haven’t noticed.  But after reading this post, even though I’m going to keep reading your blog, I’m deeply afraid that no one else I know will know anyone who reads your blog.  Because in this post and other posts like it, and even in some posts that aren’t very much like this one, you show an utter unwillingness to engage people in good faith just because these people happen to be operating in bad faith, and besides, just because they are blood-guzzling cave zombies who have been utterly rejected by the American people doesn’t mean we shouldn’t comb through their arguments (with a very inexpensive, even complimentary, comb, since other people won’t take us seriously if we use expensive combs for our glistening locks even though our hair is beautiful) in search of any speck that can be taken out of context and made to sound remotely sane.  Because that is what the American people react vaguely pleasantly towards.  Dammit.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  03:12 PM
  23. sorry Chris, it’s been less than a week and we’re still drunk with power.

    I’ve found that if you drink a glass of water for every power you drink, the hangover’s a lot less horrible the next day.

    captcha: “image,” as in “Now I have the _____ of holding onto the toilet the next day and vomiting up power stuck in my brain, gee thanks, Me...”

    Posted by Chris Clarke  on  11/10  at  03:21 PM
  24. Thanks Chris. I’ll try that next time. Although I suspect the faux Sangria made with Thunderbird and skittles had something to do with it.


    Posted by  on  11/10  at  03:57 PM
  25. Hey, Elliot! We killed the thread. Go us!

    But it’s just as well. I am a big supporter of this blog and its aims, and yet I find everything written here* is near-fatally undermined by Michael’s continued refusal to disavow himself over the rampant sexism and anti-pitbull sentiments flagrantly hidden in the subtext of his past comments like this one.

    * by the proprietor, commenters, trolls, and myself

    Posted by Chris Clarke  on  11/10  at  05:46 PM
  26. Chris,

    I wouldn’t say we killed it so much as perhaps aborted it. (he said in a half hearted attempt to steer the wildly careening vehicle back onto the road)

    I’m pretty new here so I’m not sure I can afford to piss Michael off just yet. wink


    And yes the captcha word is “nuclear” as in nucular.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  06:13 PM
  27. Damn, I go out and attend meetings all day, and sure enough, Chris and Elliot have killed aborted the thread before I got the chance to say that

    New progressive slogan:

    Just Say NO to the Rhetorical Universalization of Privately Held Opinion!

    *I* think it works.

    is not nearly as effective as

    What do we want?

    No rhetorical universalization of privately held opinion!

    When do we want it?


    And now back to business:

    Michael’s continued refusal to disavow himself over the rampant sexism and anti-pitbull sentiments flagrantly hidden in the subtext of his past comments like this one.

    Um, Chris, that wasn’t me.  That was Ann Althouse pretending to be me.  And speaking of Ann, Zack, on the basis of your comment @ 22 I’ve forwarded your contact info to her agent.  You should be hearing any moment now.

    Posted by Michael  on  11/10  at  06:56 PM
  28. How long and how loudly do you think you have to demand access to the salad bar before they throw you out of Applebees?

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  06:59 PM
  29. Am I correct in assuming that NOW!! is the time to say that we are all rhetorically universalized privately held opinions now?

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  07:01 PM
  30. MB@27: is not nearly as effective as

    Well, so says you. Sheesh, and now I bet *everyone* is going to agree with you.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  07:41 PM
  31. Too little, too late.

    Obama’s well-funded secret campaign laboratory (which by late September had synthesized change, thus meeting the “now” deadline with time to spare) has bred—and last Wednesday released into the wild—several thousand SOLICITUDE OGRES.

    Solicitude ogres feast on the entrails of concern trolls.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  07:57 PM
  32. I’m watching Matthews now.  While he seems to be positioning himself for a run at elective office, it’s as an Obamacrat, and in doing so he’s helping set the conventional wisdom.  He’s thrashing that “Republican strategist” Todd whoever, making it clear that Obama has every bit the mandate that W did, and moreso, and that Obama should run with it, and not be cowed by the deficits--which the MSM and GOP seem to rediscover whenever the Dems are in power.  Obama and the Dems have a once-in-a-generation opportunity, and I suspect that he alone has the vision and the chops to rise to the occasion.  In other words, Lanny and all the other DLC types can, in the immortal words of Tom Friedman, “suck on this.”

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  08:32 PM
  33. If Obama were really committed to reaching across the aisle to that oasis located right in the center of David Brooks’ head, he’d send Michelle to Alaska to help their Governor sort out her clothes. Apparently the RNC is forcing her to account for her kids’ underwear, the knaves. Surely Michelle could help in her hour of need.

    Captcha = “see”, but I’m not sure why you should care…

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  08:40 PM
  34. well you also failed to mention the puma caucus that refuses to work with obama at all until he becomes hillary clinton; and i also wonder why you didn’t mention mudcat’s call for the end of bigotry towards all bigots everywhere…

    Posted by skippy  on  11/10  at  10:13 PM
  35. How long and how loudly do you think you have to demand access to the salad bar before they throw you out of Applebees?

    Sounds like a fun experiment.

    Posted by  on  11/10  at  10:53 PM
  36. It would be a great experiment!  And when the manager of Applebees finally came to throw us out, we would laugh and say, dude, you’ve been Brooks’d!

    Posted by Michael  on  11/10  at  11:09 PM
  37. You can measure how long a sustained campaign demanding access to the Applebees’ salad bar lasts, or you can measure the volume of the chanting over the lettuce heads, but you cannot* measure both. This is due to the Iceberg Uncertainty Principle.

    * captcha

    Posted by Chris Clarke  on  11/10  at  11:11 PM
  38. JP @12:  “Omaha/Somewhere in the Middle of America/Get right to the heart of matters/ It’s the heart that matters more”

    Posted by Ken Houghton  on  11/10  at  11:26 PM
  39. So salad/2*pi = salad bar? Or does 2*pi mean you accidentally went to Baker’s Square instead of Applebees?


    Posted by  on  11/11  at  12:27 AM
  40. e.—oh the bad physics pun pain!

    catchpa: “idea”—as in I never get ideas even remotely that interesting

    Posted by  on  11/11  at  06:58 AM
  41. I was always taught that the value of a salad bar was directly proportional to the mass of the chick peas multiplied by the mass of the cottage cheese and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the iceberg lettuce and the blue cheese dressing.  I don’t understand all these fancy quantum salad-bar speculations.

    Posted by Michael  on  11/11  at  08:28 AM
  42. WHY in the name of All That Is Holy are Red-Blooded Heartlanders eating Frickin’ Salad? I don’t care if they use a quart of Blue Dog Dressing; it is still Salad, basically just a big dose of Hollywood liberalism topped with European Socialism sitting on your Chinese Plate, served up by the Ghost of Martin Van Buren himself!
    And don’t get me started on Herbs, whose subtle flavors draw their evil essence from the dark gardens of Salem at midnight. For a real and true Heartlander, it’s gotta be the William Henry Harrison Diet, preferably eaten over a sink, or you might as well catch the next commuter train back to New Haven or France or whatever.
    Until Democrats learn these basic facts of American Cuisine, they will be forever trapped on the campaign bus eating arugula with John and Teresa Heinz Kerry.

    Posted by  on  11/11  at  09:55 AM
  43. What with all this talk of salads, I head that DCTCC (Democratic Concern Troll Central Committee) has appropriated funds to have plates of emergency bacon cheeseburgers located within 10 yards of all salad bars.

    Posted by  on  11/11  at  10:32 AM
  44. Indeed, I am concerned that the flippant nature of the discourse in this airspace might prompt David Frum to disapprove of its effects on the political climate. And we wouldn’t want that to happen, as he’s a Serious Person (tm) indeed.

    Captcha: “book” as in “why aren’t you reading one right now”?

    Posted by John Protevi  on  11/11  at  10:48 AM
  45. Let us all hope that President Obama chooses his Salad-bar Czar very, very carefully.

    Posted by  on  11/11  at  11:25 AM
  46. For a definitive description of the quantum nature salad bar physics, I recommend “Holographic Bounds on the Vegimatrix” from last months Journal of Culinary Physics.


    Posted by  on  11/11  at  12:31 PM
  47. for the less scientifically savvy commenters here, Elliot is, of course, joking. Salad bars, composed of once-living substances as they are, are defined at the organic chemistry scale, or larger, rather than the particle physics scale.

    Which is not to say that particle physics doesn’t play a role, as witness the importance to your average salad bar of elementary particles such as onions and croutons. (And of course - a nod to Amanda French here - anticroutons.) In fact, much of the scientific excitement in the salad bar world concerns the search for the widely postulated Higgs bacon.

    But really, emergent salad bar properties mainly emerge at the molar level, which is to say the level at which ingredients are found in quantities of a molé or greater, in laypersons’ terms the atomic weight of the vegetable in grams, which is of course equivalent to multiplying a single vegetable times a very large number called Avocado’s* constant.

    I hope that clears things up a little.

    *Avocado was, of course, the cook who determined that equal volumes of salad bars, at the same temperature and pressure, contain the same number of salads.

    Posted by Chris Clarke  on  11/12  at  12:56 AM
  48. for the less scientifically savvy commenters here Chris is of course joking.

    He is correct about the molar level and one thing to consider is which foods are more/less likely to get stuck in your molars.

    And interestingly Avocados are the key ingredient in GuacaMOLE.

    Posted by  on  11/12  at  12:35 PM





Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:

Next entry: MeTubes

Previous entry: Operations

<< Back to main