Paul Rosenzweig - A true left wing asshole

HikerGuy83

Diamond Member
Dec 26, 2021
11,299
8,626
2,138
O.K. Here we go.

He wrote an article:

It’s Time for Outgoing Democrats to Play Hardball​



In the political context, this misconception contributed to the Democrats’ recent defeat. Biden and congressional Democrats saw Trump as an exception, so when they took power in 2020, they returned to traditional, normal leadership activities. They performed admirably. Like a well-drilled baseball team turning a double play, the Democratic Congress, despite its narrow majority, passed valuable legislation aligned with typical Democratic priorities, like the Inflation Reduction Act.

*********************************

Admirably ?

That stupid act increased inflation....


Now, this moron says this is what the senate should do....before the Stuttering Celery Stalk takes leave:

Had Democrats recognized the transformational meaning of Trump’s movement, then instead of prioritizing “normal” legislative activities, they would have put their focus on reforming electoral rules to prevent Trumpism from taking root. Drastic options would have been on the table—things like adding two states to gain four Democratic senators or beginning the effort to abolish the Electoral College (not that the latter would have helped them in 2024). They did none of those things.

Wow......what a radical twit.

Enjoy knowing the left still sports this kind of cretin. BTW: He consults to Homeland Security....or he did. If we are lucky, he'll get deported too.
 

Much can still be done between now and Inauguration Day to put limits on the excesses of the incoming Trump administration.​

So the idea is for the Left to create excesses in order to compensate for other excesses which have not even happened? Sounds like the rational to "save" the 2020 election by violating it.

IN THIS CRUCIAL PERIOD between the election and the inauguration, opponents of the president-elect need to use every feasible lever of power to defeat Trump’s movement, lest the country fail.
In other words, use every means available to oppose the will of the popular majority despite it obviously being what America wants.

In this, they would be correcting a past mistake. The original response to Donald Trump’s rise was based on a strategic error. His critics and opponents thought he was an aberration, not a phenomenon—a recipe for quietism.
So they thought Trump just a fleeting aberration, that is why they called all of his supporters cultists?

In the context of culture, we had Michelle Obama’s initial response: “When they go low, we go high.”
When has a democrat ever gone high?

The comforting conceit was that if Trump’s opponents continued to hold the moral high ground, Americans would eventually tire of the man’s shenanigans
What shenanigans? It is their constant opposition to Trump which keeps him relevant.

In the political context, this misconception contributed to the Democrats’ recent defeat.
What contributed to your defeat is that you weren't a million miles within what America wanted. You ignored every vital issue people are concerned about because the only possible answer was that you created the problem so how could you be the solution?
 
So the idea is for the Left to create excesses in order to compensate for other excesses which have not even happened? Sounds like the rational to "save" the 2020 election by violating it.


In other words, use every means available to oppose the will of the popular majority despite it obviously being what America wants.


So they thought Trump just a fleeting aberration, that is why they called all of his supporters cultists?


When has a democrat ever gone high?


What shenanigans? It is their constant opposition to Trump which keeps him relevant.


What contributed to your defeat is that you weren't a million miles within what America wanted. You ignored every vital issue people are concerned about because the only possible answer was that you created the problem so how could you be the solution?
I hope you know I am quoting the asshole I am talking about.
 
More from the f**kwit in the OP:

Likewise, in the context of law and policy, the Democrats’ idea was to continue to adhere to the norms of conduct that undergird formal legality. The very first piece I wrote after the 2016 election was titled “Defending Norms by Defending Norms,” and it critiqued (of all people) Preet Bharara, who was then the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. He had (in my then view) transgressed normative expectations by refusing to resign, forcing Trump to fire him. Bharara was within his legal rights to do this, of course; my criticism at the time was rooted in my belief that the best response to Trump was to keep up traditional standards of conduct and restraint.

Boy, was I wrong. And so were other critics. We’d misjudged the situation and made a strategic error—one that opponents of Trump are still making today. It’s time to correct that error. If we want to have a real hope of reversing Trump’s authoritarian course, we all need to stop playing tee-ball and start playing legal hardball. Trump’s opponents need to stop showing automatic deference to historical norms and limitations that ought, in a good and just society, be adhered to—not because those norms are bad, but rather because it behooves us to suspend normal decorum when the building is on fire.

*******************************************

Well, let's see where that gets you Paul.

Hopefully on a plane to the Ukraine.
 

Forum List

Back
Top