Conservatives live in constant fear that voters will not understand what they believe and liberals fear that voters will understand what they actually believe.
This year the Democrat National Committee helped the Democrats stay in the shadows by scheduling their debates when no one will see them. To hold a debate on a Saturday night with an NFL game on another channel is an example.
The next debate will be held on New Year’s Eve at 11 p.m. on the Oxygen Channel. This from a party that insists that they want to get people out of the shadows.
Democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders, left, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Martin O'Malley take the stage before a Democratic presidential primary debate, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)
The leading Democrat candidates are two old white professional politicians campaigning on 100-year-old ideas. They support more government in your life and are convinced that they are better equipped to make your decisions than you are.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders talked of rebuilding the middle class and punishing the rich, but other than the talking points the detail was absent.
If former Gov. Martin O’Malley made any promises for the future I missed them, but he was a Baltimore mayor and a Maryland governor and has a nice smile.
Guns were at the top of the list. Guns are always at the top of their list.
Sanders has a bit of a problem here because as a candidate in Vermont in 1990 he received the support of the NRA. Consorting with the NRA is cause for excommunication for a Democrat.
Clinton has been on both sides of this issue depending on the campaign. Her current obsession is to allow gun manufacturers to be sued for gun violence. She would punish a legal industry for the illegal activity of others using their product. Sanders voted to prohibit such lawsuits and it is a handy cudgel for her.
Of the approximately 33,000 victims of gun violence in 2013 more than two-thirds were the result of suicide. Would Clinton allow those families to sue Smith and Wesson?
Drunk driving kills too. Should General Motors be liable for damages? How about those who carelessly ingest a poisonous chemical? Should Dow Chemical pay?
Martin O’Malley reminded us that he passed tough gun laws as a mayor of Baltimore and as governor of Maryland. He also has a nice smile.
Gallup noted last week that the public has more respect for the Bill of Rights than for Democrat nostrums. They prefer the Republican position on guns.
There was general agreement that the rich should pay their “fair share” of taxes. Clinton would use the new money from rich folks to pay for “free” college tuition. For Sanders it would just go into the pot to pay for his $18 trillion in new spending.
The top one-fifth of all income earners currently pay over 84 percent of all income taxes. What is fair?
Sanders would increase the death tax and the payroll tax. He also wants to close corporate loopholes and tax Wall Street speculation. He wasn’t specific as to what he considers a loophole, but every investment, including new homes, is speculation. How must it be punished?
If we are going to punish all speculation how are we going to create the jobs necessary to rebuild the middle class? Perhaps Democrats do not consider jobs as part of their rebuilding effort.
O’Malley proudly noted that he raised taxes on millionaire households in Maryland by 14 percent. He was wrong. Actually he raised their tax rates by about 30 percent, from 4.75 percent to 6.25 percent. In Baltimore it rose to 9.3 percent.
The following year the number of millionaire households filing taxes in Maryland declined by 30 percent and the amount of taxes paid by them fell by 22 percent. Instead of raising an additional $106 million as promised the collections fell by $257 million.
It was O’Malley’s success with guns and taxes that turned Baltimore into the jewel of the Mid-Atlantic.
Did I mention that he has a nice smile?
Clinton promised to raise the minimum wage and pass the Paycheck Protection Act to provide equal pay for equal work.
It’s pretty bold for one who pays women less than men in her own office to demand that we pass a new law to get her to abide by the Equal Pay Act of 1963.
She also would demand more profit sharing for employees. I anxiously await her details. Do you suppose she will demand that employees share losses too?
While the candidates were bemoaning the devastation to “working families” it was left unsaid that the income disparity they seek to fix was made worse under President Barack Obama.
During the debate the Clinton campaign sent out this tweet:
"Strong economy? Thank a Democrat."
Which is it? A strong economy or an economy in the tank needing aggressive change? She doesn’t know.
If you would like to be added to John Linder’s distribution list please send your email address to: email@example.com or follow on Twitter: @linderje
TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.