Democrats and libs: sucks being them

The Caucus, the politics and government blog of my local newspaper of record, the New York Times, has a post today on the shifting political environment Dems are suddenly facing. The first paragraph tells all:

President Obama awoke on Wednesday to a dispiriting reality: Less than a year after taking office on the strength of a historic Democratic sweep, his party is facing a shifting and perilous political environment that could have big implications for this year’s midterm elections and his own agenda.

This reality sandwich presented itself first in the unprecedented party switch toward the end of December of Parker Griffith, representative of Alabama. Not too often that a member of the majority party switches to the minority. This news was followed up yesterday by the announcement that Byron Dorgan, senator from North Dakota, would rather retire than fight the uphill battle toward reelection, and then again this morning by the news that Christopher "Sweetheart Deal" Dodd planned not to seek reelection. The rats have begun to abandon ship.

And the president is surprised? Well, let's think about this. A year ago, Democrat politicians and liberal commentators were both celebrating the certain death of the Republican party. "It's our turn," the illustrious Speaker of the House shouted out from the top of the Capitol dome in Giddyspeak, her native language. Indeed, the picture looked rosy for blue staters. So what could possibly have happened between then and now to sour the deal?

Maybe—just maybe—the plan to turn one sixth of the economy over to the federal government in the name of health care reform isn't sitting that well with the electorate. Especially since the entire deal was consummated in dark, smoke-filled rooms rather than in the plain light of CSPAN, as Obama promised during the campaign. And maybe the American people aren't terribly delighted—and certainly New Yorkers aren't—that the trial of the mastermind of 9/11 will take place in a civilian court rather than in the military tribunal every criminal of war deserves. Or that the most recently captured would-be murderer of innocent civilians, Umar Farouk Abdul Muttalib, was read his Miranda rights rather than taken into custody by the CIA or other agencies that could find out about other terrorist plots that may be in the hopper.

So that its readers don't slink off in despair, the Times does throw them a bone, in the soothing words of David Axelrod, who observes “There’s not an election tomorrow. There’s not an election next week. There’s not an election for 11 months.” If Axelrod had half the brains liberals think he did, he'd be wishing there were an election tomorrow. The results wouldn't be nearly as bleak as the shellacking Dems can look forward to this coming November.