Operation Epic Failure

I stopped my regular contributions to the Democratic National committee a couple of weeks ago. I had two reasons.

First, I wanted to let the DNC know that I didn’t want to get any more “scare you to death” messages to try to get me to send them more money.

Second, I HATED the incident in which a DNC responded to an angertainment-style message from a Republican with a profanity. The message, on the official DNC Twitter account, said something to the effect of “shut up you ugly [expletive].

I wanted to let the DNC know that I am not the sort of person who says that to someone, no matter how I may have been provoked. The profanity bothered me a lot, but it was also juvenile.

I keep saying, we have to be who we are. that is not who I am.

A couple of days ago, I found another, even better reason to0 cut off the DNC.

Ken Miller, the leader of the organization. oversaw the expenditure of nearly a billion dollars on the last election. He approved the spending of hundreds of millions for this and that and the other.

And yet, when it cam to figuring out why Democrats lost the election so badly, he decided to entrust the job to a part time volunteer who would do the work pro bono.

Here’s a quote from a story by Shane Goldmacher in the New York Times. (I plan to send a message to him with a link to this post saying he “buried the lead” — newspaper-speak for treating the most important news in the story like an afterthought.

He turned to Mr. (Paul) Rivera, a Democratic consultant who once worked in the Clinton White House, to spearhead the project. Mr. Rivera was an unusual pick: He had not worked on a presidential race since 2004. But he was an old, trusted friend of Mr. Martin’s who could bring an outsider’s eye. He took on the 2024 review as a part-time, unpaid project.

[ ME SHOUTING]

Part-time! Unpaid!

That’s all the importance you place on figuring out what the heck happened?

Are you [bleeping] kidding me? [Yeah, I might insert some real profanity here]

[END SHOUTING]

I think that anyone who is calling for Mr. Martin’s resignation can make a pretty good case for it.

I’m sure Mr. Martin is a nice guy with good intentions and all that. I’m confident he will land on his feet somewhere. But the failure to invest significant resources in an after-action report (autopsy, if you like) is an incomprehensible blunder.

He deserves to be terminated.

My two cents.

R