I was very interested to see the reaction of many Republicans to the over-the-top behavior of the extreme right in the wake of the assassination of abortion doctor George Tiller earlier this week. On The Next Right they quickly removed an offensive article, and comments had loudly condemned the author. On Little Green Footballs they posted a substantial article condemning commenters and posters on several other right-leaning blogs for their remarks about Tiller. These reactions give a clear impression that more and more mainstream Republicans are fed up with the fanaticism of the religious right, sickened by their behavior over the Tiller issue and just about ready to give them the boot.
Is it possible that this incident is the straw which finally broke the camel's back and has created an irreparable rift between rational conservatives and the extremists of the religious right? Even Republicans who are socially conservative seem to have had enough of the extremist rhetoric and support for violence coming from people like Fred Phelps and Randall Terry. They seem to have awakened to the fact that the fanaticism and terrorism they oppose in the Islamic world is not much different from the beliefs held by some they considered allies.
As Barry Goldwater pointed out many years ago, the one thing which Republicans ought to be extreme about is liberty, and on all other issues they ought to be rational and pragmatic. Maybe that lesson, which he spent decades trying to teach with his own actions, is finally sinking in.
The obsession with legislating morality and with opposition to abortion and gay rights is really not part of the core Republican agenda. These ideas, and the fanaticism they inspire, were brought into the party through its alliance in the post-Reagan era with religious conservatives. Historically, Republicans have had a laissez-faire attitude, not just on the economy, but also on moral issues. Republicans used to be dispassionate, leaving moral decisions in the hands of individuals and keeping government out of the picture. It seems like the pendulum might be swinging back in that direction.
As Abraham Lincoln said many years ago, our nation and by extension, the Republican Party, was "conceived in liberty" and that idea of individual liberty ought to be the basis of every policy and every decision which Republicans make. There is very little question that abortion is a sin, but shouldn't that sin be a matter of personal responsibility, to be resolved between the individual and his or her soul and church and god? Once you get government involved, a change in policy or administration could as easily mean forced abortion and sterilization, as you have in China, as it could mean protecting unborn fetuses. Putting such personal decisions in the hands of government can only work out badly when there is the potential to go to either extreme.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - El Bicho
Very good piece. I hope the answer to your question is yes.
2 - Lumpy
the real question is whether repiblicans who are desperate for votes will still care about the ugliness the tiller killing exposed.
my belief is that for every vote they get from the religious right they lose one moderate and one libertarian.
3 - Glenn Contrarian
Very good article, Dave...and I agree wholeheartedly that the Republican party's hoped-for rejection of extremism and violent rhetoric is the only hope they have to avoid following the path of the Whigs. Remember, I've said before I do NOT want a one-party country, even if that party is the Democrats.
But there is one important and unanswered question - are you going to be able to avoid being canned by Rush Limbaugh?
4 - Dave Nalle
What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with it? He's not one of the extremists. He's an entertainer. He'll go along with whatever the predominant message is.
Dave
5 - Glenn Contrarian
If the political world operated the way it's supposed to, you'd be right.
But it doesn't work that way - at least not for the time being in the Republican Party - because the Republican who holds sway over the opinions of the greatest number of other Republicans...is Rush.
You can call him an entertainer all you want, but in the real world (at least for the time being) you know very well that he has a greater influence over the Republican party than any other single human being.
And that's pretty sad.
6 - Jeannie Danna
What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with it?
He has everything to do with it...Whether you want to admit it or not that SOB has become the face of both the Republicans and the Conservatives. He is bringing out the lowest of the low, here and in the real world!
7 - Arch Conservative
Speaking as a former Republican who'd rejoin the part if they started exhibiting financial sanity and stopped taking people like John McCain seriously, I think it's hard for most Repubs/conservatives to reconcile their very passionate feelings for what George Tiller did during his with his murder.
I nor any other Repub/conservative I know do not personally approve of what happened to Tiller. None of us wish to live in a society where people routinely take the law into their own hands. It's just that we viewed him as such an evil man that it's hard to muster up enough real concern over his murder to condemn it.
I really hate that Nalle is tiptoeing around the idea that so many diehard leftist moonbats like to throw out there. That being the ridiculous notion that the more radicalized Christians in this nation are somehow on par with regard to the threat they pose to the world, with Islamic terrorists the world over.
I'm not saying there is no reason to be concerned about our own Jesus fundies but anyone who does even a cursory gathering of evidence will see what an absurd idea this is.
As far as accepting my conservative values as just personal. That's fine to a point. Sooner or later someone's personal values eventually get extrapolated to societal values and ultimately law and I while I can certainly sympathize with the very traumatic decision some women make in choosing abortion, I do not wish to live in a society where abortion is used as birth control and viewed as cavalierly as getting the oil changed in one's car.
8 - roger nowosielski
"I nor any other Repub/conservative I know do not personally approve of what happened to Tiller."
It seems you're changing your tune, Archie. Only two days ago you were overjoyed. Is it because you came awfully close to being ostracized? I'd rather see the old Archie, sticking to his guns like the good old H&C.
Are you getting softer now in you old age?
9 - Jeannie Danna
#7(I nor any other Repub/conservative I know do not personally approve of what happened to Tiller. None of us wish to live in a society where people routinely take the law into their own hands. It's just that we viewed him as such an evil man that it's hard to muster up enough real concern over his murder to condemn it.) Why did you view Dr. Tiller as such an evil man and who has given you the authority to decide what a woman, man and Doctor decide to do is evil? Yes, #7 there are also men involved in the decisions to terminate pregnancy.
10 - Jeannie Danna
I have one question here for Dave or anyone that can answer it.
Who sponsor's this "little football" web page? Is it a college paper?
When I first clicked on it I thought it was Ann Coulter's blog.
11 - Jordan Richardson
Arch, I hate to keep bringing this up but I'd really like to know what your thoughts are.
You blame Dr. Tiller and call him "evil." But what of those who decide, in the first place with full legal support in the United States of America, to have an abortion? Why is your ire not directed at those who have chosen to "recruit" the services of Dr. Tiller? Dr. Tiller was, like soldiers in Iraq, following the orders of his occupation. He was a gynecologist. He was not a "baby killer," he was a doctor. Abortion is one of the parts of his occupation, in this case "late-term abortion" was a key component, but he didn't coerce women to use his "services." They chose to do so on their own accord.
Going by your logic, wouldn't the woman who requested the abortion be the real murderer? Aren't they to blame?
You say yourself that the women are in a "traumatic position," but you have no sympathy for Dr. Tiller or his staff or, judging by your cruel commentary over the past days, his family. Why are those who choose abortion in the first place exempt from your rage? Why are they making a "traumatic decision," in your opinion, as opposed to being murderous hags?
12 - roger nowosielski
I find it very odd indeed that it's only men who are the most vocal opponents of abortion.
Is it perchance that they still entertain the illusion they they can keep women barefoot and pregnant?
13 - Jeannie Danna
read what the post is saying about Rush Wishful thinking on their part...:)
14 - Jordan Richardson
I think you're on to something there, Roger. I think aggressive male roles play into sexual/reproductive politics a whole lot, both with the abortion discussion and with homosexual marriage.
It does tend to fall into stereotypical patterns, sadly, and there are many men who have no problem assuming those roles. Two women making out can be "hot," but two guys getting married is an abomination. I find abortion interesting in that regard too and I think Arch is inadvertently (maybe) playing the same hand here. He's attacking the male doctor performing the abortions but reserves rather soft rhetoric ("traumatic choices") for the females. I think he finds it easier to criticize the Evil Male, which is why I keep pursuing the question. I think it comes from a desire to, as you say, maintain this illusion of female roles.
On another level, I begin to notice males attacking powerful and prominent females with tremendous force. This isn't confined to the Right Wing, of course, but if one looks at recent processes in political history, it's very easy to find a lot of it going on.
Hillary Clinton, for instance, was bashed and criticized with sexist rhetoric like "holding on to the apron strings" and the like. Judge Sotomayor (sp?) became "fat" (someone around here called her fat recently, but my memory escapes me as to who it was....) and "emotional." And so forth.
Sarah Palin, conversely, was attractive (at least according to Mitt) but never really viewed as more than some sort of "attack dog." Woof.
A lot of what happens in politics, especially in these sort of social debates, often winds up somewhere in the middle of gender politics.
15 - Jeannie Danna
The other day there was a nice thread going on between the women about inner beauty and one of these clowns actually went over to say they should all get boob jobs! That was the message wasn't it?
16 - Jeannie Danna
I like your mind Jordan!
17 - roger nowosielski
You're perfectly right, Jordan, especially as regards vicious attacks on Hillary.
Remember the comments about her wearing the pants and suit to cover her "chicken legs and ankles"?
Tammy Wynette comes to mind, "Stand By Your Man." She went against the grain, sort of, when she said she wasn't going to stay home and bake cookies, and she braved the Clinton scandal rather well.
Think of Barbara Bush, on the other hand. A perfect image for the average American male.
18 - roger nowosielski
Jordan is first-class, Jeannie. Too bad not enough of them.
19 - Jeannie Danna
You know I have to make an observation here because, well, I wouldn't be me if I kept my mouth shut.:)
Why do most Conservative/Republican women seem to wear only dresses and skirts on TV? Is this a wish to please their men or is it a subtle code?
20 - roger nowosielski
To tell you the truth, I kind of liked Laura (Bush). I think she was a cut above.
In fact, I even fantasized about her (in my first novel).
21 - Jeannie Danna
I think I have been attacked here because I also show a picture of myself. Shallow thinkers have a way of judging people based on their looks! I don't care because Rick loves me and that's all that really matters in my life...:)
22 - Jeannie Danna
Well Roger I have to take a break... It was nice talking with you and reading what Jordan wrote. Say hello to Cindy for me..:) and go read my article! "blatant self-promotion!"
23 - roger nowosielski
You look just fine, Jeannie. I'd love to meet you in person.
24 - Clavos
Why do most Conservative/Republican women seem to wear only dresses and skirts on TV?
Umm. Maybe because dresses and skirts are "conservative" clothing?
But maybe not. You hardly ever see a conservative male wearing a dress or skirt on TV.
25 - Jordan Richardson
I notice they try to "sex up" the appearance of a good portion of the women on FOX. Lots of heavily-make-up'd blondes, lots of short skirts with side shots, etc. It's pretty hot stuff with the sound off, actually.