Make no mistake, the country has exceeded its tipping point and will never be the same again.
Whereas previous generations of Americans laid down their lives for our freedoms, this generation willingly gave theirs up at the voting booth last night. Americans gave up real rights, such as the right to religious liberty, and very likely our second amendment rights, in exchange for services masquerading as rights, such as the "right" to "free" birth control. In fact, exit polls suggest that Obama was successful in making abortion an issue this election, handily winning the single woman vote by huge margins, even though abortion was never part of Romney's platform or even on his to-do list.…
Article comments
26 - El Bicho
some conservatives see the loss as a time for reflection. others like OA continue to wallow in denial.
27 - Igor
Hmmmm. Wonder what I said.
IMO the discussion someone was having back around #10+ was racism disguised as something kindler and gentler, like 'demographics'.
Can't we all just get along?
28 - Dr Dreadful
Igor, you're reading something into Clavos's #11 that isn't there, unless the tendency of Americans to classify everybody by "race" is itself racist.
29 - Doug Hunter
#28
An interesting question in itself. The mounds of demographic and racial data are pushed by liberals with the purpose of finding statistical differences which can be attributed to racism. If you bring up the idea of a truly colorblind society that does not even regard or ask about race you'll usually be accused of racism.
It's very strange and quite backwards to my logical mind, a colorblind society, equal treatment, lack of race consciousness is racism while special treatment, forced outcomes, racial bean counting is somehow the opposite... probably part of that amorphous 'social justice' concept that's floating out there.
30 - Dr Dreadful
The mounds of demographic and racial data are pushed by liberals with the purpose of finding statistical differences which can be attributed to racism.
It's more for the purpose of ensuring that racial groups aren't discriminated against, but I can see how getting things arse-about could be an upshot of the process.
The problem with classifying everything by race is that no system can catch everything. Working on HUD programs as I do, I encounter this sort of thing all the time. According to the federal government, there are only five races: White, Black, Asian, Native American and Pacific Islander. You end up doing things like categorizing people of Punjabi descent as "Asian" when genetically they're closer akin to Europeans. You can have a situation where a Sikh landlord is systematically discriminating against his Hmong tenants in favour of his Indian tenants, and unless someone says something you're never going to know because the database classifies everyone as "Asian".
Even more bizarre is the "ethnicity" classification under which you can be one of two things: Hispanic or non-Hispanic. That one's really helpful. My wife, for example, has Swiss-German, Nicaraguan, Puerto Rican, Spanish and French ancestry, so which is she?
31 - zingzing
"If you bring up the idea of a truly colorblind society that does not even regard or ask about race you'll usually be accused of racism."
well, it depends upon what you say about that idea, but you know that. you take a dim view of liberals and "social justice," so it's no suprise you see nothing but the dark possibilities. but remember that your point of view is not the entirety of the picture.
for example, your "forced outcomes" thing probably means you think minorities get an unfair leg up (right?). but if you look at it with your non-poo-face, it could also mean that the social traps certain groups of people are particularly vulnerable to are guarded by a safety net. you see a problem, you put in protections against that problem, because that problem does harm to a certain group of people, and that does harm to the society at large. we're all better off for these programs.
do you really think that because a program doesn't directly benefit you, it has no benefits to you at all? or am i reading too much into your comment?
32 - Doug Hunter
#30
Yes, it's kind of a blunt tool. I believe the blanket term 'black' has by far the most diversity, a Pygmy is not an Ethiopian is not and an Aborigine etc. etc. Asian is right up there. White Europeans are but one small branch of the human tree.
#31
I certainly take a dim view of "social justice", moreso when it applies to race, sex, all the protected classes. Individuals are individuals, you don't start with the assumption that all whites/men/protestants are privileged with perfect lives or that all minorities/women/etc have the opposite experience. You just don't treat people as groups, it's that simple. Without that consideration you don't need 'social justice' you just need plain old fashioned blind justice and the good old equal opportunity laws we've had on the books for decades (bring the hammer down on those afflicted with the 'isms').
There aren't alot of forced outcomes currently in the US as many don't stand up to judicial review. Quotas are out for the most part, certain contracting and procurement opportunities exist, but not a whole lot. I'd say the 'unfair leg up' minorities may get is somewhat less than the benefit I get for having honorably served (worked? I hate how all government work is called service... it's a dang job like everyone else has.) in the military... not much in total. That doesn't mean that changing out a supreme court justice or two and reelecting democrat majorities won't take us in that direction.
Everything the benefits society benefits me, it's nice not to get shot in the face when I walk outside by someone trying to feed their family or their drug habit. The 48% of the country that does not vote democrat has a stake in the future as well, I have kids who I want to have the best life possible as well. I don't believe getting people reliant on government service cradle to grave is going to move this country ahead. I don't think adding to the trillions we already borrowed from the kids' piggybank so we can kick back and enjoy life today at their expense is good policy. I think democrats don't have an idea to raise the tide and lift all boats they are fixated on equalizing us and the easiest target is the lowest common denominator.
If they did have an answer why didn't they use it in their bastions... Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago, etc.? Seriously, there were wards in Philly voting around 10,000 votes for Obama with about 50 for Romney. I'd be willing to bet crime and poverty are rampant there. How do they have this visceral fear and blame for Republicans for their situation when they've been in blue cities in blue states for generations? Look further at DC with the massive federal funding they get and it's still rife with crime and poverty... if they had an answer surely they would use it there... massive funding... massive education spending... an all democrat leadership in literally the heart of the nation. Hell, at the rates they're voting the people probably don't even know any Republicans, all they know is what they heard... which leads us back full circle to racism... sometimes it's easier for the leaders to point and shout racist than face their own failures.
If there wasn't such fear of the racist boogeyman, perhaps some people would realize that sprucing up the project and topping off the food stamp benefit card probably isn't as much incentive to get out of intergenerational poverty as say the Republican solution... jobs. Maybe, just maybe, the Republican message would appeal to more than 1 in 200 people in these places.
33 - Zingzing
The "republican solution... Jobs" is a promise they've broken. How many jobs bills did they propose? Anyway, again, you look at the dark side, the "cradle to the grave" stuff, I mean. Not that that doesn't exist. Some people are going to become addicted to that stuff, and some people abuse it. But some people, who never had a shot in this life, never got an education, never had any money to even think of getting one, never had a shot at anything but a minimum wage job, they actually need that stuff. Imagine what their lives would be if they didn't. Do you want our poorest starving or turning to crime? That our poorest can survive and have some hope of getting out of poverty through social programs is a great thing.
And at the same time, our middle class is surviving on just another teat, that of credit (which is a far more dangerous teat to suckle, at least when it comes to the overall health of our economy)... Most of that money from credit does not return into our economy in the same way that social program dollars do. Blaming the poor for our troubles, when it's our NATIONAL inability to live within our means is like slapping the mosquito on on your ankle wihile ignoring a vampire sucking at your neck.
But it's never our fault. It's always the weakest among us who would drag our "strong" nation down. It's the welfare queens, not those amongst us who fell for "too good to be true" mortgage deals. It's social programs that are dooming us, not the trillions we spend on meaningless wars. It's the unemployment benefits that we can't pay for, not the decade of ridiculous tax cuts for the "job creators" who have failed to create jobs.
We're so busy shifting the blame to anyone but ourselves. I'm cool, you're cool. It's those other people.
34 - Doug Hunter
#33
Proposed jobs bills.
A handful, they claim dozens but then can't trust politicians. Senate democrats control what gets to the floor there so they haven't even brought the bills or budgets the house passed up for debate. Of course, it's only Republicans that obstruct... hehe.
I didn't blame anyone. I asked you what was so successful about Democrat policies that got such resounding vote margins from the inner city. Again, DC is the absolute perfect example. They get massive government expenditures, they're at the heart of government jobs, they spend around $30,000 per student per year on education, and they have straight blue democrat governance. They also have sky high murder rates, sky high violent crime rates, poverty only behind AR and MS (whose cost of living is so far lower they're barely comparable), etc. The country would go bankrupt long before we could spend as much on services for the whole nation as we do in DC. It simply won't fix the problem, we have a shining example of that failure.
No blame, just an observation. Against the backdrop, I wonder why Republicans get 1 of 10 to 1 of 200 votes in these areas. The only reason I can fathom is the sheer scapegoating and demonization of the Republican party in the eyes of these largely minority groups by their own leaders and the powerful democrat political machine. I believe fear of racism is the trigger. Racism exists, but rural Mississippi dipshits are literally thousands of miles away with no political clout and zero influence in DC, or Detroit, or Philly, and the list goes on. Their democratic leadership is right in front of them and they're not doing a damn thing and yet they keep voting for them over and over and over. The definition of insanity IMO.
35 - Zingzing
"The definition of insanity IMO."
the other side is promoting idea of further cutting what help they do get (which, as you know, is barely subsistence-level). It would be insane to vote the other way. There's an underclass in nearly every democracy (find one without such an underclass, i challenge you).
Let's look at dc. What do you know? Violent crime is down by 50% since 1995. Property crime is down by 49.8% in the same time frame. Amazing. These people are insane? Maybe not. I dunno, dc was the first one I looked at. Detroit or Philly might hot show the same type of improvement. But it seems to me like you're working from cliches and assumptions, not reality.
36 - Zingzing
As for your link to jobs bills, just look at those names... You can't link to the actual bills from that site, but many of those look like total sophomoric bait. Instead of sending up job bills that had a chance in hell, they sent up "job bills," like all those "regulatory relief" and "energy tax relief" and "access to capital" acts that are just gussied up deregulation and tax relief to the rich schemes. Most of those are "jobs bills" about as much as my dick is a hammer. It won't do the job you asked it to do. (sorry.)
37 - Doug Hunter
#35
Crime is way down in the entire nation since the late 80's, red state, blue state, inner city, rural, everywhere. The per capita incarceration has spiked to triple the rate in that time period. Modern police are better at finding criminals and we're keeping 300% more of them in prison at any given time so they can't commit more crimes (and mentor more future criminals). I'm sure that helps.
Here's a link:
US Incarceration Rate *Note, this is per capita so the total increase in raw numbers would be even higher.
Over time is a tough comparison all around, technology and society tend to evolve and things get better in many ways. I'm aiming more at today.
Look, you're right. What you're saying is entirely logical, once people get government support they can't remember how they could ever exist without it and 'would be insane', i.e. never, vote Republican again. In fact, they will cling to it and never be without it... that's the problem... that's the trap. It's not even the dollar cost of these programs, it's the human cost of a wasted life scrimping by on welfare and food stamps in government housing maybe subsidized by someone on disability or SS with no hope and no future. Oh well, I guess we'll find out if more money redistribution can fix it. I just hope the country can afford it, if DC is any indication you get little bang for your buck.
Again, I'll rephrase the question so you get it. In light of the fact that DC gets gobs of federal spending, is in the core of government jobs, spends $30,000.00 per student per year on education (almost 3 times the national average), has a higher minimum wage, and pure D leadership at the helm are they so unsuccessful when compared to other urban areas? They're right near the top of the murder and violent crime and poverty stats. Why do they continue to blame R's for the problems as evidence by votes? If federal spending and education spending and government jobs and democratic policies worked so well, why isn't it evidenced in the testbed of DC where they get multiples of funding?
Cliches and assumptions? Bollocks. You obviously don't know me, granted I don't spend all my time here.
38 - Doug Hunter
#35
Very true. I didn't do alot to defend the list, just pointed out the claim. There definitely is a budget in there though.
39 - Doug Hunter
I'm headed off for awhile Zing, appreciate the exchange. My gathering is that federal spending is only slightly more successful at fixing the root of poverty as tax cuts are for creating jobs. Neither occurs without a willing mind and an a practical opportunity.
40 - Zingzing
"What you're saying is entirely logical, once people get government support they can't remember how they could ever exist without it and 'would be insane'."
How do the rich feel when their shit might be cut off? I worry a lot less about the rich, how about you? Who can afford it more, and what might the social consequences be? I'd rather hit those that can take a hit.
"I'm headed off for awhile Zing, appreciate the exchange."
Godspeed, sir. It was testy, but civil, which is what I hope for in the political discourse over the next four years (or two if I'm being realistic).
41 - Clavos
Nice discussion, gents. Enjoyed reading it.
42 - Dr Dreadful
Probably best that it ends now before you-know-who shows up with more pearls of white supremacist wisdom.
He can sniff out a conversation about race from 11 miles away, that one.
:-)
43 - Dan
Thank you for the introduction Dreadful.
Just as Charles Darwin predicted American exceptionalism based on the "genetic endowments" of those "adventuresome" and "individualistic" whites who emigrated from Europe, the racial polarization seen this last election has a genetic component as well.
When Ted Kennedy and liberal Democrats abandoned the founders intentions by expanding immigration in favor of non-white peoples in 1965, whites were first told that the racial composition of the population would not be changed. As that lie ultimately became exposed, the new lie was that race is a trivial thing, and that the newcomers desired to live the same political philosophy as traditional white Americans. Nothing to fear here!
Now that the election is decided, libs are crowing about demographic destiny, and the need for the Republican party to abandon the traditional conservative principles of government that enabled exceptionalism.
prepare for decline, resentment, and austerity.
44 - Dr Dreadful
Dan, you made it! Took you a while, but welcome. :-)
As usual, though, you're viewing everything distorted through the lens of your favourite hobby horse.
This discussion isn't about convincing the GOP to "abandon the traditional conservative principles of government" (we don't need another Democratic Party, we've already got one). Those principles have nothing to do with what colour your skin is or what particular intricate little twists a certain acidic molecule within the nuclei of your cells takes. The key is to sell the message to new demographics without compromising your basic principles. It can be done: up until not so very long ago, for instance, African-Americans almost unanimously supported the Republican Party.
BTW, Charles Darwin was a product of his time and shared many of his contemporaries' preconceptions about the superiority of Europeans, but he knew nothing of genetics, a term coined by William Bateson 40 years after his death. So quite where you got the notion of him predicting American exceptionalism based on "genetic endowments", I don't know.
45 - Igor
@28-Dr D:
Igor, you're reading something into Clavos's #11 that isn't there, unless the tendency of Americans to classify everybody by "race" is itself racist.
Well, isn't it?
46 - Igor
People are invited to watch the marvelous PBS documentary "What Darwin Didn't Know" being reprised on PBS this week (IIRC it's 2 hours). It describes the advent of DNA, etc., and other considerations, and is absolutely fascinating.
47 - Dr Dreadful
Sounds very interesting, Igor. I'll set my DVR. Thanks.
48 - Dr Dreadful
Hmm. Doesn't seem to be on my local PBS station's schedule. Unless it's already aired.
49 - Igor
"What Darwin Didn't Know" is a NOVA episode that first aired 3 years ago, so it comes around in the local rotation as your station sees fit. But you can Web Watch it at: PBS NOVA Darwin. I caught it in the primetime airing at 8PM then again at 4AM in the morning. You can also probably BT it at the MVGROUP file list.
Science documentaries have become so good and so engaging that it's a wonder that anyone watches fictional stories anymore.
Frankly, commercial TV is so bad that IMO it should be revoked. All the commercial stations should have their licenses revoked (they are all in violation of the "public interest" clause of the FCC charter) and turned over to non-commercial subscription stations and colleges and high-schools. Then the airwaves would truly become the Public University Of the Air, as envisioned by Armstrong when he invented FM, and Philo Farnsworth when he invented TV. What a wonderful thing that would be. And then the population would not be endlessly trained to absorb advertisements and to watch fictional stories told by practised liars, both designed to make gullible fools of formerly free citizens.
50 - Dan
"Dan, you made it! Took you a while, but welcome. :-)"---Dreadful
Thank you, I haven't checked in for a while. Happy Thanksgiving to you and family.
"The key is to sell the message to new demographics without compromising your basic principles. It can be done: up until not so very long ago, for instance, African-Americans almost unanimously supported the Republican Party."---Dreadful
True, but back then Democrats had been the party of segregation for several decades, and Jim Crow, so a Conservative message of limited government and equal rights appealed to them. Sadly, the great majority of blacks now favor racial discrimination from their politicians. As long as it is against whites.
My point was a much larger one, and that is that there is very likely a genetic component to philosophical attitudes of governance that differs within races, but more substantially, between races.
Simplified, it could be related to attitudes of individualism vs. socialism.
One need only to look at the imminent financial collapse of some major, once thriving cities that through "white flight" fell into control by non-whites as examples. California's fiscal difficulties since they have been "browned" serves as another. For a truly controlled experiment, the Country of Liberia comes to mind. Founded by freed American slaves, it has ostensibly the same representative republic government model as the US, but has had a tragic, but predictable history of corruption and misery. (predictable for those realists who abstain from the social fantasy of egalitarianism).
"Charles Darwin was a product of his time and shared many of his contemporaries' preconceptions about the superiority of Europeans, but he knew nothing of genetics..."---Dreadful
The developmental theory of heredity that Darwin formulated he called "Pangenesis".
51 - Igor
@50-Dan: your race-based cultural differentiation fails. Cities failed because of vicious exploitation by their rulers, who had too much power and were too crooked.
Abuse of power and crookedness are not specific to any 'race', whatever a 'race' is.