Karl Rove worked towards a permanent Republican majority. His work may have helped create a permanent Democratic majority.
One wonders just how long it will be before the Republican party realizes that its scorched-earth, win-whatever-it-takes political tactics are consigning the party to electoral marginalization. It‘s been noted many times by moderate and left-wing pundits that the more the Republican leadership panders to the conservative base, the more moderates they alienate from the Republican party.…
Article comments
26 - Jeannie Danna
While many on the left are frustrated with SOME of Obama's decisions, the VAST majority are happy with him OVERALL.
YES!
27 - m ark
While many on the left are frustrated with SOME of Obama's decisions, the VAST majority are happy with him OVERALL.
Yes. And it's a tyrannical majority backing Statist solutions.
28 - Glenn Contrarian
Clavos #17 - you got some 'splainin to do...!
If you're right about that, then the article is completely off base, because, as the polls show, the ranks of self-identified conservatives are growing rapidly, far more so than the self-styled liberal group.
Are you really, really sure about that? You see that 40% of Americans are conservative in ONE poll, and that's a sign that they're growing rapidly?
Better check around, friend.
I think the Seattle PI put it best: "the number of people who describe themselves as very or somewhat conservative has actually grown from 53 percent to 59 percent. In fact since 2002, the very/mostly conservative segment has held remarkably steady around 60 percent."
That's actually not far off what Rush Limbaugh stated in August of last year: "Twenty-seven percent said they were somewhat liberal, and 9% said they were very liberal. That's a total of 36% to 60. Sixty percent conservative, 30% liberal. Question D3, Battleground Poll, five days ago. Three percent of Americans did not know or refused to answer."
In the same article, Rush also pointed out something else that was interesting: "The percentage of Americans who define themselves as 'somewhat liberal' or 'very liberal' has always been puny. In thirteen straight polls, this percentage has never been higher than 38% (June 2004) and it has usually been much lower. The gap between self-defined conservatives and self-defined liberals has been as high as thirty percentage points and as low as twenty-one percentage points. What does that translate into in electoral politics? If conservative presidential candidates simply got all the conservative votes -- if virtually all moderate voters, uncommitted voters, and liberal voters went for the liberal candidate -- then the conservative candidates would win a landslide bigger than Ronald Reagan in 1988."
Well, the moderates DID break strongly for Obama, and what happened?
Conservatives were historically at 60%, and now they're at 40% - but the number of liberals shrank too! What happened? Two different polls, asking questions in different ways...but in any case the growing number of moderates, even if they're not crazy about liberal policies, are increasingly anti-conservative because the conservatives are (rightly or wrongly) increasingly associated with prejudice, extremism, and domestic terrorism.
29 - Jeannie Danna
m ark, President Obama does not want to be King. He just wants to clean this mess up that he was left with...please don't be offended by the word mess, anybody here, I don't know what else to call it.
30 - m ark
He just wants to clean this mess up that he was left with...
Jeannie, imo were this true then he'd be unwinding the powers of government that the last administration and congress put in place.
31 - Clavos
Jeannie, imo were this true then he'd be unwinding the powers of government that the last administration and congress put in place.
AND cutting spending way back, when in fact he's spending at levels GWB never even contemplated.
32 - Jordan Richardson
GWB didn't really contemplate anything, dude.
33 - roger nowosielski
#27:
"Yes. And it's a tyrannical majority backing Statist solutions."
I don't see why you should be complaining, Mark. Isn't that the road to socialism?
And then again, take # 30:
"imo were this true then he'd be unwinding the powers of government that the last administration and congress put in place."
Wasn't it only a while ago that we all bitched about Wall Street excesses and Big Business running rampant or like a loose cannon? And weren't the reasons, some have though, because we allowed that to happen, because of what some thought was a collusion between Big Business and government?
So what are we arguing about now? To unwind the powers of the government so that corporations would have their way, just like before? Or to put a reign on them when reign is needed?
You can't have it both ways, Mark. You've got to choose sides. Yes, we are caught between the rock and the hard place. So what else is new? In all of your criticism, I don't see even a semblance of a solution.
34 - m ark
You can't have it both ways, Mark. You've got to choose sides. Yes, we are caught between the rock and the hard place. So what else is new?
You offer a false forced choice,Rog.
In all of your criticism, I don't see even a semblance of a solution.
The solution will emerge through more or less anarchic experimentation which is going on here and there. As I've claimed before in comments, the way forward demands a new motive for production.
35 - Glenn Contrarian
Roger and M ark -
When it comes to 'unwinding' what the last administration did, that would be referring to the creation of the 'unitary executive', GWB's propensity to issue executive orders so he wouldn't have to bother with the troublesome route of legislation and the rule of law.
What Obama IS doing, is increasing regulation where it is NEEDED, and trying to enforce regulations that were NOT enforced under Bush. This is called 'leadership'.
I've got my own disagreements with Obama...but none can argue that he is steamrolling the minority party as Bush certainly did. Obama's striven for bipartisanship at every turn - and I must admit I hope the exception to the rule of his bipartisan efforts will be the passage of Universal Health Care...or at least an option to purchase such a government-funded plan.
36 - Clavos
GWB didn't really contemplate anything, dude.
I'm not a "dude."
37 - Jordan Richardson
Begging your pardon, sir.
38 - Cindy
36 - Clav
Ha! That is exactly what my mom told me when I called her that (awhile back)! Only her preface was: "I am your mother"...
39 - roger nowosielski
"the way forward demands a new motive for production."
I'm afraid then that you'll have to invent the wheel. Neither you nor I nor anyone alive has even the germ of an idea as to what that might be. So to speak in such grandiose, high-sounding terms is not only vacuous but a pinnacle of ideology.
I'm afraid that you're thinking is clouded by your desire to see the world in a certain way - eventually leading to a withering of the state, am I not right? - which prevents you from examining the here and now. The goals you feverishly pursue blind you to the sense of reality.
In my case - just to highlight the contrast - I'm more bewitched by certain values - like freedom, equality, and universal justice (well accepting the idea that we might have a significant difference of opinion as regards these things and their exact applicability.) And those things are the most important items in my itinerary and line of vision;
So our disagreement is in essence what it has always been. I believe that the capitalist system, when properly modified, can deliver these things, and that's all I care about.
40 - m ar k
Rog, #39 - I view it as a very practical problem and base my notions on observations of a real world.
Yes, our disagreement remains what it has been. Tweak capitalism as you will, production rationalized by maximizing profit will result in some form of slavery, inequality and selective justice.
PS I've got a friend who could come up with a ceremony for that 'bewitched' thing.
41 - Cindy
Speaking of vacuous pinnacles of ideology...in the cult of domination, it's all blurry vision--whether by beer or history books.
What bread and circus is to one portion of society, smoke and mirrors is to another.
42 - roger nowosielski
I already argued here and elsewhere that I don't regard economic equality as the end all and be all, and certainly not the basis of a more comprehensive concept of human equality which is embedded in their being persons. In fact, economic inequality might be reflective of some undeniable individual variations (though they don't have to because we are free to choose what we will), and to deny the existence of these variations is to deny reality. And in light of that, any system that would deny the individual the freedom in the economic sphere would be just as coercive as anything else. Opportunities must about, in every area of human endeavor - that's the key.
As to "form of slavery" you speak of, I think you're still overly enamored with Marxist terminology. Re-read Horace Mungin's article - an expression of faith, if you will - to the effect that we're all moving, slowly but surely, towards universal justice. I admit it's a long road, and that goal may never be reached in the ultimate sense. Still, it's a journey and perhaps that's most that can be said for it. The importance of ideals is to aim at them; reaching them is another matter.
I have no problem with the idea that alternative practices emerge as different situations arise; but I'm not going to be "bewitched" (now, that's the right use of the term) by such empty phrases as "new motive of production." To be more convincing on that score, you've got to give me something I can chew on. At this point, it's nothing but a slogan.
PS: My use of "bewitch" in the first instance was not the happiest expression. "Enamored" might be a better term, especially since I, too, accused you of being enamored. And this makes us even.
43 - Cindy
What do you think Roger, still think he's a Marxist?
(I'll check back in another 6 months.)
44 - roger nowosielski
PS: "opportunities must abound . . ."
45 - mar k
Rog, as you point out if only parenthetically, economic inequality is a matter of choice - and is not joined at the hip with variation. Thus, poverty amidst wealth is unnecessary...except these days as a consequence of capitalism.
we're all moving, slowly but surely, towards universal justice...
I've already given my view on this 'directionality'. I add only that, arguably, injustice has steadily increased world-wide for generations
The importance of ideals is to aim at them; reaching them is another matter.
bah. The importance of ideals is getting the hungry fed.
46 - roger nowosielski
Ideals had specific context here, in relation to justice.
As to elimination of poverty, we should be clear on the context - the world, Latin America, or the USA?
Poverty amidst wealth? Relative poverty or poverty of some other kind? Yes, it's unnecessary, but then again, you can't lay it all at the feet of the capitalist system. You're dealing with corrupted governments, dictators, and the worst scum on earth.
Whether it is the consequence only of capitalism is also debatable. You're ignoring all other factors.
And I'd definitely disagree with you as to directionality of progress - unless your measure here in strictly economic terms. But I am going to insist again that economic equality does not figure high on my hierarchy of values - although there ought to be limits to wealth accumulation and greed. To insist on that as a precondition of a happy society is not only unrealistic but dreary. None of us are alike; we all have our strengths and weaknesses. What you value may not at all be what I value, and I like it like that. Plurality and diversity are far more important to me than economic equality. I don't envy any man, and I'm sorry for you if you an envious type. And as long as opportunities abound for people to excel in whatever they want to excel, that's the key.
As to the minimum living standards, yes, I do believe in that. So if the world at large is the area of your concern, definitely we've got a long way to go. As for the good ole USA, I don't believe poverty is the main problem. I can think of education as being more important.
To be continued . . .
47 - Dave Nalle
When it comes to 'unwinding' what the last administration did, that would be referring to the creation of the 'unitary executive', GWB's propensity to issue executive orders so he wouldn't have to bother with the troublesome route of legislation and the rule of law.
If that's your main complaint about the Bush era then you're part of the problem, not part of the solution. How about pulling out of Iraq AND Afghanistan? How about repealing PATRIOT I and II? How about an end to attempts to force Real ID on the states? How about repealing FISA rather than expanding it even further? How about shutting down DHS?
These are things Obama would do if he were serious about "change," but he's not and he won't.
Dave
48 - Silas Kain
Hmm, interesting points to ponder. The way I see it, Democrats have usurped core GOP issues and made them their own such as gay rights. The problem I see is that moderate members of the GOP have been left out in the cold because of the sheer wealth of the Far Right elite. We fail to realize that the uberconservative engines of the GOP are driven with millions of dollars taken from "donations". Prop 8 is the classic example. Regardless of the outcome, the bottom line is that Mormon machinery played the pivotal role. How easy it is for the uberconservatives to launder cash out of the church coffers and into political machinery " all in the name of their God.
Think about it. 50 years ago hospitals were funded and operated by religious institutions. The offerings of the masses were generating good works in every corner of American life. And that's how it should be if you don't have to pay taxes. Religious operatives are now funneling cash into the political process. If that's how they want to play it then it's time for the churches to pay taxes. Imagine the religious having to pay taxes " they may just go back to health care. Anybody catch the point I am trying to make here?
49 - roger nowosielski
Interesting take, Silas. Forget the Prop 8 case and the Mormon machinery. Do you have other examples in mind?
50 - Joe Brafford
I have alternative reasons why the conservative philosophy is disappearing and may not recover:
Out-of-wedlock birth rate is approaching 40%
Divorce rate is around 50%
Premarital sex rate is at least 75% for teens, 90% overall
Around 30% of children live in single parent families
High school graduation rate is less than 80% and in places like Detroit, Cleveland and many other cities, it is less than 60%
The US has more people in prison than any other country, the most violent nation in the first world, 76% of the world’s serial killers
About 20-25% of Americans have some form of sexually transmitted disease
One in seven adults lack the literacy skills to read something as simple as a print ad or as complex as a ballot
About 8.3 percent of all persons age 12 and over are involved in use of illegal drugs or the non-medical use of prescription drugs.
Core values are disappearing (contraception is encouraged and abortion is acceptable, even the disgusting late term ones performed by the likes of Dr Tiller)
Traditional marriage is disappearing while gay marriage is praised and pursed, shouldn’t polygamy be legal as well?
Respect for authority is disappearing, personal responsibility, self control and accountability are disappearing
Care to guess which group (conservatives or liberals) are contributing the most to these facts?
51 - Clavos
shouldn’t polygamy be legal as well?
Absolutely. The state has no business regulating marital arrangements -- of any kind.
52 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
If you don't think there's been a lot of change already, then you haven't been paying attention.
What Obama is doing is governing from the center. That's why much of what he is doing is angering the left, but he's giving us enough that we won't choose someone else over him.
Likewise, despite what conservative pundits are claiming, he's striving hard enough to be bipartisan that he will attract many moderates who would otherwise vote Republican.
Yes, he inherited the 'unitary executive', a presidency stronger than at any time in history save perhaps that of Wilson in WW1. It's hard for any man, no matter how well-meaning, to give up power that he holds in his hands. Obama might not be able to do so, but can you honestly say that ANY of the Republican candidates would have done so?
Certainly not. Obama might still, but they would never have done so.
He's been in office five whole months - not even half a year - but you've been judging him almost that entire time. That's like judging a chef by the way his lump of dough looks before he's even put it in the oven.
53 - Arch Conservative
What Obama is doing is governing from the center.
Oh is that what he's doing? I thought he was being his arrogant, pompous self and assuming that he not only has all the answers, which we mere mortals cannot possibly comprehend, but he can easily implement them at will.
In reality he's nothing but a light weight political hack arrogant dickhead Marxist fuckwit who's never been told "no" in his life and whose ego has been so coddled by the mainstream media that he has bought into the messiah mythology that has been spun about him.
Circumstances being that, he is destined to go down in a blaze of media created glory as one of our nation's worst presidents. If I haven't been exactly clear about how I feel about this fraud let me put it this way....if i was walking down the street and I saw King Barry on the other side, and he was on fire, I wouldn't even cross the street to piss on him to put the fire out.
1/20/13
54 - Arch Conservative
"He's been in office five whole months - not even half a year - but you've been judging him almost that entire time. That's like judging a chef by the way his lump of dough looks before he's even put it in the oven."
Yeah and when the German people were getting familiar with Hitler in 1933 they were thinking "hey this guy's pretty good."
55 - Glenn Contrarian
DAVE!
Remember how you castigated me about one of my former articles for (1) pointing out quite correctly that the Nazis used something called "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" which had MORE constraint and oversight than the Bush administration's program did, and (2) you were insulted that I referred to Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld as 'chickenhawks', which term refers to armchair generals who served little or no time in the military?
Remember how in my article I specifically stated that I was NOT comparing the Bush administration to the Nazis, but was only pointing out that one similarity, and that I used NO insulting statements other than 'chickenhawks'...which term is the ONLY insulting name I have EVER used on blogcritics?
But despite the no-comparison disclaimer I included, and despite the only-insult-ever fact...YOU WERE SO OFFENDED!
Remember how I told you that your 'offense' would come back to you? Check out Arch-Con's comments #53 and #54, and compare them to my oh-so-offensive statements!
If my (1) proven-true statement about EIP with a no-comparison disclaimer and (2) one-time EVER use of an insulting (and VERY accurate) name deserved your moral outrage, then what do Arch-Con's remarks warrant?
56 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
I'll answer ahead of time for you - if I were you, I'd let Arch-Con be, because he used repugnant language containing petty, puerile accusations that are obviously (even to most conservatives) false. I say let him be, because if nothing else his post contains classic examples of the willful ignorance of the far-right wing, just as some others on BC provide examples of the willful ignorance of the far-left wing.
But if you do so, then where does that leave you for castigating me about using obviously FAR less offensive - and completely accurate - language?
57 - Dave Nalle
Glenn, the fact that Archie is an idiot doesn't actually excuse you from similarly dumb statements. That's not the way this works. His offensive statements are offensive. So are yours. One doesn't balance out or correct the other.
However, we generally ignore Archie's Godwinisms and other goofy statements because no one begins to take him seriously. You should feel complimented that we take you seriously enough to complain.
Dave
58 - Glenn Contrarian
I do indeed feel complimented that you take me seriously enough to complain.
But to say that my statements were 'similarly dumb'? No offense, Dave, but you know better than that.
59 - Arch Conservative
No one's taking me seriously. That's great. While you're at it don't take Eight Ball Barry's government health care seriously, or cap and trade, or his lack of a backbone in dealing with Iran and N. Korea.
I'm just a guy with a keyboard. The amount of influence I have over the life I have anyone reading any of my posts is nil. However the amount of influence King Barry has over your lives is far from nil. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, I find it uniquely disturbing that so many are still cheerleading him with such zeal.
His solution to everything is more government spending and more government power over our lives and then his cultists have the audacity to be offended when the S word is used.
Barack Hussein Obama is quite simply the biggest joke that was ever played on this nation and the fact that so many are still so ardently singing his praises like a giddy pubescent Paris Hilton worshipping 14 year old girl just proves that you can't fix stupid.
[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor] Nalle, while you may not appreciate any posts in which I take more dramatic liberties I think you and I are on the same basic page when it comes to King Barry.
Leaving out all of the colorful language I think you have just as much resentment for this man as he needlessly and wastefully spends trillion of dollars, as he attacks the basics of capitalism which led this nation prosperity and I'm sure that Dave recognizes the irony in the fact that Bush was so often accused of fear mongering yet Barry and his side of the aisle have been engaging in it nonstop since he took office both on the economy and now on health care.
We've been told that you and you family will get some deadly disease tomorrow and you need Barrycare to cope with it. We were promised transparency. What we got instead was a president employing intense fear mongering to ram his radical leftist agenda through Congress without providing any time for scrutiny or debate by the American people. Danger Will Robinson... it's government health care today or your life tomorrow. We were lied to. Well, I wasn't. I knew he was a lying fraud all along.
ANd I don't really give a shit if I'm taken seriously by those who'd agree with me or those who wouldn't. I don't seek anyone's approval. As I stated before this is my therapy. It's a way to vent the anger I feel without anyone having to get hurt.
My wife and I are closing on our first home in a few weeks. My wife just got a promotion and raise at work. Things are pretty good for us right now and we don't owe a damn thing to King Barry, King George, shit for brains McCain or any other pandering politician. We did that. The rest of you can enjoy your little pipe dreams of Barry or some other government shill swooping in on his white horse and making all of your dreams come true.
One last thing... On the day I move into my new home I'm going to buy a bottle of champagne. Not to celebrate the home though. No this champagne will only be opened upon the occurrence of one of three specific events... the first being the American voting public giving that prick Obama a well deserved bitch smack in the 2010 midterm elections, the second being that that bitch smack actually comes in November 2012 and the third... well I'll let you all use your imagination for that one.
60 - Glenn Contrarian
Arch -
Congrats on your first house - I know how we felt with ours, and it was a happy time. I really do wish you and yours the very best.
One observation - when I bought my first house, I was still a Republican.
And a wish for the two of you - I hope your marriage and lives together are as happy as in my own marriage, because even after eighteen years together we still get told that we're honeymooners, that we 'need to go get a room'.
And lastly, the single piece of advice I give to every young husband: "Never stop courting her" - because if you stop, then the marriage will go south. It does start with you.
And one more thing - plant roses, lots of roses (and some other flowers) - because they're plentiful, they're free, and they're perfect for that 'just because' moment.
And one more thing! "Rub her feet" - that's from Robert Heinlein (an arch-conservative like you), and it has served me very, very well over the years, because she is always grateful.
You might despise my political beliefs - but I hope these will help you keep the fire lit as the years go by.
61 - roger nowosielski
Nice touch, Glenn. But don't turn Archie yet into a lovey-dovey human being. It'd be too much of a shock for the rest of us.
Same here, Arch, congrats. But I shan't give you any marital advice. I'd change them like gloves. As soon as they be getting tired of me, or vice versa, I'd engineer a big fight, casting myself in the role of a villain.
I just couldn't say good-bye nicely. I'd have to be a big, dragged-out fight. It was easier that way.
62 - Clavos
Good marital advice, Glenn.
I have only this to add:
If one day misfortune should afflict one of you with a serious illness, remember and honor the part of your vows that says "...in sickness and in health..." You will both grow from it; as individuals and as a couple.
63 - roger nowosielski
A Christian ideal?
64 - Dr Dreadful
Arch,
I'm a little late to the reception (to which I suspect I wouldn't have been invited anyway!), but congratulations on your marriage and becoming a Man of Property.
Not sure I like what my imagination is telling me re your third champagne-popping occasion. Is that the Men With No Facial Expression I hear knocking at your door?
65 - STM
Archie hasn't recently declared the rubber glove, has he??
I thought they'd just bought a house, not tied the knot.
If so, good luck Arch, you'll need it ... especially if Friday is pub night :)
Not any more