Is there a political Gatorade prescription for "conservative fatigue"?
What’s breaking?
The GOP is in trouble.…
"A sinister cabal of superior writers."
Is there a political Gatorade prescription for "conservative fatigue"?
What’s breaking?
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - Nicholas Stix
Oddly enough, I think the socialist MSM unwittingly helped Bush keep his conservative base longer than he had any right to. The SMSM's insistence that Bush was a far-right wacko made him look good in the eyes of the base, and gave them a reason to be loyal to him. Had the SMSM been able to look past their own dogmas and loyalty to the Democratic Party, they would have realized that Bush is an evangelical neoconservative. And had they portrayed him as such, enough conservative voters might have stayed home to cost him the '04 election.
77 - Heckler
I'm back, and notice that Dave said; "The group who the religious right want to screw over isn't the general population, just a small minority who they think they can get away with victimizing. From your perspective that does, indeed, suck, but for most of us it's just something we observe and look on with distaste while not being personally impacted."
Now, take a look at this one closely people. Notice how it appears that Dave and his ilk are going by the NIMBY standard of "promote the general welfare"
It appears that it is OK for the "Liberty Wing" of the republican party to stand idly by and allow a segment of the population to be persecuted by their political brethren, for the sake of expediency.
Where is the outrage that an american miority's rights are being systematically violated, or that bigotry against these citizens is not only condoned, but part and parcel of a political agenda.
For all the bullshit talk of "changing from within" that some like to harp on, let me remind you that THE most marginalized segment of the population has a faction within the GOP.
They are called "Log Cabin Republicans".
The next most marginalized appear to be the "Liberty wing"
Wake up, stop being used, and stand up for your principles. Until then you are part of the problem while you look the other way and actively support the bastards who are fucking up our nation.
Vote gridlock, vote checks and balances. Come November, toss out the single party rule.
78 - NR Davis
"It appears that it is OK for the "Liberty Wing" of the republican party to stand idly by and allow a segment of the population to be persecuted by their political brethren, for the sake of expediency."
Yes! I've been screaming this from the rooftops for years. Problem is, this is the mindset not only of the so-called Liberty Wing of the GOP, but also the mainstream of the Democrat Party. Many libs - including 99.9999999 percent of Dem pols - say they believe in equality and they feel bad that gays are unequal under law, but precious few are willing to voice their outrage in any meaningful way or to take any tangible action to end this gross injustice. And then they have the audacity to get mad when people like me remain true to ourselves and our principles and give our support to third-party candidates. Hello? Why is a party that doesn't fight for my equality going to get my support? If your support of equality is so pathetic, so weak, so lacking that you will only stand up if YOU PERSONALLY are affected, you are a bad, selfish person who only believes in equality for yourself. Equality isn't equality until ALL CITIZENS - including GLBT PEOPLE and conservative Christians and Muslims and atheists and Jews are treated EXACTLY THE SAME and receive THE SAME PROTECTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES WITHOUT PREFERENCE AND WITHOUT RESPECT TO RELIGION, MELANIN, ORIENTATION, etc. under civil law.
79 - JP
Arch, the average is just to the right of center, I'd have to agree there totally. That's why the far left has no chance, but a more centrist progressive does.
"homosexual interest groups, anti-christian atheists, terrorist appeasers and apologizers..." I agree that the left pushes atheism too far, but as you may have noted recent articles discuss the strategy of the religious left--I'm an advocate of the idea that progressive ideas and faith can coexist. (I'm usually not received all that well on DailyKos for that reason!)
On the other hand, I think the right uses a broad brush to overstate the painting of anyone who expresses dissent as a "terrorist appeaser/apologizer," and further I think it's counterproductive to label someone who tries to recognize what it really is they're upset about (support of Israel). By failing to recognize, we can't fix the problem.
I don't think it's so much that Democrats are appeasers, but rather that the Right's media machine (Hannity) has succeeded in convincing America that they are.
80 - NR Davis
Trust me, the DINOs *are* appeasers who castigate those with integrity. Many of them are also crooks and liars and terrorists and bloody-handed killers by virtue of their appeasement of the Bushites and status quo types and centrists and such.
81 - JP
Dave,
Your Dems vs. Repubs comparison deserves attention. You state "It's the difference between the Plame affair and the Kelo case in Connecticut. The difference between outing a CIA agent for political reasons and destroying the lives of hundreds and placing the property rights of every citizen in limbo."
Agreed that the Kelo case is overbearing and that the wrong decision was made in it. But I believe you are suggesting that Plame represents "Republicans are willing to abuse very specific and limited rights of a few individuals on a short term or extra-legal basis to achieve their goals."
The Plame case in one sense damaged a specific person, BUT.. I must observe that outing a CIA agent damages other operatives in the field and those agents' mission and cover. Further, by mounting a deceptive case and suppressing contrary evidence, the Republicans have gotten the entire country into a misguided war.
Therefore, at best (granting you the Kelo example) I would suggest both parties are equally adept at infringing upon the rights of every citizen. Just in a different manner.
82 - Michael J. West
Bush is an evangelical neoconservative. And had they portrayed him as such, enough conservative voters might have stayed home to cost him the '04 election.
An interesting idea, Nicholas, but bear in mind that the evangelical vote was at massive levels in 2004. Those were the people that were mobilized and moved to vote in record numbers. Portraying him as an evangelical neoconservative may have only boosted those numbers.
I agree, JP, when you say that the left pushes atheism too far. But the right certainly pushes Christianity too far, as well. Where's the moderating force between these two?
83 - NR Davis
Not saying that I necessarily disagree (still considering the matter), but how do lefties push atheism too much? Heterosexual Christians are top dog: They've got the law, the money, the oaths, etc. on their side ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY.
Nonbelievers have to put up with a lot of shit in this culture, including being ignored and rebuked and having their concerns belittled and reviled by the rest of the electorate. Someone has to stand up for the disenfranchised, and goddess knows the GOP won't, so it's left to the Left. Don't damn them for doing ONE thing right.
Not everyone can go along with "under God." As a very spiritual Christian (and student of Judaism and Buddhism), I am offended by the notion of organized prayer in school (but tell me there isn't praying going on prior to exams or sporting events; there IS prayer in the school for individuals and no one I know is not OK with that). Intelligent Design amuses me (if you're going to address the religious theory in a publicly funded academic setting, the compromise is to teach it as part of comparative religions, not in science). And the sight of a 10 Commandments monument before a government building... whoa: If I saw that in front of the municipal courthouse here, it would convince me that justice is not to be found within the edifice's walls - and I'm Christian. Imagine how an atheist would feel - he or she is supposed to be part of the picture, but no, nonbelievers are excluded, for all the flowery lies spread about this being a nation where all citiens are equal. If anything is anti-American, it's the way in which the majority deals with minority groups. It's unforgivable.
If nonbelievers are part of a country with no established religion and that claims to keep church and state separate (but doesn't, the mendacious, filthy, supremacist bastards), why do the nation's symbols and currency, its recite-by-rote pledge and vile traditions, its leaders who insist that everyone is "under God" focus on believers to the detriment of atheists and agnostics and those who don't fall under the (convenient for certain Christians) Judeo-Christian banner? I don't need the government to support my faith. Too many others, for whatever reason, do, and sdly, those people are in charge and doing damage to their fellow citizen-humans every day.
So: I stand for atheists, agnostics,freethinkers, and non-Christians because it is the American thing to do. Of course, I'm arrogant enough to believe that often (certainly not always), people OUTSIDE the mainstream are more truly American in values and in the way in which they live their lives than those who cleave to the policies and such imposed by the dangerous majority society, which claims one thing yet does another and insists everyone be and believe what everyone else is and does - or else.
84 - Dave Nalle
Bush is an evangelical neoconservative
Except for the part about being evangelical or neoconservative you're right on the mark here. "Bush is" - quite correct. Now if you can just find something accurate to finish up that sentence you'll be kicking some rhetorical ass.
Dave
85 - Heckler
Oh Dave, you are aware that Bush refers to himself as a "born again christian" yes? As for him being a "neocon", he himself has not signed up on pnac.org, but his brother Jeb, Checney, Wolfowitz, Perle and so many others in his administration did sign up.
Now, if you hire and listen to a bunch of ideologues, does this not, ipso facto, mean that you are a diciple of said ideology?
A case can be made either way, but if he is not both , then he has been played as a pawn to both.
So, which is it? Is he a raving ideologue out of touch with America or is he a pliable pawn being played by his advisors and completely incompetent to do his job as his own man?
86 - JustOneMan
It seems some of my fellow poster may be suffering from an acute persecution complex! Under the current administration - like it or not - more minorities own homes and businesses, more minorities are in real positions of power and MORE NON CHRISTIANS are in positions of power!
IMO the issue is a very few ACLU followers - it has become a religion of its own in its attempt to socialize the country and rewrite history (diminish the role and significance of European founders)
Just one mans option!
87 - NR Davis
Persecution? Talk to me about persecution after you've spent a life unequal under law. Until then, you can tell me nothing that I would take seriously, including your "option[s]".
88 - JustOneMan
Unequal under the law???LOL...
The diagnosis is accurate! A severe persecution complex!
I rest my case!
89 - zingzing
no you don't rest your case. maybe more minorities own houses and businesses, but tell that to the people who live on my street. i don't mean down the block... i mean on the fucking street. 85% of them are black. something unequal is going on when you see that.
maybe more non-christians are in positions of power, but there are more christians mixing religion and politics than ever before as well. before, it didn't matter--christian or non-christian... now, i'm not so sure. since when does the united states go to war after consulting god and ignoring international law?
aclu... a religion? i bow down to protecting my rights (and yours).
90 - Heckler
zingzing, remember one thing here. There are more minorities numerically than there were before as well.
Simple demographics, if there were a million before and 10% owned homes/businesses, that woudl be 100,000.
If there are 2 million now and 9% own homes and businesses that woudl be 180,000. So it woudl mean there were more that owned such, but a lower percentage of the overall population in question.
See how easy it is for them to spin shit when they think people are too stupid to figure it out?
And folks wonder why I heckle.
91 - zingzing
damn right. i wasn't going to go look up the numbers. numbers is bunk.
92 - Heckler
Now zing, numbers is kool, numbers are our friends, and allow us to do so much stuff!!
Dishonest manipulation of numbers are bad, mmmm'kay?
93 - JustOneMan
International Law....oh yes the Russians, French and Germans on Sadams payroll...
Gee 85% of the homeless in your neighborhood are black! Hmmm oh thats right thats Bush and Cheneys fault! Here are some stats that are the "black man and womens" problem...
The highest rate was non-Hispanic Blacks, among whom 69.4 percent of births were out-of-wedlock. American Indians have the second highest rate at 58.7 percent, followed by Hispanics at 40.92 percent. Among non-Hispanic whites, 21.54 percent of births are out of wedlock, and Asians/Pacific islanders have the 1owest rate with 15.64 percent of births being out-of-wedlock.
94 - Jon Sobel
How come whenever I go on one of these discussions and ask the rightwingers for specific examples of their positions, they completely ignore the question? (See # 52 and # 57) Man, is that frustrating.
95 - Jon Sobel
Actually, come to think of it, NR Davis is on to something:
If your support of equality is so pathetic, so weak, so lacking that you will only stand up if YOU PERSONALLY are affected, you are a bad, selfish person who only believes in equality for yourself
It's true that the vast majority of politicians from both parties are guilty of this. The problem is, those who might have their hearts in the right place know that if they come out strongly in favor of certain things, they will be voted out by their narrowminded, often bigoted constituents.
And this goes some way towards answering my question about why there's a lack of specific examples of rights that would be "taken away" under a left-leaning government. See, it's not that the right wingers are afraid of specific rights being explicity taken away, it's that they're afraid of expansion of existing rights to cover people who are "the other" - who are "not us" - such as LGBT people, atheists, and now illegal immigrants.
Observe the pattern. Right wingers scream bloody murder about the prospect of gay marriage. Or of removing "under God" from the Pledge. And now they turn against their own Dubya when he suggests a guest worker program. It's all the same thing: fear of the other. We all tend to be guilty of it. The difference is that liberals tend to be more willing to admit it and talk about it.
96 - zingzing
hey heckler, whose side do you think i am on? i am a bit confused by your responses.
97 - JP
NR, just some thoughts here for discussion--I am certainly in favor of rights for all believers and nonbelievers, as well as those with alternative belief systems such as Gnostics, pagans, etc. It's not anyone's business what someone else's belief system is.
But in a country where an overwhelming majority are believers, and Christian at that, it's unrealistic to expect every government entity and every ritual to avoid altogether any reference to a supreme being. Reference doesn't mean endorsement. Atheists (particularly vocal ones) are sometimes guilty of lumping all theists together, such that "all Christians" are Republicans, which also isn't true.
That said, I respect a position against the commandments posted in church, "under God" in the Pledge, even the Bible used for the Oath. But of those 3 examples, only one involves forced behavioral compliance--the Oath. One can simply remain silent during the questionable words in the Pledge, and no behavior with regard to the Commandments is required that I'm aware of.
An agnostic or atheist's position as a minority is hard not to remember--religious symbolism is everywhere. However, if it were removed, would not a believer notice its absence? I don't know how to make both sides happy. Some believers assert that belief affects every facet of life, including public service; for them, denying the right to use symbols or language is a form of oppression.
98 - zingzing
justoneman--
did i mention bush? no. you painted a rosey picture. i don't think it's so rosey. your statistic is nice... but, like i said, numbers are bunk.
i dunno. maybe i just live in a strange place, but i can't help but figure that being born out of wedlock isn't the only element at play here. actually, the last place i saw the same amount of homelessness was in london. lots of white folk peddling "real change" or whatever they call it there. obviously, it's not just a racial issue. it's also social issue. we can't change race from the outside. but we can change society, so let's start there. what's the problem with that? are you saying, "hey, it's their own damn fault, let them rot..."
99 - JustOneMan
zing...
Not at all...that is "in my opinion" the liberal position...get the underclass addicted to social programs and welfare...so they can be manipulated and controlled. In order for people to get up off the ground and rise above their personal misfortunes they must - as a people - abandon the victim mentality and be take responsibility for their actions and fate...
100 - zingzing
so what do you suggest? what do YOU do about it? obviously, the problem is deeply entrenched. do we let them go, "cold turkey?" somehow, i think that will only worsen the problem. welfare needs reforming, that's obvious. but that reform should be for the benefit of those who need it, not to lessen the load on society.
poverty affects us all. any one of us could be in that boat tomorrow. poverty increases crime and disease, which makes those who aren't impoverished victims by association.
it's a complex problem that can't be summed up in some set of numbers. a multicultural society has good and bad points. it enrichens us with diversity and color. it also breeds misunderstanding and racism. we need to remember our common humanity and our common goals.
101 - JustOneMan
Zing...
One-day - one life - one issue at a time! Look what liberal society has done the black race in America...I was embarrassed when Three 6 Mafia wins an Oscar for "It’s Hard Out Here For A Pimp”...can you agree that its nothing but a "Minstrel Show" that denigrates a whole race...
Gee pimpin and crack whore are something to celebrate!
It may seem insignificant to some but it is just one more brick in the wall of poverty, racism and despair...
102 - RogerMDillon
Talk about one man's bogus opinion. As the population grows, so does housing. Also more and more people are getting interest-only loans at a variable rate, and they won't be able to afford them forever. Then get back to me about home ownership
You have to love people who defend Bush with incorrect facts.
"for most of us it's just something we observe and look on with distaste while not being personally impacted."
Talk about elistist. All his positions make sense now. NSAlle doesn't care about the rights of Americans, only his own rights. When they come for you, don't be surprised if there is no one left to speak out as Pastor Martin Niemöller would say.
103 - Dave Nalle
Oh Dave, you are aware that Bush refers to himself as a "born again christian" yes? As for him being a "neocon", he himself has not signed up on pnac.org, but his brother Jeb, Checney, Wolfowitz, Perle and so many others in his administration did sign up.
Actually, Cheney and Jeb didn't 'sign up'. They signed letters originating with PNAC but are not actual members of the organization.
Now, if you hire and listen to a bunch of ideologues, does this not, ipso facto, mean that you are a diciple of said ideology?
Apparently not, since Bush's foreign policy bears zero resemblance to the PNAC agenda and he's been publicly and loudly condemned by PNAC officials and leaders including Uberneocon William Kristol who is positively rabid in his dislike of Bush and his policies.
Dave
104 - Dave Nalle
You have to love people who defend Bush with incorrect facts.
"for most of us it's just something we observe and look on with distaste while not being personally impacted."
Talk about elistist. All his positions make sense now. NSAlle doesn't care about the rights of Americans, only his own rights. When they come for you, don't be surprised if there is no one left to speak out as Pastor Martin Niemöller would say.
Roger, I was explaining why the GOP approach is more acceptable to the general public than the more pervasive rights violations of the left, not expressing my personal opinion.
As has been clearly demonstrated here on BC I fully support gay rights and other personal liberty issues regardless of their political acceptability.
Dave
105 - JustOneMan
RogerMDildo
Gee low interest rates are the only reason that minorities own businesses and homes...gee give them aliitle more credit...anoth example of the liberal view of victimization and ignorance...those rates are a time bomb...the sky is falling the sky is falling
106 - Arch Conservative
You hit the nail on the head JUSTONEMAN.
Liberals and democrats view minorities as nothing but pawns in the quest for political power. It is impossible for a minority to better his or herself without voting democrat, without the benefit of some liberal social welfare program, without towing the leftists line and believeing it.
If you're black and a conservative republican the democrats and liberals have no use from you because you're just a deluded race traitor, uncle tom.
No single group in this nation has done more to keep minorities down than the Democratic party. When you tell someone that they are victims and that is all they can ever be without your help and control and then do everything in your power to make sure that this someone gains no independence then you are doing them a great disservice and this is exactly what the Dem party does to minorities.
107 - Dave Nalle
I hate those rare occasions when AC says something so true, so clearly, that you have to take him seriously.
Dave
108 - Heckler
#106 and #107 clearly show the Big Lie principle that has lured many decent people into towing the GOP party line. Note how they trot this one out when they are backed into a corner by their own action.
The next best distractions they can come up with are evoking Kennedy, Clinton (either),god, gays, guns and abortion.
Watch for all of the above from a rabid spin doctor drone of the Party near you!
109 - Jon Sobel
No single group in this nation has done more to keep minorities down than the Democratic party.
What disgusting ignorance. If the Republicans had had full control of the government for the past 50-60 years, minorities wouldn't even be able to vote. We'd be back in the days of poll taxes and "oops, this isn't your polling place, you have to go across town. And hey, where's your ID? What, there's no bus? Oh, well, try again next time."
110 - DJRadiohead
Jon, not to absolove the Republicans of all their wrongdoings but it was southern, white Democrats who oversaw much of the segregation and civil rights abuses during the Civil Rights movement.
I guess what I am saying (and I have not looked through all 109 of the comments) is that both major parties have plenty of warts and embarassing moments.
111 - Eric Berlin
True, DJR, but Republicans have been the worst at exploiting race-based fears over the last several decades. It's rather fascinating that Bush is getting crushed by his own conservative base -- which he has tended and fed and watered for the whole of his presidency -- over immigration.
112 - Jon Sobel
Yes - very true about the southern white Democrats. But I'm really referring to the post-Nixon Republican Party. Too often we talk about Republicans and Democrats as if they are constant forces. When I rail against the Republicans I am referring to the Party of the last few decades, as Eric B. points out.
Another example of what I am talking about is the knee-jerk opposition of today's Republicans to equal rights for gays. Talk about keeping minorities down.
113 - Arch Conservative
Heckler and sobel....couple of lefties accusing all republicans of being racist while denying thier own parties politics of victimization and dependency.......
NOthing new there.
114 - Jon Sobel
Arch - do you even actually read the comments you're responding to?
115 - DJRadiohead
I don't think it is settled fact that Republicans have been more egregious in using the "race" card or fear mongering tactics.
I just don't think the world breaks down neatly between Good Guys and Republicans (or vice versa) which, unfortunately, is what too many of our nation's political debates degenerate into. Reality is messier than that.
116 - JustOneMan
Sobel....
The gay issue is not a Republican issue!
Latest polss show that less than 40% approve of gay marraige and 60% disapprove...hmmm based upon your logic Bush would have won by a landslide...but it doesnt matter a win is a win...
117 - Jon Sobel
The gay issue is not a Republican issue!
Perhaps not directly, but it is a moral issue, and the Left has the morally superior position on it and many others. Just watch - in another 10 years that 40-60 split will be reversed, because the populace is gradually waking up. Most people used to think "separate but equal" was OK too.
118 - Arch Conservative
"Perhaps not directly, but it is a moral issue, and the Left has the morally superior position on it and many others."
Righhhhhht
Liberals are so morally superior.......that's why they advocate infanticide with a smile. That's why they stick up for the civil rights of NAMBLA but attack Catholic charities.
[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]
119 - Eric Berlin
Jon -- I largely agree but that thinking leads to dangerous territory. For a long time now Dems think they *should* win but for a variety of reasons they don't.
DJR -- Republicans have been better -- flat out -- at using wedge issues to rile up their base while splintering the opposition.
120 - Heckler
zingzing asks me ;"i am a bit confused by your responses." Good, then I'm doing my job right.
Dave states; "Actually, Cheney and Jeb didn't 'sign up'. They signed letters originating with PNAC but are not actual members of the organization."
Wrong-o there buddy, check the pnac.org website, go to the mission statement page, find Dick and Jeb there. If you dig around there, you will find part of the neocon public policy for the mid-east as of 1997 or so was a burning wish for some kind of "pearl harbor" type incident (Kristol's words , not mine) so they could invade a mid-east arab country and set up permanent military bases and expand influence in an imperial fashion.
Kind of like what Bush is trying in Iraq? I think the evidence bears out such a proposition, expecially since the policy was drafted by Perle, Wolfowitz, Cheney and Rumsfeld. All of whom are signatories to that mission statement.
And finally, Arch claims; "Heckler and sobel....couple of lefties accusing all republicans of being racist while denying thier own parties politics of victimization and dependency......."
First off Arch old bean, I fucking defy you to find anywhere that I have ever called anyone "racist". Also, check all my comments, I have said often I am no democrat or republican, but a registered independant.
Now, live up to your state motto, "Live Free or die"
121 - zingzing
heckler... what side do you think i am on?
i am not sure if you understand what i am saying with your responses...
what do i have to say?
122 - Heckler
zing, you don't have ta say anything. Say what you want to say, I'm fine with that.
If you are made to think by a bit of confusion induced by what I say, then I am doing my job correctly.
A simple example just this once for you. You made a statement about hating numbers, and I responded that numbers our great, it's bad manipulation of numbers that is bad.
Make more sense now?
123 - Jon Sobel
Infanticide with a smile... yeah, that's reasonable talk. I'm guessing you're talking about abortion. I respect a person's right to believe that abortion is morally wrong, but I don't understand this business of wanting to extend rights to fetuses and embryos while refusing them to fully grown, functional citizens who happen to be gay.
Unlike Heckler, I have called people racist on occasion when I believe it to be accurate. Of course Republicans aren't all racists, far from it. But today's right-wing policies tend towards discriminatory results. (I am happy to provide examples other than gay issues, if asked.) This is a moral failing and hence, according to my own moral sense and beliefs - of course YRMV - the Left has the moral high ground on issues like this.
124 - zingzing
heckler... don't be condescending. it's kinda ugly. maybe the reason i don't like numbers is because they are so open to manipulation... does that make some sense? i trust it does. i didn't think that it needed to be said. maybe i was wrong.
i have nothing against anything you have said so far as i remember. i'm just here to combat people like justoneman, who, while entitled to his opinion, has a rather simplistic view of things. i think he is wrong.
do you really think confusion adds to a political debate? i'm not so sure that it does. maybe you are making a point. if so... you missed me. but whatever.
i don't think welfare is working to its full potential. but i do believe that it is not something we can abandon, as that would just worsen an already horrible problem.
it would seem to me that you would be on the same side of the fence as me, or at least not closed to the idea.
but your first little south park reference made it seem like you think i just don't like numbers for some nebulous reason. something random. i'm not sure. maybe you were throwing that one at me, trying to make a point to someone else. i get it... it was the point i was making in the first place.
125 - Heckler
zing, no being condescending on my part, truly. Yes, I am ugly in many ways. Your next sentance is spot on, and the very point I was making in my "south park" comment.
As to what "side" I am onk, the answer is no side. I don't pick arbitrary sides, I deal with issues, and I heckle sloppy thinking no matter where it comes from.
Purely for my own amusement and edification.
As for sowing confusion. Confusion is good, it shakes the mental cobwebs loose and forces people to think about something that they had taken for granted. If I cause that for anybody, then I have done my job title as well as amused myself.
Selfish and greedy bastard that I am.