|
September 10, 2009
Bless Obama, and damn Bush!
Every day I get a lot of emails from various right wing organizations, all of which seem to be telling me that the only alternative to Barack Obama is the far right. These organizations include the American Family Association, the Traditional Values Coalition, Richard Viguerie's Conservative HQ, not to forget longtime emailer Matt Barber, who sends mainly anti-gay diatribes from Liberty University where he's "Associate Dean for Career & Professional Development." I don't like these organizations, and I have been ignoring these emails. Should I? Here's the text I was just sent moments ago, from Richard Viguerie's Conservative HQ: "Tonight, President Obama reconfirmed his far-left agenda by re-launching an effort for government-run health care.So, they like Obama for helping them, and they hate Bush and the Republicans for betraying them, right? It's very confusing. I realize that I am not supposed to criticize "other" "conservatives," but is that a fair rule? They certainly don't hesitate at all to criticize libertarians and "RINOs," do they? Nor do they hesitate to criticize Bush and McCain at every opportunity. Anyway, it occurred to me that since I spent years defending Bush from the left, I might as well continue to do it now that he's getting it from the far right. Or was I only allowed to defend Bush against left-wing attacks? Is that it? Does defending Bush now make me a liberal RINO sellout? It is certainly true that a growing number of Americans have grown disenchanted with Barack Obama. But I think it's a mistake to assume this means they'll support the American Family Association, the Traditional Values Coalition, Richard Viguerie's Conservative HQ, Matt Barber, WorldNetDaily, and Alan Keyes, and the rest of the anti-Bush, anti-McCain right. Aren't they forgetting that Bush won twice, but only barely, against Al Gore and John Kerry? And that Barack Obama beat McCain by a safe margin? I realize that Bush and McCain are too far to the left for their liking, but do they seriously believe that the reason McCain lost -- to Barack Obama -- was because he was too far to the left? And that therefore someone more to the right would have won? I could be wrong, but I don't think the math supports their position. I say this as someone who held my nose when I voted for Bush, and less so when I voted for McCain (because I so feared the election of Barack Obama). I became quite accustomed over the years to holding my nose, and I accepted the unpleasant fact that libertarianism was pretty much a lost cause in the GOP. I'd be a fool not to recognize that if the AFA, TVC, WND right takes over the GOP, libertarianism will be as much of a lost cause as it was under Bush and McCain, if not more. So how come I have to hold my nose and vote for the GOP but they don't? And why should they have any more right to complain than I do? I'm thinking maybe the party should just be handed over to them, and then I could drop out of politics and vote for a third party. posted by Eric on 09.10.09 at 05:57 PM
Comments
The Tea Party movement is the only new and refreshing thing to come along in a long time. Perhaps that explains the frenzied attempts by these far right organizations to glom onto the Tea Parties as if they own them. (Naturally, these attempts to claim credit also play into the hands of those who accuse the Tea Parties of being astroturfed.) Eric Scheie · September 10, 2009 06:09 PM but do they seriously believe that the reason McCain lost -- to Barack Obama -- was because he was too far to the left? That's a tougher one, look at the huge boost McCain got from Palin. Then look at how he muzzled her and then let the press define her. When she gave a speech, she was praised, but when she got with "journalists", they got the best of her. She wasn't expecting that much dishonesty I figure. Obama and his crew, in the media, entertainment and in politics, had no such compunctions when dealing with that senile, angry old man. Veeshir · September 10, 2009 06:13 PM I should say, I took a lot of crap from conservatives for defending Bush's handling of Iraq and Afghanistan. As I have to say every now and then, my job isn't getting Republicans elected, their job is getting me to vote for them. Veeshir · September 10, 2009 06:16 PM Yes, some stayed home. But was it enough to have mattered? http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008_voter_turnout_same_as_2004_/ Compared to 2004, Republican turnout declined by 1.3 percentage points to 28.7 percent, while Democratic turnout increased by 2.6 points from 28.7 percent in 2004 to 31.3 percent in 2008. If we assume that the missing 1.3 percent are the conservatives who stayed home, even if they had voted, it would not have been enough to alter Obama's margin (53% to 46%). There's also an assumption that, say, Romney or Huckabee would have not only brought in these conservatives, but kept the rest of McCain's votes. Is that warranted? Eric Scheie · September 10, 2009 06:33 PM I'm just curious, why do you mention Mitt, "I've been a conservative for about a minute" Romney and Mike, "Christian Socialist" Huckabee when we're talking about conservative candidates? The effect of "They're the same" also affected your average American who doesn't pay any attention until about 5 minutes before the election. The last election was ridiculous. Anybody who looked at it in a desultory manner saw all crazy people. All unbelievably crazy people. So when it's the choice of the crotchety old man and the thrill of a black president, both of whom were mostly the same otherwise, well, lots of people were also swept up in the historic angle. If there had been a candidate who wasn't just haggling over how much the gov't was taking over, well, Americans would have had a choice of positions instead of skin color. Veeshir · September 10, 2009 07:17 PM Why? I don't know. I was probably unduly influenced by Laura Ingraham, and I might have imagined she was speaking for, um, conservatives. http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2008/02/conservative_pu.html Not saying I'm a conservative, mind you. Just trying to figure this shit out, then as now. Eric Scheie · September 10, 2009 10:03 PM It's a whole lot easier to put together a coalition AGAINST someone than it is FOR someone. Barry Hussein held together anti-Bush coalition that coalesced for the '06 midterms. Now that he's governing, the Bush supporters and the Bush-haters that don't like the Big O's can hold hands and sing kumbaya -- until the R's win an election and the cycle of creative destruction begins anew. Enjoy the circus. The cycles of American politics have been this way since Jefferson. Only now, the cycles are accelerating. It's like the old joke about not liking the weather in Oklahoma. Wait a minute (or a year) and the political weather will change. Rhodium Heart · September 11, 2009 03:15 AM I was a liberal until a few months after 9/11, when a fellow liberal asked me what I thought of the war; and I was a conservative until a conservative asked me what I thought of abortion (then, all hell broke loose). Now, I am an independent with a strong states' rights streak who supports candidates, not parties. With that said, I've never understood why the Libertarian Party has wasted its time and resources fielding presidential candidates. If libertarianism is to become an influential movement, it needs to do so from the bottom up. We don't need the Presidency or the Senate -- state offices and the House ought to be our target. Oscar · September 11, 2009 09:43 AM Heh, I've tried to watch her when she guest hosts O'Reilly, I can't take her. They're Republicans first, conservatives second. Rush is more of a free agent (I don't listen to him either), so is Beck and, of course, Neil Boortz. Boortz endorsed the Huckster, but that's because Huckabee claimed he was for the Fair Tax. I didn't believe him, Huckabee not Boortz. Eh, I was rooting for a Benito Giuliani/Newt ticket first and then a Fred ticket. Veeshir · September 11, 2009 10:23 AM The people who organized the original Boston Tea Party weren't just angry. They were angry at something specific, the Tea Tax. When I watch people on TV talking at these new Tea Parties, they are clearly angry, but they are angry about all sorts of different things. Many don't seem to know what they are angry about, and many are angry about things that aren't real, like Obama's so-called Death Courts or Death Panels. That's a fantasy. chocolatier · September 11, 2009 04:07 PM Did you think that up yourself or did someone have to give you an off-topic annoyance for you to cut and paste in inappropriate posts? Veeshir · September 11, 2009 06:15 PM featherbedding bioscience cutters!contraction.aunts.listers corker yardstick Anonymous · September 17, 2009 08:08 PM featherbedding bioscience cutters!contraction.aunts.listers corker yardstick Anonymous · September 17, 2009 08:09 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
September 2009
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
September 2009
August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
What happens there can happen here!
Leviticus "sting" video and other heresies ex post facto jackass punk issues Texas Style We are all "racists" now. Except for the racists. ACORN Is Looking For A Few Good Gynecologists - Or Is Bill Gates In Favor Of Child Prostitution? Vanguard Of The Proletariat "This is a private video." "And I shot him. And he died. Right there." But aren't certain ideas outside the conservative mainstream?
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Oh, hell no, will all the Tea Partiers fall in with the Repubs, just because they are angry with the Dems! In my experience, they are about equally PO's with both, and any Repub strategist who is rubbing his hands gleefully at the thought of all those fresh new political activists falling into lock-step with them has got another think coming!