FIRE STEELE AND BRAND THE RUMPS OF RNC COMMITTEEMEN
I suppose it could have been worse. Instead of passing a resolution officially branding the opposition the “Democrat (sic) Socialist Party,” the RNC might have voted the GOP out of existence.
In the end, the one will hasten the day that the other is realized.
This may be the silliest thing a political party has ever done in American history. I’m with Allah 100%:
More than anything, this reeks of impotence, operating almost as a concession that the right’s argument on the merits that the left is evolving towards socialism isn’t working to shift public opinion. So now they’re going to up the ante by trying the hard sell: Just repeat “socialism” as much as possible to try to drive it into people’s skulls, never minding the fact that that term’s already lost some of its taboo and might well lose more as it goes further mainstream. Or at least, I hope that’s the GOP strategy here. The alternative, that they’re simply sticking their fingers in their ears and repeating “socialist” over and over out of spite like a five-year-old, is too depressing to contemplate. What’s next, a formal resolution declaring french fries “freedom fries” in the Republican Party henceforth and forevermore?
Unfortunately, I believe their reasoning for passing this resolution is more attuned to the latter rather than the former. There is no sense, no rhyme, no reason to “officially” branding the opposition socialists. It is nothing more than a cry in the wilderness; a pathetic ploy (and a childish one at that) to inititate a round of name calling and finger pointing when what is needed are policy alternatives.
This is truly the party of Limbaugh now. The casual use of the word “socialism” on talk radio, the internet, and anywhere the “new conservatives” gather is an affront to common sense not to mention proof positive that the party is in the control of ill-educated, anti-intellectual brigands. Since around 99.9% of American businesses are NOT being taken over by the government and a similar percentage of workers are NOT having their salaries and bonuses manhandled by the feds, one wonders where the idea that the Democrats want “socialism” came from in the first place.
What Obama is doing should be opposed with every fiber of our beings. But Obama is corrupting the free market, not eliminating it. Here’s George Will today:
This is not gross, unambiguous lawlessness of the Nixonian sort — burglaries, abuse of the IRS and FBI, etc. — but it is uncomfortably close to an abuse of power that perhaps gave Nixon ideas: When in 1962 the steel industry raised prices, President John F. Kennedy had a tantrum and his administration leaked rumors that the IRS would conduct audits of steel executives, and sent FBI agents on predawn visits to the homes of journalists who covered the steel industry, ostensibly to further a legitimate investigation.
The Obama administration’s agenda of maximizing dependency involves political favoritism cloaked in the raiment of “economic planning” and “social justice” that somehow produce results superior to what markets produce when freedom allows merit to manifest itself, and incompetence to fail. The administration’s central activity — the political allocation of wealth and opportunity — is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.
Not a peep about socialism from a man who was fighting the expansion of the federal government when most new conservatives weren’t even a lacisvious gleam in their father’s eye. If you wish to call what Obama and the Democrats are doing “socialism,” then petition Webster’s to change the definition. And what is that definition?
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
Considering that a minuscule part of the economy is, at the moment, being run by the Feds, the grossly exaggerated (and, I would add, hysterical) notion that the Democrats desire to close Wall Street, seize all private property, convene an industrial production board to set targets for economic activity, prevent the creation of new businesses, and control capital on a much grander scale than they do now - can only be explained by a shocking ignorance of politicl theory and the lack of even a beginner’s overview of the nature of the political economy shown by new conservatives from the RNC down.
Are Obama’s moves troubling? You betchya. Not because he is instituting socialism but because he and the Democrats are ignorantly corrupting the free market. The more they fiddle with it the more they screw it up. That much should be obvious even to the Keyenesians at Treasury and the White House. But the basic principles of the free market as it relates to the macro economy are still well in play. If you doubt me, pay a visit to the Chicago Board of Trade where capitalism - real devil take the hindmost capitalism - still rules the roost.
The laws of supply and demand still propel our economy despite the Fed’s best efforts to muck things up. And that’s what makes this move by the RNC to brand the Democrats as socialist so silly. Not only are they tarring tens of millions of Americans (and potential voters) with the slimey appellation, but they are lowering the bar on the definition of socialism to the point that about the only people in the US who wouldn’t be considered socialists are pie in the sky libertarians and corporate Republicans like Limbaugh and his ilk on talk radio.
And what of our illustrious leader, RNC Chairman Michael Steele? A cigar store indian has more influence with the RNC than he does:
A member of the Republican National Committee told me Tuesday that when the RNC meets in an extraordinary special session next week, it will approve a resolution rebranding Democrats as the “Democrat Socialist Party.”
When I asked if such a resolution would force RNC Chairman Michael Steele to use that label when talking about Democrats in all his speeches and press releases, the RNC member replied: “Who cares?”
Which pretty much sums up the attitude some members of the RNC have toward their chairman these days.
Steele wrote a memo last month opposing the resolution. Steele said that while he believes Democrats “are indeed marching America toward European-style socialism,” he also said in a (rare) flash of insight that officially referring to them as the Democrat Socialist Party “will accomplish little than to give the media and our opponents the opportunity to mischaracterize Republicans.”
I can hear my new conservative friends already: “We shouldn’t care what the media and the opposition will say about us. Anyone who does is a cowardly wretch who willingly plays into their hands by accepting their characterization of conservatives and Republicans.”
Okay, you win. I totally and completely reject the characterizations of conservatives by the media and the Democrats. I’ll even agree that even thinking about the subject should be cause for being kicked out of the Republican party. We don’t want pantywaists who wet themselves if the media and the Democrats successfully paint conservatives as a bunch of loony tunes nitwits who smear 60 million potential voters by calling them socialists. Be a man. Stand up. Look like an idiot, go ahead.
Lord deliver us.
Michael Gerson calls it “A Driving Desire to Lose:”
Witness the reaction to the National Council for a New America — an anodyne “listening tour” by Republican officials recently kicked off at a pizza parlor in Northern Virginia. Social conservatives attacked this forum on education and the economy for the offense of not being a forum on abortion and the traditional family. Neo-Reaganites searched the transcript for nonexistent slights: How dare former Florida governor Jeb Bush criticize “nostalgia” for the “good old days”? Why didn’t he just spit on Ronald Reagan’s grave? Other conservatives criticized the very idea of a listening tour, asking, “What’s to hear?”
During a recent conversation, Bush described himself as “dumbfounded by the reaction.” He added: “I don’t think listening is a weakness. People are yearning to be heard. Perhaps we should begin with a little humility.”
[snip]
Each of these policies — carbon restrictions, universal health insurance and immigration reform — could eventually be important to the Republican recovery. But would a candidate carrying these ideas transform the Republican Party, or be destroyed by it? The hostile reaction to the pizza parlor putsch provides one answer.
But this is a snapshot, not a prophecy. As the years pass, the kingdom of irrelevance seems less and less pleasant, even to its rulers. Policy shifts that seem incredible become inevitable. This is how a party prepares to win.
Fighting over who should rule this “Kingdom of Irrelevance” is all we have left. There are issues of vital importance to almost all Americans that the GOP continues to ignore not because there aren’t conservative alternatives to what the Democrats are offering but because the ignoramuses currently in the ascendancy in the party have deemed them “Democratic issues” and anyone who advocates conservative solutions to those problems is automatically branded a “moderate” - a virtual death knell in today’s purest atmosphere. The notion that addressing vital issues is nothing more than acting like a Democrat is so absurd on its face that it is little wonder serious people do not take the party seriously.
Steele has got to go. He’s been emasculated already so putting him out of his misery would seem to be the charitable thing to do. And as for the RNC members who want to make an irrelevant statement by passing an irrelvant resolution, from an irrelevant group representing an irrelevant party with irrelevant ideas - they should all be forced to take their pants down and a great big “I” for “Irrelevant” branded on their rumps. That’s my idea for “rebranding” the party.
That way, when they pass a resolution requiring Republicans to moon Democrats whenever they see them, people will know where they’re coming from.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Obama-offers-security-at-the-expense-of-liberty-44834647.html
de Tocqueville, as well as Jonah Goldberg’s book “Liberal Facism”, should be required reading for anyone who is concerned about where Obama is taking us…whether or not you want to label his agenda “socialist”, “statist” or “soft despotism” is entirely up to you…
Comment by SG — 5/14/2009 @ 11:11 am
My apologies…Goldberg’s book is “Liberal Fascism”…accidentally left out the “s”…
Comment by SG — 5/14/2009 @ 11:13 am
Unfortunately you are so right with this post. As I have said before, real life socialism did really exist and it cost millions of lives. The Democratic party has been in power before and I did not see thousand detained and sent to Gulags. I knew both East and West Germany and indeed there was a big difference. Present day Germany might be much more liberal than the United States in economic policies and Rush Limbaugh might call European Countries socialist but as far as I know Mercedes Benz, BMW and Audi are no socialist entities. The phone service used to be government run but that is long ago and as you can attest to here in the US, T-mobile is doing pretty well (just in case you didn’t know they are German; and so is DHL). All I’m saying is that it really is ridiculous to call Germany or the Democratic Party ’socialist’.
However, this will go over well at Hot Air.
Comment by funny man — 5/14/2009 @ 12:00 pm
“What Obama is doing should be opposed with every fiber of our beings.”
Then oppose it with every fiber in your being! Stop using some fibers of your being to castigate those who are calibrating their opposition to Obama in ways different from you.
“There are issues of vital importance to almost all Americans that the GOP continues to ignore ”
You have a blog. Stop the circular firing squad yourself and bring those issues up - what are they?
It reeks of impotence and intolerance to go around trying to get people to stop saying what they feel about an administration that is the most left-wing in history.
Comment by Freedoms Truth — 5/14/2009 @ 1:31 pm
The socialists rebranding IS stupid. However, if Steele were fired it would simply further the perception of a party in disarray. Parents used to say “We shouldn’t argue in front of the children”. Why haven’t the powers that be in the Republican Party learned not to argue in public. Party discipline is not only in regards to issues but to public behavior.
And for all those who are essentially saying “Fine I’ll just take my ball and go home” remember its “our ball” And frankly I don’t want you to leave.
Comment by c3 — 5/14/2009 @ 1:44 pm
I agree that the socialist rebranding might not be especially helpful and it is vulnerable to counterattack. Yes, using such language is imprecise and perhaps even intellectually lazy. But so what? If you can get every voter in America to read (or reread) The Road to Serfdom, then we can have a really sophisticated conversation.
Until then, we probably won’t get far using only Ivy League-approved terminology. You’ll notice, in addiiton to calling the Obama administration “lawless” (which is effective), George Will suggests at the end of his column that the administration is “maximizing dependency” by imposing “economic planning” in the name of “social justice” - all code words for socialistic policies of whatever degree. I thought Will’s column was terrific, but how many people read it, and how many understand his subtleties? Still, he was calling Obama a socialist in his own way.
I also agree with Freedom’s Truth that, if “what Obama is doing should be opposed with every fiber of our being,” then it’s even less helpful to agitate for an intramural war. The left pretends to have internal disagreements, and will viciously attack apostates, but most of the time time the left reserves its character assassination campaigns for its opponents.
Look, it’s just over 100 days into the Obama administration. At this stage, the two most important things to do are: 1). Engage in ideas - research, analyze, think, have healthy debates, etc.; 2). attack, attack, attack all bad Democrat policies, and force them to take 100% ownership over their messes. Soon, it will also be important to find dynamic new leaders and settle internal differences. But why do the left’s bidding for it?
Comment by Buckeye — 5/14/2009 @ 2:59 pm
C3:
. . .it would simply further the perception of a party in disarray.
I’m not sure that’s mathematically possible. Once you achieve 100% disarray and 0% credibility, I think you’re at the limit.
On the plus side, there’s nowhere to go but up.
Comment by michael reynolds — 5/14/2009 @ 3:17 pm
A more accurate name for the the Democrats would be the Social Democrats. Most left-leaning folks long ago figured out that govenment ownership of the means of production screws everything up. So they moved to the high tax/high benefit models you see in much of Europe, which the Democrats have never made any bones about wanting to emulate.
For a leftie, or a “socialist” or whatever you want to call them, it’s the best of both worlds - through high taxes and regulation, the government effectively controls the means of production without actually having to run the businesses - which they proved they suck at. And they use the high taxes to fund the redistribution they desire - voila! - socialism without the responsibility of ownership!
Comment by Chris — 5/14/2009 @ 3:41 pm
de Tocqueville, as well as Jonah Goldberg’s book “Liberal Facism”, should be required reading for anyone who is concerned about where Obama is taking us…whether or not you want to label his agenda “socialist”, “statist” or “soft despotism” is entirely up to you…
What’s in a name? It’s still the same-old Government-collectivist-we-know-best approach to things.
Comment by Freedoms Truth — 5/14/2009 @ 3:50 pm
“Not because he is instituting socialism but because he and the Democrats are ignorantly corrupting the free market. ”
BTW, Rick, you realize this is an oxymoron. A corrupted regulation and man-handled economy is by definition no longer a *free* market, but a regulated one.
The real awkward thing is that the closest analog to a non-Govt-owned yet highly-regulated (non-free) market system is what Hitler/National Socialists did in the Third Reich, but I suspect that any RNC resolution to the effect of “Obama’s economic policies are moving USA economy to be just like Hitler’s” would be beyond incendiary and nuke public discourse pronto (massive Godwin’s Law event) … Oy vey!
Comment by Freedoms Truth — 5/14/2009 @ 3:56 pm
Sorry Freedoms Truth, by Godwins law (and horrible, horrible logic) you fail.
Comment by Chuck Tucson — 5/14/2009 @ 4:37 pm
“Sorry Freedoms Truth, by Godwins law (and horrible, horrible logic) you fail.”
LOL, you cant invoke Godwin’s Law. I already did.
Comment by Freedoms Truth — 5/14/2009 @ 5:08 pm
Travis Monitor (Freedoms Truth),
why do you always have to evoke ridiculous comparisons like now Nazi economics. Let’s just say Obama wants a system like present day Germany, nothing more nothing less. I can tell you lot of things that are not good in Germany but they are still pretty competitive when compared to let’s say Texas.
I agree with you in not having circular firing squads but that’s what happens after lost elections. Things will straighten out in the end but of course it also is a power struggle. We’ll see who will be in charge of the GOP in let’s say 2 years. I’ll do my best it’s neither the neocons nor the Coulter brigades.
Comment by funny man — 5/14/2009 @ 6:17 pm
I also do not agree with many of Obamas economic policies, but I cannot be the only person who has become very jaded with the way both Republicans AND Conservatives pay lip service to the “Free Market” only to ignore it when it benefits them and their political contributors.
Comment by getreal — 5/14/2009 @ 6:54 pm
Let’s just say that without any opposition the Democrats would control the activity of the entire economy, except small parts which are irrelevant. I don’t know what you call that, but socialism is not the worst thing it can be called — Mises wrote about all forms of government control of the economy being socialistic in nature, because the final results are the same — the technical differences don’t matter.
Libertarianism is the best alternative going
Comment by Mike Farmer — 5/14/2009 @ 7:25 pm
People like Freedoms Truth control the gop today, thats why they are in trouble. Because to them, nothing is wrong with the party, they will not tolerate any critique of the party (Rick) and they seem not to notice the party shrinking. Wall Street and the banks were completely out of control, wheres the vitriol on the hard right for that fact?Obama tries to rein in the mess and gets branded a leftist. Fine. The only argument I can win nowadays with my conservative friends is that my Democratic Party will continue to win big elections. No, were far from being perfect as far as political parties go, but compared with the modern day gop, we are lightyears ahead imho.
Comment by Joe — 5/14/2009 @ 7:51 pm
True the vast majority of American businesses have not been taken over by the federal government. Creeping socialism never begins with the conner market, or the local shoe store, but with the big boys–the banks, the big insurance companies, the auto makers. Once this is done the little fish will be easy to subdue. Yes, Obama is on the road to socialism and a blind man should be able to see it. Some will deny this and will not believe it could happen and will find a thousand things to point to, to indicate its not happening—that crowd is always present and will not see the tidal wave until it sweeps over them.
Comment by Ron Russell — 5/14/2009 @ 8:07 pm
I was hoping that this was some kind of bad joke or another Internet twisting of the truth. Unfortunately it isn’t. Apparently being losers is not enough for the GOP. We now intend to become a bad joke.
I respectfully disagree that we should oppose Obama with every fiber of our being. Let’s disagree with and oppose the policy choices based on why we think they won’t work. The ad hominem attacks and silly sniping just make us look like bad losers. Do we have any ideas of our own, or are we only willing to sit on the sidelines and snipe?
Right now the entirety of the Republican action plan seems to be to attack Democrats. Not by coming up with better solutions, but by calling them names. Go to the Republican National Committee web page. It looks like a bad copy of perezhilton.com. The only news is about why Democrats are bad and who was appointed to fill what new vacancy in the GOP’s leadership. What’s next? Are they going to start posting pictures of Michelle Obama and criticizing her clothes?
Those of us that remember the excitement of Reagan’s 1980 Presidential Campaign know that it was about ideas. We had a leader that had ideas about where to take the country and how to fix what was wrong with our government. Even if you didn’t agree with everything you were willing to be led by somebody that seemed like he had a plan. After he won, the democrats stooped to the same kind of idiotic sniping that the GOP is trying now. What happened to them? They didn’t get the White House back for another 12 years! Is that what we want?
Comment by Mark — 5/14/2009 @ 9:04 pm
Damn.
All day I was hoping that you’d be able to put a “this isn’t as unbelievably stupid as it appears” spin on this.
Comment by busboy33 — 5/14/2009 @ 10:54 pm
#15 Joe “People like Freedoms Truth control the gop today, thats why they are in trouble. Because to them, nothing is wrong with the party..”
Nonsense on multiple levels:
1. I didnt get my presidential nominee nor am I an ‘elite’ or bigwig. I have no more influence on the GOP than any primary voter.
2. Your view of my view of GOP is completely wrong. I have plenty to say about what the GOP should do and I think rethinking the GOPs articulation, brand, core principles, and engagement with votes, ie, a top-to-bottom rethink and redo, is useful. I am aware and supportive of introspection:
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2009/05/conservative-introspection-tour.html
There are brand issues that need to be fixed:
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2008/11/smartness-coolness-factors.html
I think there is a need to change some things:
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2009/05/howl-of-rinos-and-rebuilding-gop.html
3. What I dont support is un-useful ‘fire Steele’ catcalls, which only feeds the circular firing squad. MY POINT IS SIMPLE TO RICK MORAN: STOP THE CATCALLS AND LEAD BY EXAMPLE. JUST DO IT THE WAY YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE DONE. TELL US HOW WE *SHOULD* CRITIQUE OBAMA, POSITION THE GOP, AND STAND FOR OUR BELIEFS.
4. In general, we have a very unhelpful fetish among some ‘hall monitor’ type Republicans who want to waste time calling out other Republicans for being too (right-wing, shallow, anti-intellectual, moderate, elitist, populist, happy/sad/emotional/unemotional etc.) IT’S 99% POINTLESS CRITICISM FROM ALL SIDES. CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM IS A BETTER WAY. If this is a bad idea, just let it drop silently and move on to a BETTER IDEA.
5. #16, I agree with need for ideas and less anti-Obama stuff at RNC, especially since others can and should take up the Obama agenda opposition. far better for the RNC front page to have GOP core values …
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2008/11/winning-youth-vote-for-republicans.html
“Here’s my take on the Republicans core principles: The GOP is the party of liberty, limited government, judges who rule on law and not make them, law and order, traditional values and family values, free enterprise, equality of opportunity, strong national defense, Federalism and Government as close to the people as possible, support for the truly needy, Constitutional rights and individual responsibility.”
Comment by Travis Monitor — 5/14/2009 @ 11:08 pm
Mark,
the problem for conservatives like us and many on this blog is that we like using our brain and reason. Bad move, we are elitist, secret Obama lovers with no backbone and conviction. Purge!
Comment by funny man — 5/14/2009 @ 11:10 pm
#15 Joe “People like Freedoms Truth control the gop today, thats why they are in trouble. Because to them, nothing is wrong with the party..”
Nonsense on multiple levels:
1. I didnt get my presidential nominee nor am I an ‘elite’ or bigwig. I have no more influence on the GOP than any primary voter.
2. Your view of my view of GOP is completely wrong. I have plenty to say about what the GOP should do and I think rethinking the GOPs articulation, brand, core principles, and engagement with votes, ie, a top-to-bottom rethink and redo, is useful. I am aware and supportive of introspection:
There are brand issues that need to be fixed:
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2008/11/smartness-coolness-factors.html
I think there is a need to change some things:
http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2009/05/howl-of-rinos-and-rebuilding-gop.html
3. What I dont support is un-useful ‘fire Steele’ catcalls, which only feeds the circular firing squad. MY POINT IS SIMPLE TO RICK MORAN: STOP THE CATCALLS AND LEAD BY EXAMPLE. JUST DO IT THE WAY YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE DONE. TELL US HOW WE *SHOULD* CRITIQUE OBAMA, POSITION THE GOP, AND STAND FOR OUR BELIEFS.
4. In general, we have a very unhelpful fetish among some ‘hall monitor’ type Republicans who want to waste time calling out other Republicans for being too (right-wing, shallow, anti-intellectual, moderate, elitist, populist, happy/sad/emotional/unemotional etc.) IT’S 99% POINTLESS CRITICISM. CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM IS A BETTER WAY. If this is a bad idea, just let it drop silently and move on to a BETTER IDEA.
5. #16, I agree with need for ideas and less anti-Obama stuff at RNC, especially since others can and should take up the Obama agenda opposition. far better for the RNC front page to have GOP core values …
eg
“Here’s my take on the Republicans core principles: The GOP is the party of liberty, limited government, judges who rule on law and not make them, law and order, traditional values and family values, free enterprise, equality of opportunity, strong national defense, Federalism and Government as close to the people as possible, support for the truly needy, Constitutional rights and individual responsibility.”
Comment by Travis Monitor — 5/14/2009 @ 11:11 pm
“Travis Monitor (Freedoms Truth),
why do you always have to evoke ridiculous comparisons like now Nazi economics. ”
Always?!? I did it once, only in pointing out the irony of it being a bit more apt than socialism, and immediately self-discounted it as incendiary not illuminating and NOT the way to go. Thanks for not noticing.
The fact is that: The Obama administration has strongarmed multiple corporate boards, bondholders and banks already in ways that make a mockery of the phrase free market, already abused by the trillion dollar bailouts and trillion dollar stimulus. They got the health insurers scared enough to ‘chip in’ on buying down cost of socialized medicine. They are moving this country massively in the direction of higher spending, more regulation, more taxation, and more govt control of the economy. One small example: Employer mandates on healthcare equate to a large tax increase for most workers.
George Will’s essay analysis is factually on target, but its complex prose makes it hard to express in our twitterized 30-second soundbite culture.
If ’socialism’ is off the table… What’s on it? How do you in simple terms describe the many fingers Obama admin is poking into the US economy? “Community Activist Government”?
Comment by Travis Monitor — 5/14/2009 @ 11:23 pm
“MY POINT IS SIMPLE TO RICK MORAN: STOP THE CATCALLS AND LEAD BY EXAMPLE. JUST DO IT THE WAY YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE DONE. TELL US HOW WE *SHOULD* CRITIQUE OBAMA, POSITION THE GOP, AND STAND FOR OUR BELIEFS.”
I realize in some ways that this make Rick’s point in that this advice fits the RNC as well: Instead of name-calling on Obama, tell us how it SHOULD BE DONE in terms of an agenda for America. That is, don’t just critique Obama but give CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM that provides an alternative agenda:
“Obama is wrong on socializing healthcare, here’s is what is better ideas to keep choice and lower costs…”
Comment by Travis Monitor — 5/14/2009 @ 11:27 pm
You guys have an additional problem: you had the White House for the last 8 years. So ideas you suddenly come up with now will beg the question as to why you didn’t advance them over the last 8 years.
You have to ditch the base. They’ve already lost on all their major issues anyway. They are a spent force. Look to the future.
Comment by michael reynolds — 5/15/2009 @ 12:00 am
“You guys have an additional problem: you had the White House for the last 8 years. So ideas you suddenly come up with now will beg the question as to why you didn’t advance them over the last 8 years.
You have to ditch the base. They’ve already lost on all their major issues anyway. They are a spent force. Look to the future.”
The Democrats have a larger problem, now — control of congress and the adminstration. I would also advise ditching your base before they ruin the country and the Democrat Party. The Democrats won because of independents, and swinging moderate Republican votes, but neither will stay with the Democrats if the radical left base completely obliterates an economy already damaged by the previous Republican president and Democrat controlled congress.
Comment by Mike Farmer — 5/15/2009 @ 6:01 am
“You guys have an additional problem: you had the White House for the last 8 years. So ideas you suddenly come up with now will beg the question as to why you didn’t advance them over the last 8 years.
You have to ditch the base.”
Wrong. We either have to ditch the base of 40-50 million voters OR ditch Bush administration lackeys and allegiance to some unpopular Bush actions, like screwing up Iraq, amnesty for illegal aliens, spending too much, etc.
Seems like a fairly easy call to keep the base and throw the Bush administrations failings under the bus.
Ultimately, this is what the “Tea Party” activity was all about. The pro-freedom wing of the electorate established an independent resistance to the Obama agenda. Bush is history and if the Democrats are going to cluelessly try to run against Bush in 2010 they will get a well-deserved come-uppance.
Comment by Freedoms Truth — 5/15/2009 @ 8:49 am
Mike Farmer:
Can I have some of what you’re smoking?
Comment by Shaun — 5/15/2009 @ 10:12 am
“Can I have some of what you’re smoking?”
Can you expound on that?
Comment by mike farmer — 5/15/2009 @ 10:17 am
Ready! Set! Lose!…
Jesus H. Christ on a bike RNC, are you actively trying to make every conservative sound like a raving lunatic? A resolution to “re-brand” the Democrats as the “Democrat Socialist Party” is worth convening a special session? …
Trackback by Futures and Options — 5/15/2009 @ 11:33 am
Mike;
Yeah but where’s it going?
Comment by c3 — 5/15/2009 @ 3:12 pm
c3 said,
I think it’s going toward political influence rather than political power. It’s my theory that a large portion of the independent movement we see are libertarian-minded voters — not necessarily people who understand the whole libertarian philosophy, but are fairly grounded in the principles of classic liberalism. Whether this creates the viability of a third party is questionable, but I foresee libertarian ideas limiting government and strengthening the private sector (charity organizations, private education, mail, etc.) in the near future.
Comment by Mike Farmer — 5/15/2009 @ 6:13 pm
The whole notion of “rebranding” the opposition party is right out of the talk radio playbook, clearly demonstrating Rick’s point about the far right influence in the Republican party. The few million that faithfully listen to Rush and the assorted faux Rushes see themselves as the true believers and everyone else as apostates. They are just not numerous enough to win elections anywhere. Unless and until Rush and his sycophants are marginalized and ignored, there is no use in trying to “fix” the GOP. True believers of any ilk eventually drive everyone else off with their demand for purity and are left talking to themselves while the world moves ahead pragmatically enough to accomplish what needs to get done.
Comment by still liberal — 5/16/2009 @ 6:56 am