Republican traitors?

Oberon · Mar 8, 2009

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/open-letter-to-the-republ_b_172822.html

I agree. You don't have to. this is America, after all. At least it used to be. I am just plain disgusted. I thought we had a chance.

Monkey · Mar 8, 2009

You Republicans are the arsonists who burned down our national home. You combined the failed ideologies of the Religious Right, so-called free market deregulation and the Neoconservative love of war to light a fire that has consumed America. Now you have the nerve to criticize the "architect" America just hired -- President Obama -- to rebuild from the ashes. You do nothing constructive, just try to hinder the one person willing and able to fix the mess you created.

This is more loaded language and heavy-handed rhetoric than is usual for the Huffpo, and that's saying something. Especially since the author could have made his case so much more balanced--and therefore stronger--given his background:

I used to be one of you. As recently as 2000 I worked to get Senator McCain elected in that year's primary. (McCain and Gen. Tommy Franks wrote glowing endorsements regarding my book about military service, AWOL.). I have a file of handwritten thank you notes from Presidents Ford, Reagan, Bush I and II. In the 1970s and early 80s I hung out with Jack Kemp and bought into his "supply side" myth and even wrote a book he endorsed pushing his ideas.) There's more, but take it from me; my parents (evangelical leaders Francis and Edith Schaeffer) and I were about as tight with -- and useful to -- the Republican Party as anyone. We played a big part creating the Religious Right.

Anyway, I'm not sure what this piece was about, other than calling names. I can't see how anyone could believe that this was truly written to encourage Republicans to be more bipartisan.

I agree that the Republicans are largely rudderless--and maybe that's a good thing considering how determined they are to go in the wrong direction--but will blaming one political party for the mess we're in while holding the other blameless really contribute to anything other than more partisanship?

Plot Device · Mar 8, 2009

Don't tell that to Ann.

brokenfingers · Mar 8, 2009

Monkey said:
This is more loaded language and heavy-handed rhetoric than is usual for the Huffpo, and that's saying something. Especially since the author could have made his case so much more balanced--and therefore stronger--given his background:

Anyway, I'm not sure what this piece was about, other than calling names. I can't see how anyone could believe that this was truly written to encourage Republicans to be more bipartisan.

I agree that the Republicans are largely rudderless--and maybe that's a good thing considering how determined they are to go in the wrong direction--but will blaming one political party for the mess we're in while holding the other blameless really contribute to anything other than more partisanship?

I see he recently wrote a book. That explains (in my mind) the attack. Any publicity is good publicity. And controversy is some of the best.

Mr. Chuckletrousers · Mar 8, 2009

I think the words "treason" and "traitor" and the general practice of questioning an opponent's patriotism should be banned from politics entirely. It's easy, and oftentimes effective, for a party or ideologue to say that not supporting a particular political agenda or course of action means you hate America and are a traitor, but it is immensely destructive to the public discourse and starts us down a very dangerous path.

mscelina · Mar 8, 2009

Partisan rhetoric that's been hyperbolized. The slant in the story is so heavy that it almost has to be discounted from the opening paragraph. It's a shame. There might have been a valid point buried in there somewhere, but I sure couldn't find under all the bull dookey.

donroc · Mar 8, 2009

History is filled with converts who have polemicized and done worse against their former colleagues/true believers.

Sirion · Mar 8, 2009

The moment I saw "Huffington Post" I knew it would be a vicious smear piece with no logic, morals, or general common sense.

I was right.

I love how berates Republicans for not falling in line with Obama's policies....Really? Because all the Liberals got behind President Bush when he was elected? I am not "getting behind" a policy which I disagree (i.e. A trillion dollar stimulus plan filled with pork, that will accomplish nothing but increasing debt) with anymore than he would. What a hypocrite.

Disgusting.

Monkey · Mar 8, 2009

Plot Device said:
Don't tell that to Ann.

Author of Slander. :roll:

Yeah. Ann can roll in the muck with the worst of them. Very like the guy in the OP, but playing for the other team.

I don't care whose team you're on, hyperbolic bullsh&! doesn't make your point...it makes your point look weak.

Don · Mar 8, 2009

Is this guy going for the title Liberal Limbaugh?

I want my ten minutes back.

Zoombie · Mar 8, 2009

Both parties should eject these windbags from their groups. Both Coulter and Hamburger and...whoever this guy is.

Let them form the Asshats of America party.

Don Allen · Mar 8, 2009

There is a truth in what this guy says, and it's something I have been trying, I think in vain, around here to say for almost a year now. I'm a republican by nature, by convictions, by voting record. I also love this country and see a nation that in eight years that has gone backwards in both domestic as well as world perception.

I don't feel aligned with the conservative movement in the least, because they refuse to be inclusive to any segment of the population that may agree with their philosphy, but disagree with the "all of nothing" format designed and promoted by those such as Limbaugh.

I walked through the Reagan library last year, and for me personally it reminded me of what he used to preach, compassionate conservatism and inclusion. I know in my heart that Reagan wouldn't tolerate the state of this party, or subscribe to it's complete intolerence of any opposing view.

.

rugcat · Mar 8, 2009

I saw that interview, and i agree Schaeffer was over the top. But I also agree that there has been a shift in the republican party, and not for the better. I used to disagree with conservative viewpoints (and still do) but I respected many of those who espoused them.

I haven't changed all that much -- I've become more radical about some things, and more conservative about others. But these days, i see a very different mindset in the GOP, one which often drives me to anger. Shaeffer, no matter how inartistically and dogmatically, has put his finger on something.

nighttimer · Mar 8, 2009

David Frum wants his Republican Party back too:

Even before the November 2008 defeat—even before the financial crisis and the congressional elections of November 2006—it was already apparent that the Republican Party and the conservative movement were in deep trouble. And not just because of Iraq, either (although Iraq obviously did not help).

At the peak of the Bush boom in 2007, the typical American worker was earning barely more after inflation than the typical American worker had earned in 2000. Out of those flat earnings, that worker was paying more for food, energy and out-of-pocket costs of health care. Political parties that do not deliver economic improvement for the typical person do not get reelected. We Republicans and conservatives were not delivering. The reasons for our failure are complex and controversial, but the consequences are not.

We lost the presidency in 2008. In 2006 and 2008, together, we lost 51 seats in the House and 14 in the Senate. Even in 2004, President Bush won reelection by the narrowest margin of any reelected president in American history.

The trends below those vote totals were even more alarming. Republicans have never done well among the poor and the nonwhite—and as the country's Hispanic population grows, so, too, do those groups. More ominously, Republicans are losing their appeal to voters with whom they've historically done well.

In 1988 George H.W. Bush beat Michael Dukakis among college graduates by 25 points. Nothing unusual there: Republicans have owned the college-graduate vote. But in 1992 Ross Perot led an exodus of the college-educated out of the GOP, and they never fully returned. In 2008 Obama beat John McCain among college graduates by 8 points, the first Democratic win among B.A. holders since exit polling began.

Political strategists used to talk about a GOP "lock" on the presidency because of the Republican hold on the big Sun Belt states: California, Texas, Florida. Republicans won California in every presidential election from 1952 through 1988 (except the Goldwater disaster of 1964). Democrats have won California in the five consecutive presidential elections since 1988.

In 1984 Reagan won young voters by 20 points; the elder Bush won voters under 30 again in 1988. Since that year, the Democrats have won the under-30 vote in five consecutive presidential elections. Voters who turned 20 between 2000 and 2005 are the most lopsidedly Democratic age cohort in the electorate. If they eat right, exercise and wear seat belts, they will be voting against George W. Bush well into the 2060s.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/188279/page/3

http://www.newsweek.com/id/180043

There is a tug-of-war within the Republican Party and if it continues driving its moderate base into the the arms of the Democrats or into sitting on their hands on election day, the GOP is destined to remain
mired in mediocrity.

The Left-wing of the Democratic Party is already impatient with President Obama as it presses him to move faster on their agenda. If Obama goes overboard appeasing them he risks alienating the independents and moderate Republicans who gave him a chance in 2008.

Presidents spend two years trying to get elected and the next four trying to get reelected. It's not that Obama can't lose in 2010. It's that he won't lose if in charting a new course, Republicans drive away the moderate middle and the independents.

Circular firing squads are not the way to go for the GOP.

But hey, it's not as if it's my party...

maestrowork · Mar 8, 2009

Among the scraps of rotten cabbage and fish guts and spoiled milk, sometimes there's a sliver of bacon in all that trash if we dig deep enough.

But yeah, most of it is still trash. And perhaps it's a bad idea to eat that sliver of bacon after all.

blacbird · Mar 9, 2009

nighttimer said:
David Frum wants his Republican Party back too:

I don't agree with Frum on a lot of matters, but he's no dummy and intellectually respectable. He's been trying to make his point within the context of the conservative political population for a good while now. But it's hard to do in the context of a Party that got hijacked by the James Dobsons and John Hagees and Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs, back in Ronald Reagan's era. It's going to take them a while to find their way out of that heart of darkness.

caw

Don Allen · Mar 9, 2009

maestrowork said:
Among the scraps of rotten cabbage and fish guts and spoiled milk, sometimes there's a sliver of bacon in all that trash if we dig deep enough.

But yeah, most of it is still trash. And perhaps it's a bad idea to eat that sliver of bacon after all.

Ray, I don't know what the fuck you're smoking, but you have to pass some out if you expect anyone to understand this..... I'll take two!!

cethklein · Mar 9, 2009

Mr. Chuckletrousers said:
I think the words "treason" and "traitor" and the general practice of questioning an opponent's patriotism should be banned from politics entirely. It's easy, and oftentimes effective, for a party or ideologue to say that not supporting a particular political agenda or course of action means you hate America and are a traitor, but it is immensely destructive to the public discourse and starts us down a very dangerous path.

Agreed. This crap hit a pinnacle during the Bush years. It was chic to use the "you're with us or against us" line. Now everyone is doing it. But I also think Ann Coulter should be separated from most of these other blowhards. She does it solely to stir the pot, she's openly admitted this.

James81 · Mar 9, 2009

because you put partisan ideology ahead of the good of our country, you have blown your last chance to redeem yourselves.

That is just dripping with irony right there.

Seriously, he's bitching about partisan ideology by...singling out....a party...and bashing them and blaming them?

What a big pile of hypocrisy that is.

That's the most disgusting thing about politics. On one hand you get people like this, who blame the Republicans. On the other hand, you have people who blame the Democrats.

When, oh when, are we going to just say "look, it's both our faults"? In a country where we can finally elect a black president, can we ever come to a place where we can put our petty partisan differences aside and work together instead of against each other?

Unique · Mar 9, 2009

There might have been a valid point buried in there somewhere...

With people like Limbaugh as the loudmouth image of the Republican Party -- you need no enemies. But something far more serious has happened than an image problem: the Republican Party has become the party of obstruction at just the time when all Americans should be pulling together for the good of our country. Instead, Republicans are today's fifth column sabotaging American renewal.

President Obama has been in office barely 45 days and the Republican Party has the nerve to blame him for the economic and military cataclysm he inherited. I say economic and military cataclysm because without the needless war in Iraq you all backed we would not be in the economic mess we're in today. If that money had been spent here at home on renovating our infrastructure, taking us toward a green economy, putting our health-care system in order we'd be a very different situation.

Two valid points.
YMMV

Oberon · Mar 9, 2009

You don't get much attention by being reasonable. People want to scream and shout. Left and right. In the present congressional stalemate, frustration is rampant. If we don't pull together, we pull apart. Sticking to a failed program makes no sense. As Einstein said, an idiot is one who does the same thing over and over, expecting a different result. I am a left-wing, radical, socialist-leaning Democrat and I have been disgusted with my government nearly all my life. So that's where I come from. I think you have to look for things that work, forget ideology. Obviously, Communism doesn't work. America will never be socialist, it's too big and too diverse and too rooted in a consumer economy. To say Obama is leading us into Socialism is ridiculous. We desperately need a concerted, cooperative effort by all branches and parties of the government. This is not an election, it's a nation in trouble. If all congresspeople think about is reelection, we make no progress. I don't exonerate all Democrats, either. Obama spoke about the climate in Washington needing change if we are to solve our problems. Resistant to change is very evident. I am still pissed, and I don't blame Schaeffer for screaming. So it goes.

Republican traitors?

Oberon

Monkey

Is me.

Plot Device

A woman said to write like a man.

brokenfingers

Walkin' That Road

Mr. Chuckletrousers

Sith happens.

mscelina

Teh doommobile, drivin' rite by you

donroc

Historicals and Horror rule

Sirion

practical experience, FTW

Monkey

Is me.

Don

All Living is Local

Zoombie

Dragon of the Multiverse

Don Allen

Seeking a Sanctuary of Intelligence

rugcat

Lost in the Fog

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters

maestrowork

Fear the Death Ray

blacbird

Don Allen

Seeking a Sanctuary of Intelligence

cethklein

James81

Great Scott Member

Unique

Agent of Doom

Oberon