| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
Resurrecting the Angry Republican theme
Robert Reich...
Republicans have made no secret of their wish to blame Obama for the bad economy, and to stir up as much populist rage against his so-called socialist tendencies as politically possible. History shows how effective demagogic ravings can be when a public is stressed economically. Make no mistake: Angry right-wing populism lurks just below the surface of the terrible American economy, ready to be launched not only at Obama but also at liberals, intellectuals, gays, blacks, Jews, the mainstream media, coastal elites, crypto socialists, and any other potential target of paranoid opportunity.
Really? First Republicans criticize big government, then...the Holocaust? Are these the Democratic talking points? I understand Robert Reich's desire to carry movement water, but I would think he would have the integrity to carry better water than this.
The 1994 Republican Revolution was the result of public rejection of Democratic overreach. In response, Democrats accused Republicans of being "angry" and unreasonable. (See the Time "Mad as Hell" cover accusing Newt Gingrich of perfecting "the politics of anger". It ran immediately after the 1994 election) The narrative was very effective for the Democrats.
Between this and recent attacks on, e.g., Rush Limbaugh, it's clear that Democrats are trying to resurrect this "angry" narrative before the 2010 mid-term election in order to delegitimize opposition to Democratic schemes.


Comments
We are now in a worldwide depression.
you are a fool if you do not fear fascism at such a time. Hitler, of course, was a centrist who favored unions.
"When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross"
-- Sinclair Lewis
Fascism is from the left Risingtide, not the Right.
I love the liberal drivel about conservative and theological fascism when there are countless examples of leftist fascist regimes in power in the world right now.
If fascism comes to America, it will come the same way fascism always comes, with the people's permission and willingness to be taken care of.
Like who?
nc
you should study history more.
I've read of how hitler came to power, and it is manifestly obvious that you have not.
No, he read
..that Luminary of the Right, that " Doughy Pantload", the author whose brilliance absolutely blinds most who read his books, who just wrote (and published (!)) that seminal work of transcendently puerile gobbledigook:
And a good laugh was had by all.
The Republican party is over
The Republican party is over intellectually. Of course it doesn't seem that way now but the handwriting is on the wall.
The Republican Ideal is like those Native Peoples standing ashore watching the first Spanish ships on the horizon. The game is over. A new game will begin but the old ways are useless in this new world.
It will take years for this realization to sink in a view of how the world works (i.e. a political ideology) has come to close.
The Native Peoples believed that all they had to do was get back to the old ways and the world they had known would return. Some danced Ghost Dances in hopes that the ancestors would rise up and give them their strength back.
The ancestors never came back.
Reagan is dead.
He Who Peddles Triumphalism
...ends up out on his ass in the next election.
Serious political people in both parties aren't listening to people like you. Which, btw, is why you're a blog commenter and Patrick owns this site.
while that's true, spector's tops ont he list of
"we replace him next time around" -- 60-70% odds of switch to a Democrat. there's a big difference between 41 seats and 40, let me tell you!
Maybe be but you guys don't
Maybe be but you guys don't have the demographics anymore. I remember arguing with a buddy of mine from West Virginia who would repeatedly predict Barack Obama could not win the Presidency for the simple reason that the racists wouldn't vote for him.
I said you're right. The racists will not vote for him. Now tell me, how many racists do you need to keep him from winning? He couldn't answer because that number was unknowable.
Two things saddle the Conservative Movement:
1. Demographic shift
2. The increased need for effective govenment services but the general population.
Until the Right comes up with a plan to address those issues that involves something other than looking at it's own navel, the party is kaput.
Anger sells
The anger pose is a very popular one on the right. It's most accomplished practitioners, Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Riley have huge audiences. People don't tune in to these shows to become better informed. Only to experience the anger the host directs at any particular person or point. Nothing is presented in depth or in context, because the purpose is not to inform.
Before I go further, let's just admit that Olbermann plays the exact same game on the left. But he is not nearly as popular as the other three. Nor does he have thousands of local market wanna be clones doing a pale impersonation of the masters. All of them present just enough of a quote or story to set up whatever strawman they will be directing their bile at for the next ten to thirty minutes.
Christopher Hitchens was on O'Riley about a year ago and was allowed to get out half an answer to one question before he was subjected to a ten minute, no pauses, rapid fire, angry barrage from the host. Hitchens closed the segment with priceless English wit by saying "You really must have me on the show more often to hear more of what you think."
The one guy on the right who appears to be breaking the mold is Huckabee. On his show it doesn't matter how much he disagrees with you, he still is really happy to have you as a guest. And he gives you time to make your points in full before coming back with his own rebuttals. To me that shows a great deal more confidence and intellectual ability than any of the others have.
I saw a Bill Clinton quote that might be apocryphal on his fellow Arkansas governor. "People don't think Mike Huckabee is a real conservative, but that's only because he's not all pissed off about it." I seem to remember Reagan disarming more than one political bomb with a joke and a smile. Modern conservatives would do well to heed his example. A true conservative fears no liberal idea.
The White House made us do it.
It's amazing how the Right is pushing the ridiculous notion that the Democrats created the controversy surrounding Rush Limbaugh. Boy, they embraced this talking point with blazing speed, thinking it gave them a way out.
There's only one little problem: Rush, "the victim" makes his living by relying exclusively on PROVOCATION. It was Rush who started the whole row by proclaiming that he wanted Obama to fail. He then showed up at CPAC as guest speaker and proceeded to launch into an invective-laden diatribe against the President and his policies. His tone was one of scorn and outrage. God knows how many times the faithful leaped to their feet to express their approval.
Faced with the widespread condemnation of Rush's ideological excesses by the general public, the GOP is trying to escape responsibility for the hate-filled ranting of their new leader by attempting to shift the focus to a "conspiracy" hatched in the White House. Do they really think that anyone is going to buy this BS?
Keith Preaches to the Converts
...that's his job. Same with Rachel Maddow, Randi Rhodes, and Stephanie Miller. It's the old Them vs. Us formula. It's not designed to Unite the country, but to increase ratings in niche marketing.
Strangely enough, the Republicans that break the mold are Huck Finn, as you say, and Palin-who I suspect will campaign as a 'non angry" Republican.
Palin is worse than the ordinary angry republican
as she ain't acting, the vindictive little vengeful twit.
I like Mike Huckabee personally
I'm not a big fan of some of his policies, and wish he were a little more 'wonkish', but I like the guy on a personal level. He seems to actually be willing to listen.
The Secret Service paid a visit to the Free Republic
The Angry Republican meme has been revived becasue of the sheer amount of evidence supporting it. One small case in point: the Secret Service recently had to pay a visit to the Free Republic to warn them that lines were being crossed by posters advocating/threatening/promising violence against the President.
Because No one on the Left ever Wanted Bush Assassinated
The Bush years were filled with left wing Bush assassination fantasies. A British film company even made a movie that fantasized about his assassination.
Please shut up about this kind of thing, Nando. The notion that political violence is the province of the right is belied by the online and cinematic leftwing fantasies of the past eight years.
Jesus. Your post just begged for a Fisking. You better not ask Axelrod for a pay raise for this Astroturfing gig of yours.
OK - but why don't you cite some examples?
Prove your case by quoting some examples.
Evidence NRNando
Here's some evidence, nando.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2191542/replies?c=41
Read through the thread, there's various others who jump on the bandwagon.
This is just one example.
Nasty.
A Freep nasty. Thank you.
not really, no.
when you feel empowered to change something, there's no reason to resort to meaningless acts of martyrdom.
freerepublic is pretty mainstream for republican thought. if someone did the same on kos, they'd be chased off the site by the participants. it would be even worse on mydd.
Zeig Flail
A stunted little man with a stunted little intellect. Short, nasty and doltish.
Robert "The Turd" Reich indeed. Nasty Little Brown Shirt that he is.
Comedy Gold!
Don't you just love brilliantly incisive rebuttals like Jack Bauer's?
He's not a tough guy
but he plays one on TV.
Are you kidding?
In the anger and rage department, the right can't even tie their shoes.
Forget about the talk shows -- they are equally full of vinegar.
But on the street, in the blogs, even in entertainment (George Carlin, Bill Mahr, Sean Penn), you can't count the f-bombs, gorilla theater (throwing chicken blood at the Marine recruiting station in Berkeley), and invective thrown at Bush, and even at people who simply disagree with the left.
Where is the right equivlent to Code Pink, MoveOn, QueerNation? Look at character assassination of Sarah Palin -- the obscene t-shirts, etc.
feminazi.
Buck Ofama.
Jack booted thugs will steal your guns, so please buy My Brand of ammo!
Better yet, check out http://field-negro.blogspot.com/, for all the many ways people have decided to denigrate our President.
Barack the Magic Negro.
What, people can't criticize the Dear Leader?
What's next? Big Character Posters? Songs for the Dear Leader's Birthday? Fuhrer Parades?
You charm school graduates dished it out against Bush. Don't call the Whaaaaaaaaaambulance when your guy gets critiqued.
Jesus. Talk about a bunch of thin-skinned whiners.
Okay, it's official. David Axelrod is overpaying you guys. He should ask for his Astroturfing money back.
racist shit deserves to get called out.
violent shit deserves to get called out, if anyone's ever serious about it (here's a hint: i almost never am. I don't speak for anyone else though, on either left or right).
To the KEYNESMOBILE!
oh, forget it, you don't even KNOW the breaking windows fallacy, why do I even bother, youw ouldn't get the joke...
Just a few examples
Ann Coulter saying the Supreme Court's Gitmo decision indicates someone should put "rat poison in Justice Stevens's crème brûlée"
Liz Trotta on FOX News saying it would be great if both Osama and Obama could both be killed.
Death threats against Justices O'Connor and Ginsberg becasue they dared to reference international law in their opinions.
John Bolton "joking" - and a CPAC audience guffawing - about Chicago being destroyed by a terrorist attack.
Joe the Plumber suggesting some members of Congress should be shot.
Sarah Palin refusing to acknowledge that rightwing radical abotion clinic bombers are terrorists.
Whaaaaaaa! Whaaaaaaa! Whaaaaaaaa!
Okay, some cheese with your whine?
Candy ass.
Just like the President, by the Way.
....ask the Iranians. They've got his number. As in "where's my lunch money"!
Very clever response
Very clever response, proving my point - you don't have anything of substance to add and you don't like the facts I've laid out, so you attack me personally. Thanks for reinforcing what I was saying.
Oh please.
There are over 900 hate groups identified by The Southern Poverty Law Center. Wanna take a stab at what the members voting records might look like if they were all polled? I'd wild guess, 80% Republican 15%, third party, 5% Democrat. And I'm not even sure if SPLC numbers include non-racially motivated groups like Rev. Phelps and the "God Hates Fags" Church.
Of course, many of you on the right will say "But those people aren't real conservatives, they're just a bunch of idiots." A common theme we are hearing these days about the Bush administration, so it's not surprising you're trying to distance yourselves from all of your embarassing former bedfellows. Bush was greeted at the 2008 CPAC Convention with chants of "Four More Years!"
Excellent advice. I'd think you might want to email that to Chairman Steele ASAP.
TO THE MODS: Love the new look. But you can't blockquote other posters anymore. The blockquoted text looks no different from the rest. So I just used italics and bold buttons till you can fix it.
Phelps
Fred Phelps is a registered Democrat.
Did you know that 87% of statistics are made up on the spot?
LOL
Did you know that 87% of statistics are made up on the spot?
No I didn't. But I do know that there are only two types of polls. Those that break down complex things into overly simplified catagories, and those that do not.
In theory there's no difference...
In theory there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.
There are two kinds of people in the world, those who finish what they are start...
Citing the SPLC about ANYTHING....
....is like inviting Heydrich to a Woman's American Ort meeting. You can peddle their statistics all you want, but I trust them about as much as I trust ACORN.
Don't expect serious conservatives to believe them, or you, for that matter.
The fact is, you Democrats shelter all sorts of fascist groups, such as Code Pink, International ANSWER, and of course, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which is basically Al Qaeda's version of the German-American Bund.
Fascism is YOUR problem, bud, not ours. Oh, and the last time I checked, it was lefty groups who were handing out The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion at antiwar rallies.
At least before the Obama people were able to step on these lefty clowns.
This will be a very interesting four years. But since the American people have a good instinct for self preservation, I don't expect it to last beyond that.
No anger on the left
Certainly no anger on the left, as evidenced by the fact that lefty trolls -- who are so insecure they have to post on this blog all the time -- are dominating this thread with their attacks.
A large number of concrete examples
A large number of concrete examples of right wing hate demonstrates....left wing hate. Interesting reasoning. Totally screwy and very wrong, but interesting nonetheless.
Logic is not the right's strong suit.
As I read over this chunk of the thread I don't see any lefties arguing against facts, and saying there are no radical "hate" groups on the left. We are simply pointing out that the right has their fair share also. Any difference in quantity or "whackosity" is beside the point. No leftie would be stupid enough to try to make his point by selling an easily disproved lie like, "There are no hate groups on the left."
I'm really not sure what ddemilo was trying to say with his original comment that "when it comes to hate, the right can not even tie their shoes." It seems to imply either incompetence or the underdevelopment one would associate with an infant. I won't try to characterize it further until he does.
I pointed out that SPLC lists over 900 hate groups, overwhelming rightie oriented. And ddemilo counters this with a statement that he personally doesn't trust SPLC's statistics without pointing to a single case where they mislabled any group. SPLC could get it wrong 90% of the time and they still would have accurately identified over 100 groups that refute the original contention that the left is the hate group leader.
And then he sums it up by stating that our group defense of his contentions is an example of hate. Nobody called anyone names or engaged in ad hominum attacks. So from now on when the righties pull something out of their ass, and we respond with well researched facts, that is actually proof they were correct, because if they were incorrect we wouldn't bother defending our side? The mind reels......
ALL you have to do
.. Is listen to one day's worth of Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Coulter, Ingraham, Boortz, Beck, O'Reilly, and Mark Levin and you would have no problem identifying the reason why Reich is talking about the GOP and its "Politics of Anger".
These are the leading media figures of the GOP, far more recognizable to the voters across this country than Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, or Jon Kyl.
And more interesting...
... to judge by the ratings, than Air America, Olberman, or Matthews.
Political discourse has been poisoned in this country by name calling, I'll grant you that.
Racist, reactionary, xenophobe, imperialist, homophobe, etc., are the left's contributions to this quandary.
What's rich is that this thread started by quoting Robert Reich on the matter. Here's one of the most insular, elitist, academic voices in on the left. He's offended every time he leaves the university campus.
Liberals think they're better because they went to college.
What is it about the Right's suspicion of the educated? Why was there such adulation of the two dimwits Sarah and Joe the non-Plumber? Remember how McCain's brain trust tried to turn Obama into an elitist snob? It didn't work, did it? And what is even funnier is that the upper class (mostly Republicans) are the ones who want most to get their kids into the "elite," ivy-league universities! The hypocrisy is bottomless.
Actually, that's mostly invented.
The Right has no suspicion of Education. That's a bastardized meme popularized by the news media in the last election because Idiot McCain latched on to Weurzelbacher.
Palin was a great candidate. She'll be even better in three years. Only the stupid and Andrew Sullivan underestimate her.
That said, the Ivy League has driven this country into a ditch over the past 20 years. Blaming it on Bush is the easy way out. Buckley was correct when he said that the nation would be in better hands if it were governed by the first 20 pages of the Manhattan telephone book than the Harvard Faculty.
So section9 is pro-education
so long as the person in question didn't go to a really good school.
yes
unless Jindal is the nominee. Then only Oxford will be good enough and anybody who "just" went to Harvard will be sooooo 2008. See, education matters, but it depends on the republican nominee. If it is Bush Sr. or Jr., Yale is fine. If someone on the ticket took 5 years to graduate and has 2 kids who may or may not get a high school diploma, then education is for the elites.
I really wonder what all the anti-education folks think of Duke and Wake Forest. they aren't ivy league but they are expensive and private. A lot of southern people down here in NC don't take the "good school" bashing too well.
I thinking kicking ass in basketball removes the elitest taint
I thinking kicking ass in basketball removes the elitest taint and therefore makes them OK.
olberman routinely outperforms oreilley.
just the facts.
O vs. O
I don't think Olberman is performing. I think that he's really that stupid.
The Obama - Democrat effort
The Obama - Democrat effort to portray Rush Limbaugh as the real leader or spokesman for the GOP is borrowed from a previously similar successful effort instigated by James Carville & Co. of the Clinton WH. During the '90s, the MSM was encouraged to portray Gary Bauer, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson as the poster boys of the GOP. As a result, they along with Ralph Reed were periodic guests on the Sunday morning talk shows with some regularity. Carville & Co. knew very well that the Sunday morning shows attract a demographic that would be turned off by the image of a GOP dominated by these polarizing religious right leaders of the day. The party leaders, including the Congressional leadership, were apparently clueless as to what was going on; they did little to counter the impressions being created. As a result, this strategy was slow poison for the positioning of the GOP over the ensuing years and is partially responsible for where we are today.
Is it any different
From trying to equate all liberals with aragula, Hollywood or cocktails?