Why Weren't the Conservatives Screaming Under Bush?
Across the country there is a vocal minority who are loudly protesting certain issues. We have the "birther" folks who think that Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States. We have the "deathers" (including Sarah Palin) who apparently think the government is going to use health care reform to kill the old and disabled. Then we have the anti-healthcare reformers who have a bucketfull of confusion and fears about socialism, fascism, and losing their "choice" in healthcare. All seem to be being spurred on by corporate backed "astroturf" organizations and by a few unethical media mouths.
Now the citizens showing up screaming at "tea bag" parties, and town halls are clearly angry and afraid. The Republican politicians do little but fuel their concerns that Obama (Democrats) and "government," are taking on outrageous powers, and ruining the Constitution and the country.
I just have one question.
Where were these people and their concerns when George W. Bush and Company were forging the Unitary Executive?
I can tell you where they were. They were cheering BushCo. on. They were shouting "America, love it or leave it." They were calling those that were concerned about the shift of power to the Executive branch, and the deliberate refusal to any oversight of their actions, "terrorists" and "communists" and "conspiracy nuts." Some even loudly proclaimed that all us "kooks" should be locked up in Gitmo or killed.
These were the folks, who despite evidence of being lied into a war, and lied to about covert surveillance of Americans and a policy of torture, said "My country. Right or wrong, my country." Or even argued forcefully for the rightness of the authority Bush was taking, and for the tearing up of Constitutional protections to make us safe.
What has changed from their purported perspective? We are still at war. We are still under threat of terrorism at home and abroad. Al Qaeda is still operating, and new foes have arisen. Iran and North Korea are still defined as active nuclear threats. <b>If these threats were what legitimated the embrace of power by the Bush administration, those conditions still exist.</b>
If there was any consistency to the ideology of the right wing screamers, then they would not be screaming. Or if they are screaming now, they should have been screaming then.
If there was any consistency to the REPUBLICAN party line, then they should have been in outright revolt under George W. Bush. Not only was there not revolt, they were in lock-step supporting every abuse of power and shredding of the Constitution.
To say the least, all of this is disingenuous, but it is more than that. It is posing, fomenting, and manipulation of folks who are willing to be manipulated.
I am sick of the duplicity. I am sick of the lying. I am sick to death of the hatefulness of the fueling of people's fears to make them shock troops for corporate and party interests.
I'm just sick of the whole thing.
I have no idea how one addresses this insanity - for that is what it is. There are those who are the manipulators - the creators of lies and rhetoric - and they are serving their own ends. They know clearly what they are doing and are quite comfortable doing it. If they change, it will be for personal events that touch their lives. Then you have the people who are swayed and fueled by them. They have belief systems that frame their world providing a lens that consistently focuses one way. They will believe the manipulators, but there is no way through evidence or information to get them to reflect on that ideology. Evidence and information which conflicts with the ideology are just lies.
The manipulators have been pumping the rhetoric bellows overtime to fuel some people's fear and anger. They run the risk of pushing more people over the line into physical violence. I seriously doubt they are concerned about this. Why? Because the people's lives do not matter to them. At best, we are abstractions and certainly expendable. So a few folks get maimed or killed, and those actors also end up jailed or dead. All those lives are acceptable losses in the big struggle for power. There are many side benefits to the hate and the chaos. It raises questions among the non-extreme, and it intimidates many into silence. It hamstrings actual discussion and debate thereby strengthening the power of the rhetoric.
The only course of action is to be as honest as possible and to try to offer fact and information. For those who try to be informed, this will work. For those who avoid being informed, whatever they hear the most is what they are likely to believe. Therefore, doing the best we can to keep the mainstream media semi-accurate is perhaps the best we can do.
Perhaps the primary thing it is important to keep in mind is that people are people. Most of those who think that Obama and the Democrats are somehow stealing the country and bent on removing their "choices" are just folks. The manipulators are a different issue all together. However, the manipulators are not the ones protesting - those they see as expendable shock troops are.
Recommended:
No Cure For Stupid Liars. Natasha Chart. OpenLeft. 8/10/09.
Please Cut the Crap - site by Milt Shook.
Rowan,
It's 'Do as I say, not as I do!' for too many who assert good/bad based only on political persuasion as opposed to the actions of the individuals or substance of the issue.
Sadly, majority of people only adhere to the political ideological line in the sand.
Instead of plain glass houses for those who only view, but seldom traverse the landscape with steadfast steps - all should have mirror glass - then I know there would be minimal casting of the haphazard stones.
Good post. Appreciate. Rec'd.
August 10, 2009 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rowan - great blog - having been a Republican in my uninformed past - I can tell you that most of them are unwilling to believe anything the Democrats say, are blind followers of the lies they are told, and think anything liberal is either socialist, big government or idiotic. Rec'd
August 10, 2009 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
"having been a Republican in my uninformed past"
:)
August 10, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is sad MaggieMum. It is a "lazy" approach to life. All the answers are given - no questions required.
In saying this I am not damning a specific group. There is a tendency to take the "easy" way. The way that demands the least of us on one level or another. Some might say that it is human nature and the brain is geared to work this way. The brain takes over the rote functions. Ever been driving someplace you regularly go and find that you have gone for a period of time and don't remember how you got to that point? That is the "routine" part of the brain driving. (Sorry, can't remember which brain structure does this).
I have read that "thinking" is not something that most folks like to do. They have not developed the skills, nor had rewards for thinking. As a teacher, I find this a lot ("Just give me the answer") Unfortunately a lot is at stake, and when rhetoric is used to manipulate, activate, and spread fear and hatred, IT IS NOT RIGHT!
Maggie, I am glad you ventured out of your shell and are flying the torturous winds of the blogosphere!
August 10, 2009 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aunt Sam, this is exceptional:
I nominate for one of DD's daily awards.
August 10, 2009 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Second that.
August 10, 2009 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Third it.
August 10, 2009 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's maddening, Rowan. No doubt about it.
Think about this.
The inner workings of the entire lobbyist/corporate thug apparatus--the hierarchy of the whole corrupt machine--has become more transparent than ever.
It's being exposed like never before. Giant industry connected to lobbyist groups connected to political advocacy groups connected to fake front "patient's rights" groups connected to campaign contributions connected to a specific politician's vote.
There is something that is good about this. The rock has been lifted. We see the underbelly and it is seriously ugly but all the slugs are in the sunlight now.
We see precisely how this underbelly of corporate power and politics works. How it operates, where orders originate, specifically from and by whom, we see how those orders are disseminated, we see the media trail, the lengths some will go to to perpetuate and protect the life of each lie and myth, we see this operation rise in the beltway and ripple outward to town hall meetings across America.
We see Democrats and Republicans alike mired in this charade posing as a representative democracy.
We see that it isn't really conservative or liberal philosophy that is the problem. That is all staging.
We can loathe the so called conservatives, we can call out their hypocrisy, but they're not even pretending to be tied to their own conservative founding principles. They deserted them for the last eight years. Who wouldn't? It was the worst governing philosophy this country has ever seen.
What they and others are really tied to, what they would kill for, is power. And it's a terrible thing to feel slipping through your fingers.
This is what we're witnessing now. And the more we all see how corruption is the real ideology that fuels Washington, the more we'll be able to hold each and everyone involved accountable for their individual actions.
And as you suggest, honesty is critical here. It's been said that when you have the facts, you pound the facts. When you don't, you pound your fists.
Time to really really pound the facts.
August 10, 2009 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go Gary - I appreciated your post today.
I think that one of the things that has irked me is that the abuses and lies are so public! It is not as if there is any effort to even bow to cosmetic distancing. This attitude was extremely prevalent under BushCo. It was so successful that it apparently continues. It is insult to injury - a real "Try and stop us - F*** You."
I like "pound the facts" ... "pound your fists."
August 10, 2009 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
True, unfortunately. No need for cosmetics in politics anymore, right?
I'm a dirty rotten politician. Love me for who I am??
(I mentioned this somewhere before, when the torrid back stories of Sanford and Ensign and others of the Christian conservative movement were getting the headlines, but it's as if some politicians aren't even pretending to wear Jesus masks anymore to hide behind, they're just wearing transparent masks of themselves.
This is what happens when nothing, not an individual, not a branch of government, not a corporation, not an industry, is held accountable for any actions. This is what happens when you strip the Department of Justice of its purpose.
August 10, 2009 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Accountability indeed. And "Let bye gones be bye gones" doesn't work for me. One can offer "forgiveness" when people accept responsibility for what they have done - not before.
August 10, 2009 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry for the long rant, Rowan. (Didn't realize it until after:)
August 10, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sorry. I have been known to go off on my own little rants myself ;>
August 10, 2009 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's pretty damn good. Pound the facts.
August 10, 2009 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
DD - look above to Aunt Sam's comment. There's an award nomination with 3 votes.
August 10, 2009 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
They were screaming, you just couldn't hear them.
They were screaming "Baby needs a nappy!"
They were screaming "Once more, and this time with feeling!"
They were screaming "Who's your daddy!"
They were screaming "Vee haf vays ov making you talk!"
August 10, 2009 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pound them with facts and remind them where we went the last time we allowed these types to lead us. We went into a pre-emptive war based on lies. These are the same people doing the same thing, preemptive shouuting to keep us from healthcare reform.
Don't forget the other bumper sticker, "United We Stand!" now how does that comport to we want Obama to fail?
As I read the post one thing occured to me. This began with Reagan, really. These frightened people who are acting out at town halls are fearful of what will be left if health insurance goes the way of the ice box. Then where will their trickle originate if big business is not served in every aspect of our lives? Who will give us our trickle?
These people of faith actually lack faith, faith that we can buld something better and that we deserve more then a trickle.
August 10, 2009 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah yes, the VAUNTED "Reagan Revolution." The revolution to corporate rule. I must say that some of it (and some of the players) go back to Tricky Dick. However, in terms of the ball set rolling on the "religious" revolution in politics, the reemergence of of blatant racism in creating a republican base, the "government is bad - corporations are good," minimizing science, letting in corporate lobbyists big time. Oh yeah, a lot of the shit see as the "wonder way" by the Republican party. Remember "voodoo economics?" Still is and that voodoo don't work.
August 10, 2009 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gets me a little down too. But there are some slight movements or at least moments out there toward truth, justice and the American Way.
Matthews for instance, is nuts for health care reform. He is just sopping all the repubs in their 'talking points' and making them address the issues.
But most of it is crap of course--I am talking about cable news. The right just comes on the air and adds nothing to the discussion....but they are given the time to speak none the less.
August 10, 2009 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Unfair and tilted" means "fair and balanced" in the polibabble that has Orwell saying "Told Ya."
August 10, 2009 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Adds profit to the corporate cable news atmos-FEAR, which is subscribed to by millions of Americans. But we’ll never give up on Healthcaring about people, if we can just strengthen the deeper message of love thy neighbors who need healthcare like anyone else.
Superb post Rowan! Facts are worth pounding. People are worth helping.
August 10, 2009 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Second THAT to the MAX!
Thanks strato.
August 10, 2009 9:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a wonderfully snarky and vulgar answer to this rhetorical question, but everyone else is being so good a thoughful, I think I had better not use it. Instead, I'll say thanks for a valuable and thoughtful post. Once again, I come to
TPM and leave feeling a little refreshed.
August 10, 2009 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you Mike ... and there is a time and place for vulgar and snarky ... though it's hard to believe you ever are 8-}
August 10, 2009 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rowan - I have often been told here on TPM that I cannot be critical of Obama's massive projected budget deficits because Bush also ran budget deficits that apparently I didn't vocally protest.
Well, as a conservative, I honestly think that the size of Obama's deficits (measured as a percentage of the overall economy) are so much larger than what we've seen since WW2 when the economy was being fueled by a war, that it is cause for alarm.
Obama's deficits and budgets are really apples and oranges versus Bush's. And the deficit spending that Bush did was never during such a fragile economy as what we have right now. Like I've said before, Bush's deficits may have put the car on the edge of the cliff, but Obama's now slamming his foot on the accelerator at the worst time.
August 10, 2009 10:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bill-
I agree that comparing the deficit spending between the Bush and Obama admins is apples and oranges. Obama's is a reaction to the fragile economy, and so far many economic experts (if you can believe them) seem to agree with the strategy being used, at least in the short term. Don't forget the first round of "bail outs" occurred under the Bush administration.
August 10, 2009 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
You correctly point out - "at least in the short term". I am not saying that we should have done nothing, but we can always argue about the magnitude of it. However, why do we need to average $1 trillion deficits for the next 10 years? You can't say that this type of spending is needed to get us out of the current recession.
August 11, 2009 6:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Well, as a conservative, I honestly think that the size of Obama's deficits (measured as a percentage of the overall economy) are so much larger than what we've seen since WW2 when the economy was being fueled by a war, that it is cause for alarm."
Unless you can show that the spending attributed solely to Obama is the cause of these massive deficits (I believe I've seen statistics showing that his spending is only a fraction of the overall projected deficit), then we'll be forced toassume your just a typical, lying, hypocritical Republican shill.
So man up, buddy. Back up your "concern" with some hard facts.
August 11, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Unless you can show that the spending attributed solely to Obama is the cause of these massive deficits "
Not sure I follow you. 100% of Obama's budget is attributable to Obama. Are you saying something else? That he's not responsible for parts of his own budget?
I'm not sure how "his" spending, as you refer to it, can only be considered a slice of the budget. It's his budget, 100% of it. And the difference between his budget and revenues is the deficit.
August 11, 2009 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are entitlements, Bush wars to fund, Bush tax cuts that originally blew a hole in the deficit that starve the goverment of revenue. So I guess you're asking Obama to make massive cuts in discretionary spending in the middle of the worst recession since the Great Depression.
And you still haven't explained your lack of concern over the Bush deficits.
If you're not a Republican shill, you're a liar and/or a fool.
August 11, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why does he need to continue the Bush policies? If people are so upset that Bush spent like a drunken sailor (which is true) then Obama should be looking for fat to cut, or at least flatline the status quo. But instead Obama is adding a trillion dollars to the budget.
You cite:
1. Wars to fund - just withdraw from them (I thought that's what Obama campaigned on?)
2. Bush tax cuts - just repeal them/let them expire (which Obama has also pledged).
I'm sorry, but your argument doesn't really hold water. Any wasteful spending that Bush was doing should be cut or at least flatlined. But instead we are massively growing the budget.
And you must have missed it but I did already explain my lack of concern (relatively) for the deficits that Bush ran. From an absoluate dollar amount those deficits were never in excess of $400-500 billion. As a % of GDP the Bush deficits were in the 1-4% range.
Now with Obama we're going to see deficits exceeding 10% of GDP for the first time since WW2. It wouldn't be so bad if this was just a blip in 2009 but the AVERAGE annual deficit will be $1 trillion for the next 10 years. We will be around 12% of GDP 2009 and 9% for 2010. And it doesn't come down very much after that.
August 11, 2009 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
"From an absoluate dollar amount those deficits were never in excess of $400-500 billion. As a % of GDP the Bush deficits were in the 1-4% range."
Now with Obama we're going to see deficits exceeding 10% of GDP for the first time since WW2."
I'm at work, and I don't have time to explain away your math. But explain to me how a deficit of $500B can be 1-4% of GDP, but a deficit of $1T is above 10%. Either our economy has shrunk drastically since Bush's last budget, which would strengthen the case for deficit spending, or you're playing with the numbers.
August 11, 2009 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good luck trying to "explain away my math". I am not playing with any numbers.
Take a look at the historical deficits numbers on www.cbo.gov. I was being a little kind and rounding to nearest whole numbers. The largest deficit from 2001 thru 2008 was $412 billion in 2004. The GDP in 2004 was $11.9 trillion according to www.bea.gov. So the deficit was 3.4% of GDP in 2004.
In 2009, GDP is expected to be $14.2 trillion in 2009 and the deficit is projected to be $1.8 trillion. So the deficit is approximately 12% of GDP in 2009.
Take a look at www.cbo.gov and www.bea.gov
August 11, 2009 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
O.K. The temptation is irresistible.
Apologies in advance.
August 11, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Believe it or not, the only conservative I can think of against GWB's policies was (wait for it) Patrick J. Buchanan! Not so much the social stuff, of course, but calling it a "war against terror" instead of against al-Qaeda, the invasion of Iraq, and the out of control spending. He even wrote a book, published while Dubya was in office, "Day of Reckoning."
I guess that since it went against the party line, nobody paid attention. I do have to say, remembering him from appearances on "the McLaughlin Group," he was pretty critical at the time and not just spouting the talking points. I found myself surprised that I would be in agreement with him, but his critique of those issues was spot on.
August 10, 2009 10:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rec'd Rowan...
I've drafted 5 different replies and deleted them all. I'm trying so hard to live up to my name, but this debate has gotten the better of me, at least temporarily. I'm pissed off, frustrated, and having a hard time believing that such a small minority appears to be on the brink of sinking health care reform for the majority who want it.
I'm not ready to start the autopsy yet, but if we get any kind of significant reform this year, I'm going to be shocked.
The repubs/blue dogs have managed to water the bill down so much already, and the concessions that are being made are so deep, that the final bill (that the bastards probably won't vote for anyway) will bear little resemblance to what it was in the beginning. If there are not a substantial number of Republicans voting in favor of the final bill (whatever it is) I hope the leadership will halt the vote, and go back to the floor with single pay. If we are going to go down in flames, I would rather it be the bill we really want, sans the repub's amendments, rather than having them screw it up and STILL not vote for it, like they did with the stimulus package.
After that, there needs to be serious work done on getting rid of this 60 vote crap, so we can get something done in this country...
They may be the party of NO, but we're the pussy party and I'm sick of it. Yeah...I'm pissed!
August 10, 2009 10:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm with you Stilli on not voting vs voting a bill that makes things worse.
The problem with the Dems is "playing to the middle." The "middle" is further left than the Dems aim.
We have a fundamental problem politically within the country. What happened was that the political spectrum (and political discussion) has narrowed radically over what it has been historically. To the best of my knowledge, it happened in the Bill Clinton campaign when he was defined by the Republicans as "far left" and a "card carrying member of the ACLU." In reality, Clinton was hardly "left" though he was socially liberal. However, Republicans had been that before as well. The "Goldwater Republicans" for example - of which Hillary Clinton was one (and personally I don't think she moved much).
In my opinion, Bill lead as (what previously would have been considered) a moderate Republican. The political spectrum was effectively cut at the "middle" and that "middle" became the "far left." Then the Republicans made a steady march to the right - expanding the grounds where the right had been. The supposed middle then moved right as well. Except that the populace really didn't move right.
For example, during this last campaign Kucinich was painted (effectively) as the radical left. However, polls showed that most of his platform was right in line with the opinions of the majority of voters.
Obama is (and was) no radical. There was hardly a hairs breadth of difference in Obama's and Clinton's positions and platforms - and a slightly larger difference to Edwards.
This is why the people (like us) need to push our representatives to the real middle (at least) and not to their false poli-rhethoric middle.
August 10, 2009 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rowan reading my mind... been asking them that very question: "Where were ya when Bush was in the House?
Selective memory and a thorough lack of interest in anything that might require contemplation is the issue.
You can lead a horse to the source, of course... but then he goes and pisses on your shoes.
What are you gonna do?
Take comfort in the fact that there are now more of us than there are of them. Stick together and keep pushing back...
August 11, 2009 12:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think there are a lot of folks who are swayed by what they think the "majority" think. If they think that most people are alarmed, and afraid, then they will be. If they think that most folks want single payer, then they'll go with that. It is another rendition of not thinking independently.
And yes - keep pushing back with truth, and keep pushing back against Representatives who are willing to pass a corporate friendly reform at the expense of the health and welfare of the nation.
August 11, 2009 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's discuss "death panels" and rationing:
Exhibit A: The Texas Advance Directives Act, also referred to as the Texas Futile Care Law, was passed in 1999 under the auspices of then governor George W. Bush.
Someone should point out (an ad perhaps) the above directive.
1.) Ask R's what they mean when they use the word "rationing". I attempted to argue this recently at a town hall, replacing the word "rationing" with "prioritizing" (i.e. bullet to the head receives treatment before hangnail - triage as it were - as is conducted in ERs everywhere).
2.) Many Republicans have never heard the term "rescission". It should be repeated ad nauseam. This is how insurance companies ration care: by purging the sick from the rolls. They no longer make a secret of it and have no intention of discontinuing the practice: see Bill Moyers PBS interview with Wendell Potter - there is a clip of the congressional hearing during which the heads of insurance companies plainly stated that they would not discontinue the practice of rescission (this clip would make a great ad).
Exhibit B: The "kill granny" provision in HR3200 was introduced by a Republican (another great ad):
"And as it turns out, the cause of advance planning has been championed especially strongly by a pro-life Republican -- U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia." who played a significant role in crafting this portion of the bill."
http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/08/death-panel-architect-a-pro-life-republican-from-georgia.html
The Senator's intentions were nothing less than honorable. The provision simply refers to end of life planning, which covers hospice care, living wills and power of attorney. It allows terminally ill patients and the elderly to make their wishes for care clear.
*This is likely something for another post rather than a comment.
August 11, 2009 2:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for adding this. Indeed, the Republicans have been the primary champions.
August 11, 2009 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I see a very simple answer to your "why" question:
Because Fox News and Rush; didn't tell them they were supposed to be upset.
End of story! The crowd that is so upset today are mostly followers that don't have any original thoughts of their own that weren't given to them on AM Radio or Fox News.
August 11, 2009 3:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
True to a point. The power of MSM. If people are told to be upset then they tend to be. If they are told all is OK, they tend to believe that as well.
August 11, 2009 9:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rowan, I posted some of this this on Deanie Mills essay, but think it would apply here too.
I've made the attempt to grapple with reading conservative points of view on the issues to no avail. I find it difficult to see beyond their vitriol laced denunciations vilifying us liberals and our positions while failing to address the issue with their facts and points that would give me or anyone reading an insight to their position on the matter at hand.
In short, conservative editorials and points of views are not much more than verbal minefields whose sole intent is posturing around the issue so as to damn liberals rather than discussing the finer points to steer a reader in the direction they are going.
As to the point you make were conservatives say liberals are taking on outrageous powers, and ruining the Constitution and the country, just look back to 9/11. Many conservatives blamed liberals for the tragedy and began to build social barriers between them and liberals - those barriers are now called teabaggers, birthers and whatever the townhall thugs wish to call themselves. Some singled out liberals as being unamericans and still do today. Many said 9-11 would never have if a republican had been in office 4 years earlier. And some go as far as blaming the liberal leadership of Clinton and Democrats for 9-11. Clearly, liberals were and still are being vilified as accomplices to 9/11. So if you ask the question why many conservatives distrust liberals they will ask why should they trust someone they suspect of aiding an abetting terrorists?
MSM manipulators have been pumping the rhetoric bellows overtime to fuel some people's fear and anger because that's what sells today - MSM is a profit center now and has to meet Wall Street epectations. Gone are the days of Walter Cronkite where the news was a drain on shareholder equity of the Corporation, but was specific and to the point minus the political ambition of the newscaster or the media giants. The conservatives have their fair share on pundits and the liberals have theirs. While one side has a sense of fair play in the political spectrum dabbling sometimes at the edge, the other broadly steps across the line simply to cast the opposition in a bad light regardless if the facts stated are more fiction than fact - truth doesn't sell and increase profits.
Honesty based on facts and information is not the knight is shining armor. Let's face it, many of those teabaggers, birthers and townhall thugs exhibit the same traits by rehashing what facts and information not germane to the topic they are protesting. They may be nice people and neighbors, but they are hard set in their point of view and not willing to let go of what they believe to be the truth regardless of the facts. The question is ... how can we persuade them to look at the the talking points of the other side, look for value and seek out possible areas to improve the concept. Same goes with the liberals too. They have to bend if they expect the opposition to move as well.
Consider this analogy:
Our current political debate is equivalent to two massive bridge abutments build on opposite banks of a river. The span between the two has cashed into the river and must be repaired. The problem is how do to rebuild the span from one side to the other while taking into account the different expectations of the engineers on the opposite shoreline. While one engineering crew is charged with coordinating the efforts of both shorelines, the other insists on exerting control over its shoreline assets. Now add to this the ironworkers under the control of each faction. Each crew views the project differently and decide to employ different construction methods in order to achieve the results they expect, but are counter to the efforts being made by the opposite shoreline crew. When the two bridge spans meet in the middle of the river, neither span will match with the other and each side will blame the other for failing to take into account the public's need for the bridge to be up and operational.
August 11, 2009 8:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Beetle for the thoughtful response.
I think that the "divide" was there before 9/11, as we kept being told that the country was divided. I do think that there was (and continues to be) a fostering on the part of Republicans of disenfranchisement and threat to "our way of life" that plays to a base that seems fairly firmly in their control.
I think that your bridge analogy is pretty good. I think though that the basic problem lies in fundamentally different assumptions about the role of government between the Ds and Rs.
August 11, 2009 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
The fundamentally different assumptions about the role of government between the Ds and Rs. is the same as the fundamental difference between the engineers on opposite shores constructing a bridge to the other side without taking into consideration what the engineers on the other side are doing.
August 11, 2009 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mmmmmm...at least to hear Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly tell it, they WERE constantly taking Dubya to task about many, many things. I guess that is the defense to the accusations about the huge deficits he created, and the fact that the original TARP bill all occurred on his watch. I'd call it Revisionist History; they call it The Truth--Fair and Balanced.
August 11, 2009 9:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's also called lying.
August 11, 2009 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, yeeeeeeee-eeesssss! They don't mind that so much! Though sometimes I do wonder which things they can start believing. I think Bill O'Relly is able to convince himself of a lot of lies he tells about himself. And I do think the most dangerous lies are the lies we tell ourselves.
August 11, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
During WWll when our Sherman tanks went up against a German Tiger, it was no contest. The Sherman's gun was too small, 75mm, and the Tiger's armor too thick, so the Sherman shell would just bounce off the Tiger. BOING! In effect, the Tiger was impervious.
Many of the wingnuts, birthers, teabaggers are like that Tiger tank, impervious. Impervious to fact, to truth, to reality. Facts they don't like simply bounce off their heads. BOING!
They wallow in a world created from hours and hours of listening to Limbaugh/Hannity types, and hanging out in right wing chat rooms where, lying, exaggeration, dissembling and rumor mongering rule. No lie, no exaggeration is too outlandish to disbelieve. They thrive on bad news.
Bill Clinton? Yeah, he bombed Pearl Harbor and framed the Japanese!
Barak Obama pushed the iceberg in front of the Titanic! GET THE WORD OUT!
If Hannity and Limbaugh annonced the world was flat wingnuts would quickly nail their feet to the floor in fear of sliding off.
Yep, impervious, that's the wingnuts. The military should make bullet proof vests out of these people and send them to Afghanistan.
August 11, 2009 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
The entire goal of advertising has been to numb people to thought and reality, and make folks gullible to fantasy worlds as real.
While I agree with much of what you said John, I think that there is a depersonalization there that is as typical on the right as it is on the left. "Wingnuts" perhaps, but they are people - even family - not objects.
August 11, 2009 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rowan,
some people are so egregious, so absolutely bigoted that I have no respect for them. Do I depersonalize them? Of course I do, or maybe due to their actions they do it for me.
P S;
it was all I could do to keep from adding "evil" to my description above.
August 11, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I DO understand.
August 11, 2009 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink