Posted on 04/30/2009 8:56:31 PM PDT by presidio9
Time travel is a staple of science fiction, with the protagonists often getting lost in time or inadvertently bringing historical figures to the present.
I have been reminded of the dramatic time-travel trope while watching the Republican Party thrash around trying to flesh out its post-George W. Bush political identity. Such an internal struggle is natural in the wake of a 2008-style electoral defeat. But it almost seems as if Republicans have been in such a rush to get past Bush that they have inadvertently ripped the fabric of the political time-space continuum, scrambling the past into the present. How else to explain the procession of issues and leaders emerging from the GOP scrum?
Here comes former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. He was the face of the 1994 "Republican Revolution" and seemed to fancy himself America's first prime minister. But government shut-downs and other Republican excesses blunted the conservative wave and gave Gingrich toxic public-approval ratings. He eventually disappeared into the political wilderness of the fundraising-and-think-tank circuit. Now he has re-emerged (along with Rush Limbaugh, an honorary member of the class of 1994) and, with an eye on 2012, positioned himself as a key voice in the conservative movement. He assailed what he calls President Obama's "war against churches" (referring to the president's proposal to lower the deduction that the wealthy receive for charitable contributions), for example, and criticized him for being insufficiently "cold and distant" when chatting with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. Newt seems to be everywhere, leading me to assume that this is a pre-1995 Gingrich, before he learned the dangers of overexposure.
Also visiting from the mid-1990s is the issue of home-grown violent radicalism. When a Department of Homeland Security report focusing on "right-wing extremism" surfaced recently, conservatives got up in arms, arguing simultaneously that the report did not list in detail the groups to which it referred and that those (unnamed) organizations must be mainstream, law-abiding, patriotic organizations (as opposed to "hate-oriented" groups or ones that reject federal authority, upon which the report was ostensibly focusing). The term "right-wing" was perhaps impolitic (though an earlier homeland security report focused on "left-wing" extremists), but the fact of the matter is that each end of the political spectrum stretches from the mainstream through the eccentric but legal and peters into the unlawful. There are left-wing extremists who would bomb office buildings in the name of animal rights (one was just added to the FBI's most-wanted list), and there are right-wingers who would blow up buildings to strike against federal encroachment.
This debate flared 15 years ago, focused on the militia movement and its fears of black helicopters, but faded after Timothy McVeigh committed what was then the deadliest act of terrorism in U.S. history by blowing up a federal office building in Oklahoma City. Now a focus on right-wing extremism is building again. Brisk nationwide ammo sales are leading to shortages; the Southern Poverty Law Center notes that the "sovereign citizen" movement, wherein citizens declare themselves beyond federal laws, is gaining support for the first time since the 1990s; throw in heated conservative rhetoric ("Those crazies in Montana who say, 'We're going to kill ATF agents because the U.N.'s going to take over'—well, they're beginning to have a case," Dick Morris said on Fox News Channel last month), and you have a disturbing confluence of data points.
Speaking of bizarre sovereignty theories, secession and states' rights have emerged from the 1960s (and 1860s) by way of Texas Republican Gov. Rick Perry, who recently opined that his state can leave the Union. Perry seems to have forgotten that this matter was settled—rather bloodily—with the Civil War. In fairness to him, an appalling 22 percent of adults surveyed last week by Rasmussen Reports thought secession legal, with an additional 18 percent unsure. Perry has also been waving the bloody "states' rights" shirt, a concept that served as a code and a shield for sovereign practices such as segregation in the 1950s and 1960s.
Perry's not the only Republican pulling talking points from the 1950s. Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama holds in his hand a list of 17 socialist members of the U.S. House of Representatives. Seriously. Whence did he conjure this figure? Who are these un-Americans? He has not yet shared his list, but raising the specter of socialism has become trendy for GOPers. "Lenin and Stalin would love this stuff," once-and-future presidential candidate Mike Huckabee (who is himself sometimes accused of being a right-wing socialist) declared recently. Someone should tell the GOP that the times may be a-changin': Only 53 percent of Americans said that capitalism was better than socialism, according to one recent poll. But you can be sure the percentage is much higher in the GOP base.
And therein lies the danger Republicans face right now. Where this temporal scramble leaves them is anyone's guess, but they must avoid the echo chamber where they are so busy revving up their base with wing-nut greatest hits that they cannot reach beyond it.
The party is not without voices urging a moderated path. Could it be that Republican gadfly Meghan McCain has been sent back from the future to save the party? Time will tell.
“Speaking of bizarre sovereignty theories, secession and states’ rights have emerged from the 1960s (and 1860s) by way of Texas Republican Gov. Rick Perry, who recently opined that his state can leave the Union. Perry seems to have forgotten that this matter was settled—rather bloodily—with the Civil War.”
By that logic, rape is legal and the matter settled because you can forcibly rape someone at gunpoint or swordpoint.
I am more and more thinking that a second Civil War might not be a bad idea.
Meanwhile, Democrats look to October 1917, or perhaps January 1959.
Don’t know Schlesinger but he writes like a real kook. Mehgan is going to “save” the party? LOL! Moderation? LOL! The Commie ‘RATS didn’t get anywhere until they all ran far to the left of Fidel Castro and Josef Stalin. Now they own the whole, damn joint. Why would we want to “moderate?” According to the results of the last “election” in this country, extremism is “in” again.
Only 53 percent of Americans said that capitalism was better than socialism, according to one recent poll. But you can be sure the percentage is much higher in the GOP base.
I don’t believe that, a lot of polls show that most americans do not want the government taking over more businesses and health care.
“The party is not without voices urging a moderated path. Could it be that Republican gadfly Meghan McCain has been sent back from the future to save the party? Time will tell.”
All that blather to get through for a ridiculous statement like this.
That only shows they don't know the difference between capitalism, a Marxist term and a free regulated market, are free markets as we are suppose to have in a free republic..
http://www.hu.mtu.edu/~wsewell/hu365/cptalism_marx.htm
The rubber room line!!!
The ball is in our court.
The Republicans need to go back to four basics - peace, prosperity, jobs and common sense. Peace obtained thru strong military, and not getting into the internal affairs of other nations. Tendency for some conservatives to advocate Wilsonian foreign policy meaning we will stick our nose into the internal affairs of other nations over American values invites trouble and conflict we do not need nor can afford. Prosperity thru small government, balanced budget and low taxes. It also means rein in the excesses of Wall Street and prevent them from creating bubbles after bubbles where in the end it is the Main Street Americans whose lives are disrupted. Finally JOBS. Want to keep demand for socialims and big government to a minimum, create an economic and trade policy that will create and maintain good paying jobs in the US. Nothing wrong with free trade as long as it is fair trade. Balance big picture economic gains with main street impact. Famous illustration is a bar with 12 plumbers. Average income in the bar is $ 150 000. If Bill Gates walks into the room, does that mean the average income in the bar is several hundred million? Corporate America wants the cheapest labor they can get if it means offshoring, importing tech/nontech workers and amnesty for illegal immigrants. Government need to balance the needs of corporate America with the impact and needs of Main Street. Dumping unemployed Americans on the government is not helping government expenditures nor depressing the working wages of Americans in our national interest. Common sense laws pertaining to everything. Today we have too many rules and regs that lawyers will have a field day on Main Street Americans, Wall Street corporations can camouflauge their irresponsible and reckless investments, government and political parties can use to intimidate Americans who complain or oppose them. Time to par down the regs and laws, simplify them, codify them and streamline them, and based them on the best common sense document call the US Constitution.
They know the world turns, they want to liberalize the GOP so it is just like the Dems (already is but they are scared of the direction)
Mort Zuckerman, owner and publisher of several media properties, as well as a billionaire real estate investor - through his REIT firm Boston Properties, NYSE:BXP with properties mostly in Boston, NY and D.C. areas - is not in any way, shape or form a “conservative”.
With the exception of rare cases - when it would suit his business interests, and support for Israel with views that are not always shared by liberal establishment but far from hard support that is common among conservatives or Republicans (a little bit like Alan Dershowitz on this issue) - he is a pretty hard leftie.
He doesn’t mind wearing the facade of “conservative” - it makes him stand out from the typically liberal publishing crowd and creates opportunities, but there is little that differentiates him from liberal groupthink, except as noted above. His political donations are overwhelmingly for Democrats or liberal PACs (Tom Lantos, Mark Warner, “Reuniting Our Country” etc.)
Interestingly, he and/or one of his charitable foundations were defrauded by Bernie Madoff by way of J. Ezra Merkin, a large Madoff “feeder”, who is now being sued. Conservatives couldn’t apply to get on that exclusive client list.
One guy said to me here that secession is, by definition, “un-American”.
After some heavy thought, it occurred to me that if Texas left the union in order to follow a Constitution identical to that which the United States was based on, while the remaining states continued to ignore it...then who has really seceded and who is really being un-American?
We would probably follow the Texas Constitution, which is more recent than the US Constitution and contains a few bug fixes. Such as the tacit acknowledgement, in the document, right at the top, that the PEOPLE of Texas are the paramount arbiter of power in Texas and they have the power and right to alter or abolish any government that displeases them *by any means necessary* and set up a new form so long as it is democratic.
I think I’ve seen the same guy here and been given the same admonishment. To that I say “so what?” If that makes me un-American, then I am (or will be) proud to be a citizen of Texas, where people don’t vote themselves gifts from the public fisc and worship of Mother Gaia isn’t the state religion.
Crockett had the right of it; when encountering people of the type you mentioned, the correct response is:
“You may all go to hell and I will go to Texas.”
The main difference now is massive amounts of illegal immigration...with their children having children and so on.
Unless we kick every last one of them out of the country (and keep them out)...the GOP is doomed to eventually be a minority party. We might have some short term rebounds...but long term is bleak unless we stop the democrats from importing voters.
Really think Texas (were I live) will be a GOP state in 20 years if amnesty is granted and rights given?
Of course...the dems are cutting their own throat too. They will pay the same political price in a generation or two. That doesn't matter to those in power right now.
Robert Schlesinger is the youngest son of the late Kennedy sycophant and historian Arthur M. Schlesinger. That should tell you all you need to know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.