Posted on 11/12/2004 1:13:10 AM PST by Former Military Chick
In 1994, when the Gingrich revolution swept Republicans into power, ending 40 years of Democratic hegemony in the House, the mainstream press needed to account for this inversion of the Perfect Order of Things. A myth was born. Explained the USA Today headline: "ANGRY WHITE MEN: Their votes turn the tide for GOP."
Overnight, the revolution of the Angry White Male became conventional wisdom. In the 10 years before the 1994 election there were 56 mentions of angry white men in the media, according to LexisNexis. In the next seven months there were more than 1,400.
At the time, I looked into this story line -- and found not a scintilla of evidence to support the claim. Nonetheless, it was a necessary invention, a way for the liberal elite to delegitimize a conservative victory. And, even better, a way to assuage their moral vanity: You never lose because your ideas are sclerotic or your positions retrograde, but because your opponent appealed to the baser instincts of mankind.
Plus ca change ... Ten years and another stunning Democratic defeat later, and liberals are at it again. The Angry White Male has been transmuted into the Bigoted Christian Redneck.
In the post-election analyses, the liberal elite, led by the holy trinity of the New York Times -- Paul Krugman, Thomas Friedman and Maureen Dowd -- just about lost its mind denouncing the return of medieval primitivism. As usual, Dowd achieved the highest level of hysteria, cursing the Republicans for pandering to "isolationism, nativism, chauvinism, puritanism and religious fanaticism" in their unfailing drive to "summon our nasty devils."
Whence comes this fable? With President Bush increasing his share of the vote among Hispanics, Jews, women (especially married women), Catholics, seniors and even African Americans, on what does this victory-of-the-homophobic-evangelical voter rest?
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Oh and we can leave her off the next debate list of those who moderate, if anyone is reading this?
Charles Krauthammer **ping**
You have to be very careful of Krauthammer. I don't believe he's much of a pro-lifer. And you have to wonder how he's so palatable to such a rabid, redneck bunch as appear on that PBS show. If they consider him acceptible - that's not good.
Counting only the 100 per cent of those who did say "moral values" we find Bush with a "mandate" and kerry, a footnote in history. Shhhaaazzzammm, as Gomer would say, you can do anything with statistics if you're a "liberal" idiot.
But what these people mean when they talk about "conventional wisdom" is "Everybody I know thinks..." and then they go on with some consensus that they take for reality.
The brilliant Charles Krauthammer used the phrase sarcastically. However, when used otherwise, the expression "conventional wisdom", it's a reliable sign of a mediocre-to-inferior mind.
I saw Simpson's name in the news last night - exactly what did she say?
ABC's Simpson: Bush Win Means Public "Not Bright," Rush "Scary"
Evidently there were remarks about the red states and slavery, I think you can figure out where Ms Simpson drew the line?
Thanks for the link - just read it.
I always mute him when he comes on FNC. He is not much of a conservative. Ultimate neocon.
bump
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.