US Politics VIII

[Shryke]

Ooh, decades ago. I don't remember the exact time line anymore. I think it was around Nixon's time?

Anyway, the GOP courted the racist, socially conservative, religious vote. It won them many years of dominance. And now it's come back to bite them in the ass.

[Lord O' Bones]

Ooh, decades ago. I don't remember the exact time line anymore. I think it was around Nixon's time?

Anyway, the GOP courted the racist, socially conservative, religious vote. It won them many years of dominance. And now it's come back to bite them in the ass.

I see what you're saying and it certainly has merit. Maybe I just didn't encounter that sort of thing very much being in California. But when I was a Republican I was proud to be one. When I returned to the United States after a few years overseas in October '99 everything seemed different. We had nominated W over the '99 version of John McCain. WTF!? I left the party within months of being home, and for the last nine years watched it become more and more ridiculous.

[Annelise]

Ooh, decades ago. I don't remember the exact time line anymore. I think it was around Nixon's time?

I think it was w/ Goldwater's nom in '64. (Also the scene of Reagan's "A Time for Choosing" speech).

Goldwater: "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

Later, in the 80's, Goldwater became outspoken against the growing influence of the RR.

[Shryke]

Yeah, that was the guy. It's been a slow build. GWB wasn't a surprise, he was the inevitable conclusion of the path the GOP chose 40 or so years earlier.

Shit, your talking about the party that embraced the DIXIECRATS. How are you surprised?

[Lord O' Bones]

Yeah, that was the guy. It's been a slow build. GWB wasn't a surprise, he was the inevitable conclusion of the path the GOP chose 40 or so years earlier.

Shit, your talking about the party that embraced the DIXIECRATS. How are you surprised?

It's not out of the question that until I'd been out in the world, I just wasn't paying enough attention.

[EHK for Darwin]

When did this madness start? I know it can't be as simple as W's election. Was it outrage over a blow-job? As a recovering Republican, I feel like I should know this. In my defense, I was overseas in your defense when I think the seed was planted. Can it even be pinpointed? Dalthor? EHK? Any other recovering Republicans want to help me out?

Ooh, decades ago. I don't remember the exact time line anymore. I think it was around Nixon's time?

Anyway, the GOP courted the racist, socially conservative, religious vote. It won them many years of dominance. And now it's come back to bite them in the ass.

When did the Republican party go nuts? Not really sure. We can say its the moment they started taking up the cause of the southern racists, but to be completely honest, I don't remember alot of that shit being much of an issue when I was a Republican. I think overt expressions of that became seriously unPC in the 90's and it was barely seen in either party. It could be when Reagan made common cause with evangelicals, but that common cause for the next 20 years amounted dangling abortion in front of their noses and going on with their own shit. They weren't an overriding concern. 90's Republicans at least gave the appearance of standing for something. They had their 'Contract for America', they talked fiscal issues, did not completely abuse social wedge issues. (cept guns, but that was more the NRA going vigilante) At present, its still not a party I would be associated with, but it really wasn't one I'd feel completely embarrassed by. Or maybe its been so long that I don't recall the most embarrassing parts.

I think I'd circle three points in recent Republican history. Lewinski. They could never stand Clinton and the fact that he rode a sex scandal to record popularity infuriated them to the point of seizure. As the mainstream public didn't seem to give a shit (beyond keeping up on all the juicy gossip), they increasingly turned to the rather new at the time conservative talk radio and eventually Fox news. Places that would echo their outrage and in time, direct and manufacture it. As other nutjobs found there was money in this, and the nuttier the more money, Rush clones started to popup left and right. Before you knew it you had nationally syndicated shows of conservative programming that could fill every slot 24/7. Finally they had a 'news' source that would tell them what they wanted to hear, 'make sense' of their impotent, ignorant, and misplaced outrage.

Second would be Bush's election. For a long time the evangelical wing had been steadily growing chunk of the party, but up until that point they were given lip service and little else. Bush however was one of theirs. It wasn't HUGELY overt during the first election run, they tried hard to package him as a moderate, an everyman, and it more or less worked. But once elected, the religious right had an active influence in the White House and their major issues came front and center. Then in 2004, they essentially won Bush his reelection. They were a voice that could no longer be denied. And at that point they decided to assert dominance. The party was essentially coopted by fanatic nuts who think gays cause hurricanes.

Third is no surprise, 9-11. Completely changed the shape of politics, the country, and the world. Things that might once had been political impossibilities were suddenly on the table. Torture. Massive surveillance. Wars. For a long time showing any hesitance in supporting the White House or granting more power to the executive cast you as weak at best. Perpetual scare-mongering became a valid political tactic and the Republicans use it at every turn.

At least that's my take as far as causes go. Maybe they were always crazy. But I doubt very much that they were THIS crazy.

[Lord O' Bones]

When did the Republican party go nuts? Not really sure. We can say its the moment they started taking up the cause of the southern racists, but to be completely honest, I don't remember alot of that shit being much of an issue when I was a Republican. I think overt expressions of that became seriously unPC in the 90's and it was barely seen in either party. It could be when Reagan made common cause with evangelicals, but that common cause for the next 20 years amounted dangling abortion in front of their noses and going on with their own shit. They weren't an overriding concern. 90's Republicans at least gave the appearance of standing for something. They had their 'Contract for America', they talked fiscal issues, did not completely abuse social wedge issues. (cept guns, but that was more the NRA going vigilante) At present, its still not a party I would be associated with, but it really wasn't one I'd feel completely embarrassed by. Or maybe its been so long that I don't recall the most embarrassing parts.

This was my impression as well.

I think I'd circle three points in recent Republican history. Lewinski. They could never stand Clinton and the fact that he rode a sex scandal to record popularity infuriated them to the point of seizure. As the mainstream public didn't seem to give a shit (beyond keeping up on all the juicy gossip), they increasingly turned to the rather new at the time conservative talk radio and eventually Fox news. Places that would echo their outrage and in time, direct and manufacture it. As other nutjobs found there was money in this, and the nuttier the more money, Rush clones started to popup left and right. Before you knew it you had nationally syndicated shows of conservative programming that could fill every slot 24/7. Finally they had a 'news' source that would tell them what they wanted to hear, 'make sense' of their impotent, ignorant, and misplaced outrage.

So it was outrage over a blow job, eh? I'm glad my instincts were right. Still, it's nice to have the details flushed out for me as I was at sea or somewhere in asia for that entire time period (June of 95 - to Oct. of 99) and could only follow the haps from afar. Since I was around for your other two points, and agree with them I'm happy to believe this analysis.

And really, that's gotta be what was so obviously different to me when I got back - there was no Fox News before. There was Rush before, but now there were hundreds of them. Bill ORLY? was no longer doing Inside Edition (and Olbermann's not on Sportcenter?) Who's this guy that replaced Kilborne on the Daily Show?

Thanks EHK, that's exactly what I was looking for.

[Annelise]

Growing up, Republicans were the norm of course. My memories of Democrats are as impotent and irrelevant types.

For me, the first.. "What was that?" moment re: Republicans was with Newt Gingrich. I had strayed from my Republican upbringing in '92 by voting for Perot but I didn't consider Bush I a nutter or anything.

[Annelise]

So it was outrage over a blow job, eh?

I think that really started with the '95/'96 budget showdown that led to parts of the G'ment shutting down. Gingrich lost that round and came out of the fight tarnished, looking like a spoiled child. I think that contributed to his later .. dedication to nailing Clinton on the perjury charges.

[AndyP]

Justice Souter to retire

NPR

[Lord O' Bones]

I think that really started with the '95/'96 budget showdown that led to parts of the G'ment shutting down. Gingrich lost that round and came out of the fight tarnished, looking like a spoiled child. I think that contributed to his later .. dedication to nailing Clinton on the perjury charges.

Oh yeah, again, I don't know much about what went down with that, but I do distinctly remember not getting paid for a week or so over it. Of course we were in port too, so I had lot's of places to spend my no money.

[Shryke]

It's not out of the question that until I'd been out in the world, I just wasn't paying enough attention.

Nah, it's nowhere near as simple as that.

It's ... it's like a deal with the devil. The GOP cuts a deal with some crazy groups and it helps them win. But, in the end, there's always a catch. And that catch was slowly building in the background till GWB came about and did his thing and suddenly many realised what they actually made a deal with.

[Foreverlad]

A lot of interesting theories. I'd say they all played a part in the shape of the GOP's current condition, but I wouldn't rule out the character of the Democrats also playing a part in the shaping (or disintegration) of the GOP.

I was a teen through the 90's. In the first quarter of the '90s, my favorite band was making prank phone calls to Bush Sr (see my avatar for a hint). With Clinton elected, he had that cool vibe to him that earned the attention of teens and celebrity endorsements. He had the city on his side. How do you revolt against a pop star or a trend? You go homegrown, you fight the culture with tradition and heritage. Midwest values- religion, unquestionable patriotism. Side effects include xenophobia, racism, fear of change, stronger definitions of morality etc. You pull in the people less inclined to agree with the younger generation. The ones who avoided blacks when they were younger, the ones brought up through the church, the large families, the 'simpler-times' ers.

As you (general, the GOP) lose votes off the top and bottom (old folk dying, young folk switching sides) you reinforce your position by demonizing the opposition and working harder than ever to prove these values mean so much to you. That's when you promote the church to full-time, villify foreign countries out of love for your own and offer cash back with every vote by promising tax cuts so you get the support of business and the well-to-do.

Send in a liar who doesn't live up to what he says, and all those values you voted for seem like they're gone for good.

Instead of changing stances on any issue, the Republican party is fighting harder than ever to make you believe they still care about those old issues. It's fanatical extremism, but the nation has been changing. The Coastal trends have primarily become mainstream, with the exception of a few holdout states and more rural areas. You're left with nothing but tax cuts, the bible and calling your opponents every dangerous thing you can.

The harder you fight, the more desperate you look, and desperation doesn't play well to the crowds these days.

[Shryke]

This was my impression as well.

So it was outrage over a blow job, eh? I'm glad my instincts were right. Still, it's nice to have the details flushed out for me as I was at sea or somewhere in asia for that entire time period (June of 95 - to Oct. of 99) and could only follow the haps from afar. Since I was around for your other two points, and agree with them I'm happy to believe this analysis.

And really, that's gotta be what was so obviously different to me when I got back - there was no Fox News before. There was Rush before, but now there were hundreds of them. Bill ORLY? was no longer doing Inside Edition (and Olbermann's not on Sportcenter?) Who's this guy that replaced Kilborne on the Daily Show?

Thanks EHK, that's exactly what I was looking for.

Well, alot of the last while has been the result of the far right essentially creating their own echo chamber. They've become more and more extreme as they've isolated themselves from the public at large. They've created their own little bubble to raise their kids and live in where Jesus is Republican and Gays and Blacks are non-existent and low taxes come with great services and the Earth is 6000 years old and America is the best.

[Tempra]

Justice Souter to retire

NPR

Congrats Elena Kagan on being the next supreme court justice.

[Shryke]

You can expect most of the older Liberal Justices to start dropping out now that Obama's in. Most of them have only been hanging on till a Democrat was elected.

Hopefully Scalia drops too.

[Ser Aardvark]

I have to say, like or hate his political views, hands down Scalia has done more to help change the strength that legal verbiage has had in turning the legal field into a near monopoly of the ABA. His opinions are clear, thoughtful, and written so anybody can read them and not only understand what's going on but actually get a chuckle or two. Souter, on the other hand, always irked me.

[Piper]

You can expect most of the older Liberal Justices to start dropping out now that Obama's in. Most of them have only been hanging on till a Democrat was elected.

You can never guess with Stevens. He's too crazy to predict. Ginsburg still seems probable in a year or two, though.

[Tempra]

You can expect most of the older Liberal Justices to start dropping out now that Obama's in. Most of them have only been hanging on till a Democrat was elected.

Hopefully Scalia drops too.

The High Court would be a dreadfully boring place without Scalia.

[EHK for Darwin]

I have to say, like or hate his political views, hands down Scalia has done more to help change the strength that legal verbiage has had in turning the legal field into a near monopoly of the ABA. His opinions are clear, thoughtful, and written so anybody can read them and not only understand what's going on but actually get a chuckle or two. Souter, on the other hand, always irked me.

His opinions are that. But anyone who calls him consistent or a strict originalist is full of it. He may have that reputation, but its not the reality if you've read enough of his opinions. (Its been more then a few years since I've read a bunch of his shit, so no I can't cite any offhand) He's a semi-ideological opportunist.