Right Thinking From The Left Coast
The Government is merely a servant -- merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn't. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them. - Mark Twain

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

We Interrupt This World Series…

Did anyone watch Obama’s infomercial tonight?  I must admit that in the conflict between live-blogging the infomercial and checking my toenails to make sure they will all the same length, toenails won.

In lieu of having anything to say about the Obamercial, I’ll run a Cato infomercial that actually says something useful about Obama’s healthcare plan:

Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/29/08 at 10:22 PM in Election 2008  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Mentalist

The latest argument against Obama? He’s hypnotizing people. I kid you not.

At the web site of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons ("A Voice for Private Physicians Since 1943″), there’s an unsigned “News of the Day” item dated October 25, 2008, under the title “Oratory — or hypnotic induction?”. This article’s disturbing message is indicated by the rhetorical questions in its opening sentences:

Is Barack Obama a brilliant orator, captivating millions through his eloquence? Or is he deliberately using the techniques of neurolinguistic programming (NLP), a covert form of hypnosis developed by Milton Erickson, M.D.?

67 additional pages of anonymous evidence and argument can be found in “An Examination of Obama’s Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches”, hosted at Freedom’s Phoenix ("Reigniting the Flames of Freedom"), a conservative website based in Phoenix, AZ.

Rush Limbaugh apparently discussed this on his show today, which I think gives you an idea of how credible this is. So, who are these people?

The first one is the “Association of American Physicians and Surgeons”, based in Tucson, Arizona. Wikipedia quotes Time Magazine as calling it “an ultra-conservative political action group”, and notes that its publication, The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, has published articles arguing that the FDA is unconstitutional, that humanists have conspired to replace the “creation religion of Jehovah” with evolution, that HIV does not cause AIDS, and that vaccination and fluoridation are harmful to public health. Ron Paul is a prominent member. They are against government regulation and in favor of Newfoundland dogs.

In other words, they fit right in with what passes for conservatism these days. And what about this startling theory itself?

As another piece of background, you may need a primer on Neurolinguistic Programming, familiarly (if confusingly) known as NLP, an approach to psychotherapy developed at Santa Cruz, CA, in the 1970s. The Wikipedia article is a reasonable introduction, or at least it seems that way to me. I’m certainly no expert — I’ve never quite gotten over being puzzled about the name, since the ideas seem to have nothing at all to do with programming, and very little to do with either neurology or linguistics.

But that doesn’t matter to the tinfoil hat crowd. Obama is obviously going to win through witchcraft. And the conservative movement’s slide into lunacy continues apace.

Posted by West Virginia Rebel on 10/29/08 at 03:03 PM in Right Wing Assholes  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Sons Of The Dixiecrats

Thomas Yunck argues that it’s the descendents of former Dixiecrats along with fringe kooks who killed off the old GOP:

In ‘48 when Truman, though facing sweeping defeat, decreed a robust civil rights plank for the Dem platform and Humphrey intoned that we must, in Lincoln’s words, “do the right, as God has given us to know the right,” the racists decamped.  A body formerly known as the Party of Lincoln gave them succor, crafted a cynical “southern strategy,” and perennially prevailed.

This unholy union has now corroded into a mash-up of Old Dixie, prairie gunslingers, anti-tax fetishists, end times Rapturists, militiamen and Millenarians, jingoists and misanthropes, survivalists and cranks, and the odd secessionist witch doctor.  Soon there will be a reckoning between the cerebral cons (who’ve been long content to pal up with vermin) and the wingnut residuum that has found its avatar in Bible Spice.

I think that reckoning has already happened, as witness to the many (starting with William F. Buckley and George Will) who were no longer willing to put up with scum just to help their party win votes. Unfortunately, they left behind a void that allowed the Bill Kristols and Hugh Hewitts of the world to become the new voices of the conservative movement. This is what happens when you let the lunatics run the asylum. The lunatics get to rewrite history and present themselves as the sane ones.

Update: If you needed any further proof, here’s WorldNutDaily’s Janet Porter’s um, “Logic":

No, this election is not about race.  It’s not about the economy. It’s about obeying God.

”Vote fer McCain, or yer goin’ straight t’ Hell!” I guess that about sums it up.

Posted by West Virginia Rebel on 10/29/08 at 01:47 PM in Politics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Naming The Donors

The Washington Post finally figures out what the big deal was about people being able to donate to Obama’s campaign without providing correct personal information:

Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed.

Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.

The Obama organization said its extensive review has ensured that the campaign has refunded any improper contributions, and noted that Federal Election Commission rules do not require front-end screening of donations.

In recent weeks, questionable contributions have created headaches for Obama’s accounting team as it has tried to explain why campaign finance filings have included itemized donations from individuals using fake names, such as Es Esh or Doodad Pro. Those revelations prompted conservative bloggers to further test Obama’s finance vetting by giving money using the kind of prepaid cards that can be bought at a drugstore and cannot be traced to a donor.

The problem with such cards, campaign finance lawyers said, is that they make it impossible to tell whether foreign nationals, donors who have exceeded the limits, government contractors or others who are barred from giving to a federal campaign are making contributions.

Their excuse?

When asked whether the campaign takes steps to verify whether a donor’s name matches the name on the credit card used to make a payment, Obama’s campaign replied in an e-mail: “Name-matching is not a standard check conducted or made available in the credit card processing industry. We believe Visa and MasterCard do not even have the ability to do this.

This is, not to put too fine a point on it, categorical bullshit.  E-commerce engines require that sort of thing by default.

I tend to be a bit more generous in my assessments of motives. But the Obama campaign had to be aware that phony political contributions are a favorite way for identity thieves to test stolen credit card numbers.  They had to know some of the contributions they were getting were garbage. I don’t think the Obama campaign was deliberately courting fraud (and it is worth noting that this was a very small portion of his overall contributions). But I think they were willing to look the other way if fraud occurred.  After all, we have to change the country, don’t we?

Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/29/08 at 08:46 AM in Election 2008  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Not A Genius In France

Europe hearts Obama? Not quite.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy is very critical of U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama’s positions on Iran, according to reports that have reached Israel’s government.

Sarkozy has made his criticisms only in closed forums in France. But according to a senior Israeli government source, the reports reaching Israel indicate that Sarkozy views the Democratic candidate’s stance on Iran as “utterly immature” and comprised of “formulations empty of all content.”

Obama visited Paris in July, and the Iranian issue was at the heart of his meeting with Sarkozy. At a joint press conference afterward, Obama urged Iran to accept the West’s proposal on its nuclear program, saying that Iran was creating a serious situation that endangered both Israel and the West.

According to the reports reaching Israel, Sarkozy told Obama at that meeting that if the new American president elected in November changed his country’s policy toward Iran, that would be “very problematic.”

Well, I don’t see that Sarkozy’s attitude has changed Iran’s mind any. And with Ima Dinnerjacket pulling a disappearing dictator act, now might be the time to actually try some diplomacy. I do, however, find it ironic that we may be on the verge of electing a president who won’t be as popular with some foreign leaders as Bush was.

Update by Lee: One of my coworkers is French, and he also happens to be a Socialist, as in a dues-paying member of the Socialist Party, who voted for Segolene Royal.  I noticed today he’s wearing an Obama pin on his jacket. 

Posted by West Virginia Rebel on 10/28/08 at 11:31 PM in Europe and the UK  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Somber Business

From Cavanaugh’s endorsement:

Something of Barack Hussein Obama’s gassy, orotund manner seems to have rubbed off on his fans this endorsement season. The news media endorsement has never been a genre known for its pith or saltiness, but this year’s offerings have been particularly solemn and heavy. The New York Times reported from a “battered and drifting” United States that its endorsement choice had “met challenge after challenge” in a “grueling and ugly campaign.” Breaking with a three-decade non-endorsement tradition, the Los Angeles Times pronounced that it is “inherent in the American character to aspire to greatness.” The Washington Post burst in, sober as a judge, to praise this year’s winner’s “supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building.” Even The New Yorker, a magazine with no past endorsements under its belt, announced that “America needs both uplift and realism, both change and steadiness...a leader temperamentally, intellectually, and emotionally attuned to the complexities of our troubled world.”

And Sullivan thought the “little starbursts” quote was bad.

I’ve seen similar lofty rhetoric in other Obama endorsements (if you’ve swallowed something poisonous, you could try reading Slate’s 55-1 count of Obama vs. McCain endorsements).  I feel like this is all going to sound hilarious in four years when Obama is finishing a “meh” first term (if we’re lucky) or facing an electoral walloping of his own (if we’re not).  I have little patience with those who would ascribe the noblest virtues to office-seekers.  I have still less when they’re fetishizing a one-term Senator with a track record shorter than that of my ficus tree.

So right now, I’m starting what I call Project Nelson.  I will collect the most craven, most pretentious and most besotted endorsements of Obama between now and the first time he fucks up (Projected Date: January 22, 2009).  And I’ll keep them around for quoting anytime Obama screws up so I can say, “Haw-Haw!”.  Any suggestions can be made in comments.

Oh, the next four years are going to be ... well, not exactly fun. But interesting, at least.

Update: Double bonus points will be given for any simpering pro-Obama quotes that came from my own keyboard.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/28/08 at 09:37 PM in Politics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Rage Against The Machine

I’m seeing more and more of this—a cartoon indicating that voting machines are going to steal thousands or millions of votes for McCain.  Chocolate News did a skit on it.  The Simpsons did a sketch.  Apart from losing funniness every time the joke is run out there, what gives?  Is there any evidence that vote machines are stealing massive piles of votes for McCain?  Especially given that most canvassing boards are controlled by Democrats?  I’m genuinely curious.  Maybe I’m reading the wrong news sources.  I’m not talking about the odd malfunction, as happened in Florida.  I’m talking about a a systematic theft.

What is it with liberals that makes them so paranoid?

Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/28/08 at 07:07 PM in Election 2008  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Let’s Do It Over Again

The NYT is freaked out because minorities are having a harder time getting mortgages.  Um, isn’t that how we got into this mess in the first place?  Is this supposed discrimination backed up by any facts?  Or are we just playing games with numbers?  My money’s on the latter.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/28/08 at 05:02 PM in Politics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Great Expansion

First an attack in Syria.  Yesterday, an airstrike in Pakistan.  Remember when attacking other countries was a sign of Obama’s naivete and recklessness?

We have entered a new phase in the war on terror. In July, according to three administration sources, the Bush administration formally gave the military new power to strike terrorist safe havens outside of Iraq and Afghanistan. Before then, a military strike in a country like Syria or Pakistan would have required President Bush’s personal approval. Now, those kinds of strikes in the region can occur at the discretion of the incoming commander of Central Command (Centcomm), General David Petraeus. One intelligence source described the order as institutionalizing the “Chicago Way,” an allusion to Sean Connery’s famous soliloquy about bringing a gun to a knife fight.

The new order could pave the way for direct action in Kenya, Mali, Pakistan, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen--all places where the American intelligence believe al Qaeda has a significant presence, but can no longer count on the indigenous security services to act. In the parlance of the Cold War, Petraeus will now have the authority to fight a regional “dirty war.” When queried about the order from July, deputy spokesman for the National Security Council Ben Chang offered no comment.

Strikes within Iran could be justified by the order, since senior al Qaeda leaders such as Saif al Adel are believed to have used that country as a base for aiding the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda affiliates in Iraqi Kurdistan. For now, however, any action inside Iranian territory will require at least sign off from the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff because of Iran’s capacity to retaliate inside the western hemisphere.

Kenya, Mali, Pakistan, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.  Plus possibly Iran.  Is Bush not going to be happy until we’re at war with everyone?  I’m all for chasing enemies across borders when we have to.  But not across every border simultaneously.

We can’t get these fuckwads out of office fast enough.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/28/08 at 04:55 PM in War on Terror/Axis of Evil  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Revenge Of The Snubbed

Gov. Charlie Crist has given Obama a big advantage in Florida:

Gov. Charlie Crist on Tuesday afternoon issued an order expanding the hours of early voting up to 12 hours a day through Saturday, from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., and a total of 12 weekend hours, between 7 a.m. Saturday and 7 p.m. Sunday. (The law allowed for a maximum of eight hours a day and a total of eight on the weekend).

At a hastily arranged news conference, Crist said the right to vote is sacred and that “many have fought and died for this right.” He said he consulted a leading Democratic legislator, Rep. Dan Gelber of Miami Beach, before issuing his order, and that Gelber knew of a similar order issued by Gov. Jeb Bush in 2002 that dealt with helping voters deal with new equipment. (Buzz audio here.)

As to the perception that more early voting helps Democrats, Crist said: “This is not a political decision. This is a people decision.” (audio here)

In other words, Crist has told McCain to kiss Florida’s ass. He has most likely blown any chances he might have had in 2012. But that’s what McCain gets for not making a rational VP choice.

Posted by West Virginia Rebel on 10/28/08 at 03:34 PM in Election 2008  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Just Say McNo

John McCain has discovered the War on Drugs:

Lax enforcement policies, judges who legislate from the bench and lack of support for law enforcement personnel all continue to force our innocent citizens behind the barred windows of their homes and allow criminals to roam free.

And now drugs are bringing waves of crime and organized gang activity to rural areas thought to be nearly immune from such problems. The federal government must both support state and local law enforcement and effectively enforce federal laws designed to root out violent crime, organized gangs and other interstate criminal activity.


I will appoint judges who will hold criminals accountable.

Apparently there aren’t enough people in jail over drug-related crimes already. When all else fails, channel Richard Nixon.

Posted by West Virginia Rebel on 10/28/08 at 03:19 PM in Election 2008  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

“It’s Not Our Fault You Suck”

The Politico responds to critics:

There have been moments in the general election when the one-sidedness of our site — when nearly every story was some variation on how poorly McCain was doing or how well Barack Obama was faring — has made us cringe. As it happens, McCain’s campaign is going quite poorly and Obama’s is going well. Imposing artificial balance on this reality would be a bias of its own.

There is quite a lot of liberal bias out there. But it hasn’t helped McCain that he has run one of the shoddiest campaigns in recent memory. In this case, McCain hasn’t really needed the press’s help to look bad.

Posted by West Virginia Rebel on 10/28/08 at 03:06 PM in The Press Machine  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Evaluating the Threat
by Lee

I realize that WVR already mentioned this but I want to add a few points about the skinhead Obama assassination attempt.

The suspects met over the Internet about a month ago, said an affidavit filed by Brian Weaks, a special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

“The individuals began discussing going on a ‘killing spree’ that included killing 88 people and beheading 14 African Americans,” Weaks said in the affidavit.

The men stole guns from family members and also had a sawed-off shotgun. They planned to target a predominately black school, going state to state while robbing individuals and continuing to kill people, Weaks said in the affidavit.

“They further stated that their final act of violence would be to attempt to kill/assassinate presidential candidate Barack Obama,” he said.

The men planned to wear white tuxedos and top hats during the assassination attempt, which would have involved driving as fast as they could toward Obama and shooting him from the windows of the car.

Why the hell are these idiots getting any press at all?  Does anyone, for a single second, think that these twits would have been able to penetrate the shield put up by the Secret Service?  They’d have snipers on every visible rooftop within a mile radius of Obama.  A bunch of skinheads in tuxedos and tophats shooting guns out the window of their truck?  Who the fuck are we kidding?  These guys wouldn’t have gotten close enough to Obama to even see him.  I’d bet Bush received a hundred death threats a week and nobody ever reported on them.

It’s nothing but sensationalist news reporting.  Think of all the elements, it sounds like an episode of 24:  America has just elected its first black president, and a group of right-wing skinhead radical domestic terrorists tries to assassinate him.  The only thing missing are the top-secret reports of Jack Bauer sticking his knife into the kneecaps of suspects to tell them where the attack is going to take place.

This just like the Bush administration’s alleged foiling of “terrorist plots.” It’s a bunch of fucking morons making audacious claims that they never would have been able to carry out in the first place.  It’s no different than those Muslims who planned to attack Fort Dix.  As I said last year

Every time someone points out how Bush has “kept us safe” from terror attacks since 9/11, keep in mind that these are terrists whose plots are not feasible and who sound like stoned hippies.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.  Every “terror plot” that we have foiled so far has turned out to be far less odious than we are originally led to believe, which just makes me think more and more that the only reason we haven’t been hit hard since 9/11 is that the terrists have simply chosen not to.


Just because something is not technically feasible doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be investigated, pursued, and the perpetrators prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  But if incidents like this are going to be used to bolster Bush’s image as a steely-eyed terrorist killer with his six-guns slung low on his hips, I think it’s only fair to point out that the terrorist he just gunned down in the town square was half retarded and trying to stab a woman with a banana.

I’m nothing if not an equal asshole to both sides.

Posted by Lee on 10/28/08 at 10:32 AM in The Press Machine  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

The Road Less Traveled
by Lee

I just remembered something.  When I was in the fifth grade in Stavanger, Norway, I wrote an editorial for my elementary school newspaper endorsing Jimmy Carter for president.  I don’t recall my reasoning, and in the fifth grade I most likely had no idea what I was talking about.  But what a political journey, eh?  From relatively liberal in my teenage years to becoming a conservative (in the Hayekian sense) in my early 20s, to a Republican in my late 20s, to a Libertarian in my mid 30s. 

After the coming political realignment, who the hell knows where I’ll end up.

Posted by Lee on 10/28/08 at 10:28 AM in Deep Thoughts  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Monday, October 27, 2008

Riffing On Frum

David Frum has a great little post over at NR on the Rush/Blankley plan for re-building the GOP:

OK, let’s develop this a little.

1) Sarah Palin has the potential to become a key leader of the conservative movement beyond 2008.

2) If that happens, she will follow “the blueprint” and achieve another conservative landslide - and another successful presidency!

3) But snobs like Peggy, David, Christopher, Kathleen and me are embarrassed that she drops her Gs. Our motto: “Unless we can nominate a Harvard graduate, we’d rather lose.”

I have to wonder:

Can even Rush himself believe this junk?

I think Rush is a great entertainer and has often been a force for good in the conservative movement. But right now, he is feeding his audience pleasing illusions that can only lead conservatives to even greater troubles in the days ahead.

Take a look at this poll from Stanley Greenberg. (Yes Greenberg’s a Democrat - but he’s long proven himself a realistic analyst of American politics. Greenberg is the guy who identified Macomb County, Michigan, as the heartland of the “Reagan Democrats” - and warned Democrats that they were losing both Macomb and the nation.)

While a sizeable majority of voters say Republicans have lost in 2006 and 2008 because they have been “too conservative,” a sizeable plurality of Republicans say, it is because they have “not been conservative enough.”

Over three-quarters of Republicans say Palin was good choice, while a majority of the electorate says the opposite.

Two-thirds of Republicans say McCain has not been aggressive enough, but a majority of voters think they have been too aggressive.

Looking to the future, a large majority of Republicans say the party needs to “move more to the right and back to conservative principles,” while an even larger majority of all voters say, it should move to the “center to win over moderate and independent voters.”

When Rush and Blankley tell us the blueprint is there, if only we would follow it, they are telling us something that is not true. They are offering flattering illusions when we need truth. They are leading us to disaster - and beyond disaster, to irrelevance

Several thoughts emerge.

First, the problem is that the voters and the Republicans are using two different definitions of conservative—or at least a definition so mutated from Reagan conservatism that it’s unrecognizable.  The face of conservatism that has been seen for the last eight years is the face of big, intrusive government.  The face of outrageous spending, of cronyism, of moral certainty, of aggressive foreign policy.  It is a face that countenances torture, disparages intellectualism, castigates science and denounces anyone who disagrees as unpatriotic.  It draws distinctions between “real” America and liberal America.  It is an explicitly Christian—actually explicitly evangelical—face. It is not something that I—and apparently a huge segment of voters—want to be a part of.

Second—contra Rush, it is not McCain’s “unconservative” worldview and attempts to bridge the partisan divide that are killing him.  It’s the toxicity of the Republican brand.  Consider this—McCain is polling 20-25 points ahead of the President right now.  In this environment—and especially with the campaign he’s run—he should be getting massacred.  That he’s not is a testament to how conservative this country is and how legitimately they are concerned about where Obama will take them.  If Bush had not poisoned the well so thoroughly (and if McCain were not so eagerly dumping even more arsenic into it), the GOP would probably win this thing.

Third, I think the Republicans are in denial right now.  They are reminding me a lot of the Democrats just a few years ago.  They can’t believe that the country would reject them in favor of the Illinois Marxist Terrorist.  It must be ACORN cheating.  It must be a biased media.  It must be Billy Ayers.  It must be psychic trolls working for Obama.  Something, anything, other than the Cheney-Rove brand of politics finally going sour.

Yes, a return to Reagan-Goldwater conservatism could bring the GOP back into power and the country back onto the tracks.  But right now, the GOP has no fucking clue what Reagan conservatism looks like.  Just because you call something conservative doesn’t make it so.

Update by Lee: I am so sick of people like Rush dragging up Reagan’s name, as if he were somehow to come back to life and run on an identical platform he’d have an ‘84-style landslide.  That’s absurd.  First, Reagan was a man for his time.  The economy was in the shitter, the USSR was still doing its thing with impunity, and people were looking for a serious change in leadership after the limpidity and overall lameness of the Carter years.  Reagan didn’t come out and promise the world, he came out and said two main things:  he’d reform the economy, and he’d deal with the USSR.  He did both masterfully.  Now, look at the current situation.  We’ve had eight years of Bush/Rove wiping their asses with the noble mantle of conservatism.  The Republican brand is dead.  McCain came out as a reformer and ended up following the same playbook that has led to Republican doom since the Democrats took over Congress.  For the rest of time political scientists of every stripe are going to look at this campaign as one man, with no experience but an uplifting message and offering a true alternative to the status quo, defeating a cranky old curmudgeon, with no message and no consistency to his campaign, who chose a fucking retard as his running mate. 

McCain, regardless of policy, deserves to lose the election on these grounds alone.  He has simply been outmaneuvered by a vastly superior campaign staff.  They kicked his ass.

Back to Reagan.  What we *don’t* need is another Reagan.  We need a new, updated Reagan 2.0, someone with his ability to connect with the common man and provide a consistent, logical, quality message that people can relate to.  Merely regurgitating Reaganesque platitudes will not win elections.  Imitating the Democrats as “Democrat Lite” will not win elections.  You have to look at what has changed since 1980 and 1984.

Reagan still remains one of our most beloved contemporary presidents.  I was in Los Angeles when he died, and when his body was ushered through the streets the people of Los Angeles, the vast majority of them liberals and minorities, lined the streets to wave American flags.  On the local news people were saying, “I didn’t agree with his politics, but I was proud to be an American when Reagan was president,” or “I was an immigrant from Honduras when Reagan was president.  He convinced me that America was the best place on earth, and I worked and saved my whole life to move here.” Reagan was not just a political message, he was an icon who was able to personify an entire movement.

Does that last sentence remind you of anyone?  It sure as hell reminds me of Barack Obama. 

What I have been saying for at least the past year, and what morons like Rush clearly are too blinded by partisanship to see, is that Obama is the “Reagan of the Left.” What we need is not a return to Reagan’s politics, we need a new figurehead, in the mould of Reagan and Goldwater, who can lead an updated version of the Reagan Revolution.  Remember, kids, by definition a revolution is an act which changes the status quo.  Obama is a revolution.  McCain, while an honest and decent man, is basically representative of everything America has come to hate about politics the last eight years.

I firmly believe that America is, at its heart, a center-right country.  What has changed since 1980 is that the GOP changed from being a party whose morals were driven by conventional Christianity into a party whose sole purpose was to implement a radical fundamentalist Christian orthodoxy in the political sphere.  When Rush says he wasn’t conservative enough he means “Not enough of a rabid Christian fundamentalist dickhead to appeal to the four-tooth, six bibles crowd in rural Appalachia.” Rush is, clearly, an intelligent man.  But he knows where his listeners lie.  He knows where his bread is buttered, and he sure as hell can’t come out and say “You know, folks, the last eight years I’ve been blowing smoke up your asses.  Bush is a moron, fundamentalist Christianity loses elections, the Iraq War is a disaster, and we need to completely repudiate the politics of Bush and Rove if we ever hope to become a majority party in America again.” He can’t say that, because he still has to make payments on his Gulfstream V and his compound in Florida.  His idiot listeners would never stand by him.  They’d call him a traitor and a communist the same way they did Colin Powell.

The problem isn’t that the GOP didn’t invoke Reagan’s name enough, it’s that the GOP invoked Reagan’s name while pissing over everything the man ever stood for.  The American people, despite what Europe might think, aren’t stupid enough to buy that crap.  Obama might be a leftist, but he comes across as an honest leftist.  McCain is an opportunist who let his lust for power derail what could have been a promising presidential end to a distinguished career.  For the rest of time he’ll be known as the cranky old bastard who spectacularly flamed out when the American people needed him most.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/27/08 at 07:52 PM in Election 2008  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink
Page 2 of 16 pages  <  1 2 3 4 >  Last »