Outrageous

@Robert Gentel,

Robert, I understand what you are trying to do... saying that there are two sides to every question and that everyone should be equal in American politics. But comparing the prominent bigoted right-wing loonies that are constantly highlighted on Fox News, with the small number of left wing loonies is silly.

The conservative movement now features Congressmen, and popular TV personalities, screaming socialism. You have Tea Bag protests trumpeted by Glenn Beck where they shout racial epithets. And you have constant ranting (on TV) about the "blood of Patriots" and other not too veiled threats of armed insurrection. The left hasn't acted this bat-crap crazy since the Weathermen in the 60s.

You claim that the left is ignoring the reasoned voices from the right (presumably these are the ones who don't equate Obama with Nazi's)...

My question (again) is where are the reasoned voices from the right hiding?

3 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

This is by design msolga, they don't go out and highlight the reasonable people who oppose Obama's policies for a reason.

This is in large part, because the Republican leadership isn't echoing the voices of the 'reasonable people.' They are echoing the loonies.

Everyone from Newt, to Michael Steele, to Romney, Crist, Boehner; these people have all endorsed or agreed with the idea that Obama wasn't born in America, or asked to see the Birth Certificate. These people regularly accuse Obama of Socialism and talk about 'Death panels,' an astonishingly dishonest position.

Republicans who are confronted with angry people at town halls don't talk them down and they don't contradict the crazy things they say; there are many instances lately of them agreeing with them. The only one with the balls to do it has been McCain, who has been roundly booed every time he reminds people that Obama is the prez and that they should respect that.

I read Republican pundits and opinion leaders every day; I likely read more Republican material on the net than Dem, because hey - I don't need to be reminded of my own position. And many of them are quite intelligent, and there ARE good arguments for their positions, especially on some fiscal matters. But these voices are the ones that their party drowns out, not promotes.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Robert, I understand what you are trying to do... saying that there are two sides to every question and that everyone should be equal in American politics. But comparing the prominent bigoted right-wing loonies that are constantly highlighted on Fox News, with the small number of left wing loonies is silly.

The conservative movement now features Congressmen, and popular TV personalities, screaming socialism. You have Tea Bag protests trumpeted by Glenn Beck where they shout racial epithets. And you have constant ranting (on TV) about the "blood of Patriots" and other not too veiled threats of armed insurrection. The left hasn't acted this bat-crap crazy since the Weathermen in the 60s.

You claim that the left is ignoring the reasoned voices from the right (presumably these are the ones who don't equate Obama with Nazi's)...

My question (again) is where are the reasoned voices from the right hiding?

I think ebrown has asked you a reasonable and substantive question, robert. And I would much appreciate an answer to it, especially since you say the left is ignoring the non-loony criticisms of Obama and focusing on the loonies. What prominent Republicans are voicing reasoned argument to Obama?

2 Replies

bookmark

0 Replies

Now there will a reading.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9ks36c549BI/SqAuG6AndmI/AAAAAAAABC8/n3ETxrtZkoA/s400/bush-pet-goat.jpg

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Quote:
There's a lot more than racism and crazy in the opposition to Obama

ummmm... could you provide an example?

That you can even ask such a thing goes a long way to proving my point. Here's are two examples just from a2k:

Georgeob1 and roger. They aren't crazy, they aren't racist, but they are reasonable people who are wary of Obama's policies.

When it comes to health care reform I oppose anything that just addresses insurance reform as well and I want full public health care.

But ideologues prefer to focus on "gotcha" politics and find youtube videos that embarrass their opposition instead of engaging in legitimate debate, and that segment of American politics happens to be the majority.

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Robert, I understand what you are trying to do... saying that there are two sides to every question and that everyone should be equal in American politics.

That's not at all what I'm saying.

Quote:

But comparing the prominent bigoted right-wing loonies that are constantly highlighted on Fox News, with the small number of left wing loonies is silly.

That is a convenient and self-serving belief that I don't think is entirely accurate, but even if it's true it doesn't address what I say.

Even if there are more nuts on one side than the other you take it to an impossible extreme and act like there are only nuts on the other side. Much of the left is doing this and not bothering to consider that there is legitimate, non-crazy, and non-racist reservations about making such a sweeping change to the country.

Ignoring that is a disservice to your side.

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Robert, I understand what you are trying to do... saying that there are two sides to every question and that everyone should be equal in American politics. But comparing the prominent bigoted right-wing loonies that are constantly highlighted on Fox News, with the small number of left wing loonies is silly.

No, that is not what I'm saying I think that your second statement is self-serving delusion, and I worry for the left because of it's willingness to fixate

The conservative movement now features Congressmen, and popular TV personalities, screaming socialism. You have Tea Bag protests trumpeted by Glenn Beck where they shout racial epithets. And you have constant ranting (on TV) about the "blood of Patriots" and other not too veiled threats of armed insurrection. The left hasn't acted this bat-crap crazy since the Weathermen in the 60s.

You claim that the left is ignoring the reasoned voices from the right (presumably these are the ones who don't equate Obama with Nazi's)...

Quote:

My question (again) is where are the reasoned voices from the right hiding?

Right outside the blinders of ideologues.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

Georgeob1 and roger. They aren't crazy, they aren't racist, but they are reasonable people who are wary of Obama's policies.

Yes quite true and to add I observe that neither Georgeob nor Roger suffer fools gladly be they from the left or the right and carry on rational dialogue with their friends and their foes. The philippics now seem to dominate the vast spectrum of conversation.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert, right outside the blinders of ideologues? What? I don't hear very many reasoned voices from the right. I don't consider myself a left wing loonie and many of my friends where I live whether they are on the right or left are not loonies, but in the NEWS on TV and on the radio there is boatload of lunatics and they are making a lot of noise. Snood started this thread because of the high dudgeon the right is in over Obama speaking to school children. Imagine!

I don't have blinders on and I am not blind to all the things the Obama administration has promised and what they have done. So far not much that you could call socialism.

1 Reply

@snood,

snood wrote:

I think ebrown has asked you a reasonable and substantive question, robert. And I would much appreciate an answer to it, especially since you say the left is ignoring the non-loony criticisms of Obama and focusing on the loonies. What prominent Republicans are voicing reasoned argument to Obama?

The very fact that you guys can ask this, and aren't aware of the many perfectly reasonable reasons to disagree with you highlights what I'm saying. You just aren't interested in seeing reason at all in your oppositions.

If you just do a quick search you'll see that the stuff you guys go on about (tea parties, guns at rallies, etc) really don't constitute the leadership of the opposition.

Tea parties:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0409/Tea_Parties_and_the_GOP_establishment.html

Quote:

The guys at First Read make a good point about today's Tax Day tea parties: "One can sense a hesitance from the establishment wing of the GOP about getting too involved in this movement."

For as much noise as the leftist ideologues make about this, it really isn't a significant part of reasonable political discourse.

Obama speaking at school:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/state/57249992.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUr

Quote:

Tim Pawlenty said "I don't think it's wrong for the president to speak on education issues, you've just got to be careful about how you do it so you don't look like you are using the public school infrastructure for a political purpose."

This isn't a crazy or racist point of view, it's a legitimate concern about the presidential use of a "bully pulpit" in politics (one I had deep reservations about Bush's use of myself) but you guys are ascribing every opposition to Obama as crazy or racist. If they have any reservations at all about their political opponent it's put down to racism and portrayed as nutty.

There certainly are folk who are crazy or racist out there, but that you guys really do seem to think that there's nothing but that says a lot more about you than them.

Sarah "I'm so crazy" Palin:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22059.html

Quote:

In the latest instance of a high-profile GOP member taking a passing swipe at the party's 2008 vice presidential candidate, former Massachusetts governor and GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney jokingly dismissed Sarah Palin’s inclusion on Time’s list of influential people in an interview broadcast Sunday.

He asked, was “the issue on the most beautiful people or the most influential people?”

Other than McCain's initial selection of Palin you don't find a lot of ringing endorsements of her from the right, you find the left eating up her inability to be coherent. This is a media creation more so than a legitimate leader of the Republican party and this cite is a good example of why. You have Time magazine nominating her as a Republican leader with Republican leaders distancing themselves from her.

Health care reform:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/090109dnmethealthcare.3f4782a.html

Quote:

"Republicans are not against health care reform," Barton said. "We do believe the president's proposal is a radicalization and some would say socialization."

He said the best option would be to defeat the current plans and then for Republican leaders to sit down with President Barack Obama and his allies to hash out a proposal that meets all of their goals.

Hensarling said the health care system needs to be changed, but not in the way currently proposed.

"I don't think any of us are here to defend the status quo because the market hasn't been allowed to work," he said.

These arguments aren't insane or racist, and it's a disservice to the left to pretend that that's all there is out there in their opposition. Health care reform is one of those huge policy debates that will affect us deeply. Just like the right was wrong to portray the opposition to Iraq as being cowardly or anti-American the left is wrong to portray the opposition to Obama's plan as being racist and crazy.

Obama's plan is in serious danger of coming off the rails while you guys sit around and congratulate each other on owning political sanity in America. Obama's popularity is seriously sliding while you guys talk about how the GOP is dead and go so far as to question if there is a single sane Republican leader.

This isn't wise, it is self-serving delusion. It is not reasonable political discourse it is gotcha politics where you deliberately focus on the least reasonable opposition.

2 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

I agree with almost everything you've said, Robert, with one exception -- Sarah Palin's endorsement.

Quote:

Other than McCain's initial selection of Palin you don't find a lot of ringing endorsements of her from the right, you find the left eating up her inability to be coherent.

While you may be correct that the Republican leadership is wary of public endorsements, the folks I read daily -- lots of Gulf Coast, eastern seaboard conservatives -- think she's the real voice of the future. Unfortunately, they all get to vote.

1 Reply

@Vietnamnurse,

Vietnamnurse wrote:

Robert, right outside the blinders of ideologues? What? I don't hear very many reasoned voices from the right. I don't consider myself a left wing loonie and many of my friends where I live whether they are on the right or left are not loonies, but in the NEWS on TV and on the radio there is boatload of lunatics and they are making a lot of noise.

That doesn't mean there are no sane folk in your opposition. And the amplification of the lunatics isn't something the right is entirely responsible for, how many of you guys have spent more time addressing the reasonable opposition and seeking them out instead of finding the stuff to embarrass the other side?

The left is all about amplifying the right's lunatics because that scores easy political points. I wish they'd temper this because it underestimates their opposition.

Quote:

Snood started this thread because of the high dudgeon the right is in over Obama speaking to school children. Imagine!

I don't think Obama speaking to the kids is a worthwhile hill for them to die on but there's nothing crazy or racist about the age-old bully pulpit concern. But the left prefers not to acknowledge this simple matter of concern with political capital on the part of their opponents and prefers to see it as racism instead of political opposition to a powerful candidate.

This is doubly concerning for me because racism is something I feel strongly about, and I think the folk who fecklessly accuse all opposition to Obama as racism are undermining two causes I care about, progressive issues and racism. It's crying wolf to play the race card so easily.

Quote:

I don't have blinders on and I am not blind to all the things the Obama administration has promised and what they have done. So far not much that you could call socialism.

You might want to tell the extreme folk on your own side that then, Cyclo for one has argued with me that it is socialism. I'm with you, it's not socialism but there is a lot of grey when it comes to the word and it's not only due to those on the right.

2 Replies

@JPB,

JPB wrote:

While you may be correct that the Republican leadership is wary of public endorsements, the folks I read daily -- lots of Gulf Coast, eastern seaboard conservatives -- think she's the real voice of the future. Unfortunately, they all get to vote.

You can certainly find support for her on the right, especially among media punditry which she is about to become part of, but they asked me for the voices at the top of the Republican party and they are pretty uniformly wary of Palin and many blame her to a significant degree for McCain's loss.

Palin isn't a Republican leader anymore and isn't going to be unless she can learn to be coherent (so don't hold your breath).

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert, I didn't say there were no sane folk in opposition to me. I don't think you are insane or loony nor do I think that of George. There are lefty loonies I know, but I have never heard anything like the noise now. You have to admit when ministers preach from the pulpit that they want Obama to die it is drastic. That is why I joined this conversation. Not to say that YOU or George or Roger are nutcakes. But when the Southern Poverty Center says that threats are up 50% from the Bush years to that of the time Obama has been president, something must be going on. I am worried but not about you! Very Happy

1 Reply

@Vietnamnurse,

Vietnamnurse wrote:

I don't think you are insane or loony nor do I think that of George.

I am not of in political opposition to you by the way (most of the time, at least).

The biggest opposition I've had to Obama so far is that he hasn't gone far enough, and that I think he's too concerned about his own political capital to do what really needs to be done.

So I prefer a larger stimulus, I prefer government-run health care, not insurance reform and I prefer that Obama match his words about torture and the war on terror with real actions instead of being Bush lite there.

Quote:

There are lefty loonies I know, but I have never heard anything like the noise now. You have to admit when ministers preach from the pulpit that they want Obama to die it is drastic.

Sure it is, just like it was when the nuts on the left said the same about Bush. This is selective memory, the nuts on the left said it too, but if you walk in leftist circles the leftist nuts aren't going to be the ones being amplified.

Quote:

That is why I joined this conversation. Not to say that YOU or George or Roger are nutcakes. But when the Southern Poverty Center says that threats are up 50% from the Bush years to that of the time Obama has been president, something must be going on. I am worried but not about you!

99% of statistics are made up on the spot. I've seen that figure cited at 400% and personally am very wary of such statistics, especially when they are so wildly inconsistent.

Thing is, even if you accept that all at face value we still aren't talking about even 1% of your political opposition and are fixating on the loonys again.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

You might want to tell the extreme folk on your own side that then, Cyclo for one has argued with me that it is socialism.

This is a gross misrepresentation of my arguments, and I am hardly what you would call an 'extreme' Democrat.

Are you not going to respond to my above point, that the Republican leadership spends more time repeating the stuff the loonies say, than their own intellectuals? The fact that you can cherry-pick a few statements by a few people does not change the fact that much of the top Republican leadership validates and encourages the crazy behavior of the base at this time; it's purely obvious that they are doing so to a greater degree now, than they were back in April, b/c it seems to be having a positive political effect for them.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Who constitutes the "Republican Leadership"? Who are their counterparts on the Democrat side? My string impression is that the public statements of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Henry Waxman and Charlie Rangel have themselves been every bit as partisan and offensive as have those of the Republican leaders you chide.

You earlier noted that only John McCain has called openly for restraint and respect for the president. Can you recall any Democrat leaders who did this for President Bush, or who are calling for reasoned debade and compromise today?

The veil you are hiding behind on this matter is wearing rather thin.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

This is a gross misrepresentation of my arguments, and I am hardly what you would call an 'extreme' Democrat.

I disagree, as I recall you told McGentrix that he was supporting socialism because he supported the notion of government-run healthcare, and I disagreed that it was socialism and we argued about it. Your exact quote was:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Actual, government-run businesses are the definition of Socialism.

You can see it here and follow our argument over the appropriateness of this term for public services. If the government-run businesses are the "definition of Socialism" then government-run insurance, or health care would be Socialism. Which is the argument that many on the right make.

I disagree with it strongly, in that the economic system of Socialism is not defined by the government having a public program. But you did use the same reasoning the right does when they denigrate public programs as socialism.

I don't think you are an extremist in terms of being loony, but you do fall pretty far along the left spectrum when you consider positions you've advocated such as limiting the wealth of all Americans, and as a leftist myself I think you take things to an extreme that I wouldn't accept. So it isn't intended as a slight to portray you as unreasonable, just to indicate that you are further left than the majority of the left.

Quote:

Are you not going to respond to my above point, that the Republican leadership spends more time repeating the stuff the loonies say, than their own intellectuals?

I thought I did so well enough but if you want me to respond to it directly:

Substantiate your claim. Show me some numbers. How much more? 10% 50%

I've seen you guys make these claims, but I think you aren't bothering to quantify anything and are relying on gut, if that is all it is then well there's not much to rebut, it's a vague and practically useless allegation if it lacks any real evidence to support it.

Quote:

The fact that you can cherry-pick a few statements by a few people does not change the fact that much of the top Republican leadership validates and encourages the crazy behavior of the base at this time; it's purely obvious that they are doing so to a greater degree now, than they were back in April, b/c it seems to be having a positive political effect for them.

Well, cherry picking the crazy doesn't substantiate anything either. So if you claim the Republican leadership caters to their crazies more than their reasonable folk then I'd love to see you make a real case that isn't based on cherry picking.

I suspect that you are just calling your impression of the situation the facts on the ground and I've already traded you my impressions for yours. If you want to take it further I'd need you to provide something of more substance to address.

But all of this ignores my point, I've not been here arguing that there is perfect equivalence between political sides, I'm arguing that fixating on the loonys is counter-productive. There is sane political opposition and many on the left are deliberately ignoring it to amplify the nuts.

Saying that the Republicans do too isn't much of a justification for that kind of gotcha politics.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

Well, cherry picking the crazy doesn't substantiate anything either. So if you claim the Republican leadership caters to their crazies more than their reasonable folk then I'd love to see you make a real case that isn't based on cherry picking.

I suspect that you are just calling your impression of the situation the facts on the ground and I've already traded you my impressions for yours. If you want to take it further I'd need you to provide something of more substance to address.

But all of this ignores my point, I've not been here arguing that there is perfect equivalence between political sides, I'm arguing that fixating on the loonys is counter-productive. There is sane political opposition and many on the left are deliberately ignoring it to amplify the nuts.

Saying that the Republicans do too isn't much of a justification for that kind of gotcha politics.

In order for equivalence to happen, you would need to see top Dem leadership validating 9/11 truthers and those who claim that Bush was a Fascist. While there were plenty of voices in the Dem party who said these things, they were generally not supported by the leadership.

On the other hand, the Republican leadership caters to their conspiracy theories. I can find you any number of quotes showing top Republicans agreeing with Birthers, advancing Tenther arguments, and making all sorts of crazy and malicious claims about the Dems in Congress and the effects of the plans they are putting forth. It isn't as if I should even have to do this, however, b/c you know from your own experience how prevalent this rhetoric has been amongst the Republicans lately.

You state,

Quote:

Substantiate your claim. Show me some numbers. How much more? 10% 50%

How am I supposed to do that? Do studies exist, which show how many more times Grassley or other Republicans have referred to 'death panels' than they have more reasonable terms for objection? I don't know where to find this data, or I would present it.

I don't see any Republican leaders repeating the arguments of, say, Ramesh Ponnuru or Henke or Eugene Volokh, or anyone who is making a great, nuanced argument. I have seen tons of the leadership use the worse possible attacks, the most dishonest and inflamatory ones. Perhaps we are getting the wrong impression about the other side, b/c that is the impression they are going out of their way to put forth.

Unlike others, I have never pretended that the Republican party is dead or gone, and I know that complacency is the first step to losing. I think the Republicans are in a long-term trough, b.c the amount of trust Bush and the Republican-led congresses lost due to their poor decisions is really, really big and will last for a while. This is not to say that the Dems are not perfectly capable of shooting themselves in the foot, as we are currently doing.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know