Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult

[Nothing2CHere]

This is a very long, but I still think very worthwhile read. Towards the end he starts talking about how fundamentalism managed to help take over the party:

http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-re ... 1314907779

[Austin]

Thank you so much for posting that! It is such a worthwhile read. Srsly, even those FJers that don't like politics should read this. It is balanced (he's not an Obama supporter) and incredibly insightful. The article synthesized for me what seemed to be obvious but disparate facts into a narrative that makes sense. Talk about a lightbulb going on!

It's long, but well worth the time.

[gustava]

I've seen this article and it confirmed by worst fears.

[emmiedahl]

The GOP is seriously not impressing me right now.

OT but related: did anyone else notice the look on Boehner's face when Obama gave his speech on recovering jobs? Seriously, it's a common sense proposal, one could even call it fiscally conservative with the cuts. I don't think senators should be rolling their eyes at the President while he speaks. It's just immature and really fucking rude. (/rant)

[Austin]

The lack of respect being shown for the President is really bothering me. Even if we don't like the man, one has to respect the office. I try not to go down the racial road, but it makes me wonder with some of these guys. A lot of people had Bush derangement syndrome, and Clinton derangement syndrome (for those not in the USA, it just means that they had an irrational hatred of those presidents), but there not that many incidents. People said bad things about them, but I don't remember people sitting behind them and rolling their eyes or shouting "You Lie" during a Presidental address.

This probably sounds very pollyannaish, but I am really disgusted by the lack of civility on both sides of the aisle in congress and the senate. And I really do believe that the GOP loves its own ambition more than it loves this country, or else we wouldnt' see them putting their agenda of bringing President Obama down over the good of the country, even if it's to the detriment of the American people. Like the debt ceiling thing. Totally manufactured by the GOP.

The extremes are causing this. There are plenty of moderate, reasonable people in the GOP, but their voices have been drowned out by the extremists, or else they seem to think they have to play along and are behaivng in more extremist ways than their past record would suggest to keep their seat.

[emmiedahl]

The party has definitely been taken over by special interests. My conservative, registered-Republican husband thought that Obama had a good plan that no one on either side of the aisle could argue with. He thought the speech was executed well and emotionally powerful. He was disgusted with Boehner. And he is growing more disgusted as the GOP fights Obama's plan for no good reason except to be douchebags.

I agree: even if you are not pleased with the President, you should be respectful when he is acting on behalf of his office. It is a matter of decency. I thought people were douchebags when they yelled out at Bush during speeches and I think they are douchebags for doing it to Obama now. But honestly? I don't remember Democratic senators treating Bush with such disdain when he addressed the Congress. It was always private citizens, but not elected officials.

Whoever the American people elect, it behooves the Congress to respect our choices by being civil.

[Witsec2]

Where does he get that the Republican party likes Ayn Rand??? They don't. The current Republican party-- and the government as a whole-- are the "bad guys" in ATLAS SHRUGGED. Ayn Rand wanted a small government; neo-conservatives want a huge government (and neo-cons run the Party now).

Anyway, both parties are evil. They both run the show and they're not very different.

[debrand]

A couple of years ago, a Republican committee staff director told me candidly (and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.

I read this and I dont' want to believe that the Republicans are this cold blooded. Really, taking down our entire system of government because it may give them more power?If it is true, it is evil and so unAmerican(despite how they like to bill themselves). It could also backfire against them. I mean what if it creates people who hate the government so much that they are willing to kill officals?

[emmiedahl]

If that is their plan, it backfired. Like, the type of backfire that takes off half the damn vehicle. My conservative husband thinks they are a bunch of corporate clowns and won't vote for them, at least in the next election. The traditionalist crowd does not take well to rudeness and obstructionist policies. I'm a moderate and they lost me when they became the anti-human rights party.

Democrats aren't really better, but then again they are, on the surface at least, kwim? At least they aren't proud to be sell-outs. They still have the conscience to know that it is wrong and should be hidden in public.

[TheBuddha]

Where does he get that the Republican party likes Ayn Rand??? They don't. The current Republican party-- and the government as a whole-- are the "bad guys" in ATLAS SHRUGGED. Ayn Rand wanted a small government; neo-conservatives want a huge government (and neo-cons run the Party now).

Anyway, both parties are evil. They both run the show and they're not very different.

THis, x1000

[finleeport]

I may not like Obama very much but I do respect his office. I don't think much of the republicans, but the only republican I hate (other than Michele Bachmann) is Ann Coulter, she really gets on my nerves. She likes to call all liberals godless and irreligious.

[debrand]

You know that Social Security and Medicare are in jeopardy when even Democrats refer to them as entitlements. "Entitlement" has a negative sound in colloquial English: somebody who is "entitled" selfishly claims something he doesn't really deserve. Why not call them "earned benefits," which is what they are because we all contribute payroll taxes to fund them? That would never occur to the Democrats. Republicans don't make that mistake; they are relentlessly on message: it is never the "estate tax," it is the "death tax."

Something that I've noticed about teh Democrats, they seem unable to speak to regular Americans.

[Chrystal-J]

Anyway, both parties are evil. They both run the show and they're not very different.

That's my belief too.

[apple1]

The GOP is seriously not impressing me right now.

OT but related: did anyone else notice the look on Boehner's face when Obama gave his speech on recovering jobs? Seriously, it's a common sense proposal, one could even call it fiscally conservative with the cuts. I don't think senators should be rolling their eyes at the President while he speaks. It's just immature and really fucking rude. (/rant)

Boehner is disgusting. And he is "my" politician (as in from my area) unfortunately... (I did NOT vote for him).

[Austin]

The Rand references are because of her basically elevating the idea of selfishness to a religion. "I got mine, screw you" is a pretty fair representation of the attitude of a lot of the worst representatives of the GOP.

The opinion piece, written by a republican (or at least one until recently and he clearly says he is NOT an Obama supporter) does not claim that the democratic party is lily-white. He just basically regards them as less evil or at least the lesser of two evils. Their sins are sins of cowardice and self-interest. Which is a whole different animal than what the GOP is doing. Anybody who kept close track of the "debt ceiling [faux] crisis" and is not drinking the GOP-extremist kool-aid can see that.

[emmiedahl]

I think the debt is a huge problem and that we should seriously reconsider who is getting tax breaks while the government contemplates whether we can afford to fund antibiotics for the elderly.

Fiscal responsibilty =/= cutting necessary programs so Paris Hilton can buy another helicopter.

[Austin]

I think the debt is a huge problem and that we should seriously reconsider who is getting tax breaks while the government contemplates whether we can afford to fund antibiotics for the elderly.

Fiscal responsibilty =/= cutting necessary programs so Paris Hilton can buy another helicopter.

Totally agree.

And just because I wasn't clear, I do consider the debt to be a problem, but there is little doubt that the "debt ceiling crisis" in July/early August was manufactured and basically a self-inflicted wound.

Corporations are sitting on zillions of dollars and despite the financial issues of the average American these days, they have raked in record profits. The rich are not creating jobs. I have no problem with the government giving a tax credit to "job creators", but let them prove that they have created some. We're just basically saying that they don't have to pay their fair share on the off-chance (very off-chance) that they may actually create a job or two. And that's just stupid and unfair to every American who does pay their fair share.

[Bella99]

Totally agree.

And just because I wasn't clear, I do consider the debt to be a problem, but there is little doubt that the "debt ceiling crisis" in July/early August was manufactured and basically a self-inflicted wound.

Corporations are sitting on zillions of dollars and despite the financial issues of the average American these days, they have raked in record profits. The rich are not creating jobs. I have no problem with the government giving a tax credit to "job creators", but let them prove that they have created some. We're just basically saying that they don't have to pay their fair share on the off-chance (very off-chance) that they may actually create a job or two. And that's just stupid and unfair to every American who does pay their fair share.

This.

[Avalondaughter]

Something that I've noticed about teh Democrats, they seem unable to speak to regular Americans.

What is a regular American and how does one speak?

The current folks in Congress don't really care about what is happening to the country. They just hate Obama so much they are determined to not let him accomplish anything good so they can take him down. Talk about disrespect for a POTUS.

I'm sure many of them believe that their way truly is better and that once they have Obama out of the way the country will be back on its feet. Too bad the ones who really believe that are the ones who will be the most disappointed.

[debrand]

Some liberal writers have opined that the different socio-economic perspectives separating the "business" wing of the GOP and the religious right make it an unstable coalition that could crack. I am not so sure. There is no fundamental disagreement on which direction the two factions want to take the country, merely how far in that direction they want to take it. The plutocrats would drag us back to the Gilded Age, the theocrats to the Salem witch trials. In any case, those consummate plutocrats, the Koch brothers, are pumping large sums of money into Michele Bachman's presidential campaign, so one ought not make too much of a potential plutocrat-theocrat split.

This is an interesting quote. I've wondered if I was being overly cyncial because I sometimes think that the GOP wants to take us back a time before unions when people worked long hours for little pay

The article is long but it has a lot of interesting points in it.

edited because I should use correct verb tenses

[debrand]

This.

Double This!

[emmiedahl]

About the Democrats' inability to speak to everyday Americans: Yes, absolutely! Most come off as very elitist and rigid in their viewpoints. Not so much Obama, but Hillary Clinton has nothing but disdain for anyone who is not 100% supportive. And it is obvious. She feels that she is the Savior, she is completely right about everything and you are an uneducated tree-dweller if there is any dissent. Even when I agree with her, I don't like doing it! She is just one example of many. They are vicious about namecalling and gameplaying. A lot of Republicans *do* mean things, but the Democrats seem like *mean people*. I'm talking about politicians here, not everyday people.

I like Obama's way of presenting his case: here's what I think, here's why I think it. It seems more respectful. Especially this last speech. And then there was the contrast of Boehner eye-rolling and grimacing. The contrast was so obvious. If Democrats can act as kind and open as they claim to be, it will woo a lot of voters.

[Austin]

About the Democrats' inability to speak to everyday Americans: Yes, absolutely! Most come off as very elitist and rigid in their viewpoints. Not so much Obama, but Hillary Clinton has nothing but disdain for anyone who is not 100% supportive. And it is obvious. She feels that she is the Savior, she is completely right about everything and you are an uneducated tree-dweller if there is any dissent. Even when I agree with her, I don't like doing it! She is just one example of many. They are vicious about namecalling and gameplaying. A lot of Republicans *do* mean things, but the Democrats seem like *mean people*. I'm talking about politicians here, not everyday people.

I like Obama's way of presenting his case: here's what I think, here's why I think it. It seems more respectful. Especially this last speech. And then there was the contrast of Boehner eye-rolling and grimacing. The contrast was so obvious. If Democrats can act as kind and open as they claim to be, it will woo a lot of voters.

I can see how you would feel that way about Hillary Clinton because I kind of did, too. After I read her book, though, I felt differently. I think Hillary has insecurities (like anyone else) and with her, they make her seem rather disdainful and dismissive. In her book, I found her to be very down-to-earth and willing to poke fun at herself. She has a very hard time confronting people, it seems, especially those that she's had long relationships with and she values loyalty beyond what is reasonable sometimes, or rather, permits loyalty to convince her to overlook major flaws in those people..

For instance, in her presidential campaign, she kept long-time staffers of hers on in very high positions despite one screw-up after the next. She just basically tried to ignore anything unpleasant between them all and they were fighting like cats and dogs instead of running her campaign. Still, she had a very hard time making necessary changes. For this reason, I do not think she would be a good president, although I did support her in the primaries. I think she is a very, very good fit for the extremely important job she has now and I feel better knowing she is in it.

[emmiedahl]

I noticed that about Hillary during her "It takes a village" period. The book was good and made points about how parents need more help, and how in a lot of countries they actually get it. But I read the book despite her public comments on it. She definitely seemed to have the attitude that parents are idiots who need the government to tell them how to raise their kids when she talked about it on shows, but the book had just the opposite tone: that parents would make good decisions if they had the right support.

There is a disconnect between her and I. I just don't like her as a person. The information about her campaign is interesting and I'm glad you shared it, because it explains why she fizzled. Not to mention that Obama is the uber-politician so no one really has a chance against him.

[lizzy]

And that's just stupid and unfair to every American who does pay their fair share.

I think it is a little disingenuous to say that the rich do not pay their fair share. A recent article by the Associated Press debunked the Warren Buffett's claim that the rich are taxed less than their secretaries.

http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-rich-t ... 42868.html

Furthermore, according to the IRS, the top 50% of wage earners contribute over 97% of the income taxes taken in by the government.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/incometax ... ysmost.htm

The problem is not taxes...there are more than enough taxes being collected. The problem is government spending. In the last 50 years as government spending has skyrocketed, the government has proven time and time agian that it cannot be trusted to spend our money wisely. Just yesterday there was an article regarding the DOJ spending millions of dollars on $16 muffins and $8 coffees.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44609600/ns/us_news-life/

The government needs to go on a spending diet like the rest of us have during this fiscal crisis they created.