Let's just say it: The Republicans are the Problem

[TinyDancer87]

Not a topic worthy of snark, but it can spark debate. Mods, you can move it if you want.

And Mike Lofgren, a veteran Republican congressional staffer, wrote an anguished diatribe last year about why he was ending his career on the Hill after nearly three decades. “The Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe,†he wrote on the Truthout Web site.

Bolding is mine.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... ory_2.html

[terranova]

Wow that's quite a claim.

[emmiedahl]

When I read the title of this thread I was like, Hell Yes! Apocalyptic cult? I will have to sleep on that one. I think they are evil and gross and I am surprised they have anyone left outside of the few remaining open racists. I don't know about apocalyptic or cult, but the article points out correctly that they are determined to sabotage anything the President does.

[TinyDancer87]

When I read the title of this thread I was like, Hell Yes! Apocalyptic cult? I will have to sleep on that one. I think they are evil and gross and I am surprised they have anyone left outside of the few remaining open racists. I don't know about apocalyptic or cult, but the article points out correctly that they are determined to sabotage anything the President does.

Right. Perhaps the author is trying to fight fire with fire? If Republican leaders make strong statements, maybe this is a dosage of their own medicine?

I think people are wising up. I found this article from a high school friend's Facebook, a friend that once practically ran the Republican club.

[FloraDoraDolly]

I'm voting 3rd party, either Americans Elect or the Green Party. It depends on who gets nominated.

[MadameX]

Right. Perhaps the author is trying to fight fire with fire? If Republican leaders make strong statements, maybe this is a dosage of their own medicine?

I think people are wising up. I found this article from a high school friend's Facebook, a friend that once practically ran the Republican club.

I sort of feel like part of the problem for the past 15 years has been that the Dems have tried to be all above it and A) they really aren't, and B) that tactic isn't working if the other side won't also play nice. They really should have rammed through what they could when they had a majority because conciliatory reaching across the aisle gets jack squat done and impresses no one, but getting shit done can win some support.

[RR88]

Both major parties are awful, as fas as I'm concerned. Each has a history of violating American citizens and limiting (or outright destroying) the rights and liberties enumerated within the Constitution.

[margiebargie]

I'm voting 3rd party, either Americans Elect or the Green Party. It depends on who gets nominated.

If you're voting for a third party because you believe in what they're about then, cool. If it's simply a protest vote then that does not help.

Here's my strategy. I'm looking for candidates with moderate voting records, who are willing to compromise for the good of the country. There are numerous sources of info for this. National Journal is one.

I'm looking for candidates who support the separation of church and state. The Secular Coalition of America has a score card on this. This is critically important even for religious folks. The fundies meddling is dragging us all down.

It is a sad fact that I'll probably be forced to vote democrat across the board because I'll find very few if any republicans who meet this very minimal criteria. While there are a few moderate republicans even those have a poor record on separation of church and state.

It's never a good idea to vote based on party alone. Look at the candidate.

Hell, I'm so desperate to get the crack pots out I'm ready to vote for a guy involved in a gambling scandal because at least he's willing to be reasonable. Things are bad, really bad.

[Snickerdoodle]

Both major parties are awful, as fas as I'm concerned. Each has a history of violating American citizens and limiting (or outright destroying) the rights and liberties enumerated within the Constitution.

This.

My personal opinion is that we got into this mess when "politician" became a career, rather than a short-term appointment to help one's fellow citizens. The majority of congress does only what s/he thinks will get him re-elected for the next term.

[FlorenceHamilton]

I totally feel all your pain. I am registered Independent because that is what I truly feel. However, I vote nearly straight across the board Democrat these days. This was not always the case.

The longer I remain an avid observer of trends in socio-political human behavior, the more I believe that the problem is the Abrahamic god. The concept had its run and has now become more destructive than useful. One could argue whether the Abrahamic ages were anything but destructive. That is not my issue today.

The overwhelming evidence is in front of humanity that the Abrahamic god is a human construct. Bronze age people had a certain body of understanding of the universe, partially from day to year experience and their geography and partially from the spiritual cultures that preceded the written word in the middle east. From this culture medium, the Abrahamic religions sprang. (one could argue that there may have been some sort of catalyst bringing this forth.)

In any case, we find ourselves in this post modern age world with the huge shifts in the flow of information and with overwhelming amounts of scientific evidence that refutes the Abrahamic story. The only thing that supports it is the archaeologic evidence of people and places detailed therein. There is not evidence to support the supernatural elements of the tale.

Old belief systems die hard. I think that part of the process of rebirth is this death-knoll of the old way. The surge of fundamentalism is exactly that. The fundamentalist phenomenon is kind of like a toddler who refuses to give up its pacifier.

The problem is only Republican because the Republicans have allowed themselves to be co-opted by the fundamentalists. They volunteered for the job. The next 20 years will be interesting.

[BravaAmica]

The problem is only Republican because the Republicans have allowed themselves to be co-opted by the fundamentalists. They volunteered for the job. The next 20 years will be interesting.

^This.

When the Republican part actively courted the fundies [which started in the early 80s, if I recall correctly], they probably thought, "Here's this huge voting block that feels unrepresented and ignored. All we have to do is beef up our social conservative rhetoric and they'll vote for us." They did not expect the fundies to essentially take over the party and dumb it down so much.

[emmiedahl]

I think the 80s was when the Republicans began courting the fundies--specifically the religious South. For a long time, being Southern meant voting Democrat because a lot of notable Republicans were all up in the Civil Rights movement. I am thinking of the Dixiecrats. At some point the tide turned, probably when the Civil Rights movement won in many ways and we moved on to other social issues that were not as Republican-friendly. For a few decades Republicans have made courting the Bible Belt a major part of their strategy.

I remember some of these games under GWB--Democratic leaders would help write a bill, then publicly denounce it. I don't recall a lot of this before then, although I was younger and did not follow politics. Unfortunately, we are not talking about a few bills here. The Republicans have made this a strategy; Ron Paul is known for it; he makes sure that any bill he can get his hands on has plenty of pork benefiting his own community, then makes a show of voting against it. The result is that his people get all the benefits of a big government representative while he can claim he is against it.

The Republicans are sabotaging our government by keeping it from running. They fight unreasonable battles and refuse to vote for anything that is a Democrat's idea, even if it is something that they traditionally would support. Obama recently proposed a budget for next year that will begin paying off the deficit. Trillions in cuts, modest increases in taxes, a compromise that we can all support with the knowledge that we do need to start paying our bills. Not a single Democrat voted for it because it was so right wing. Not a single Republican voted for it because it was proposed by Obama. That's right: Obama proposed a compromise bill that should make the Republicans very happy and yet it received not a single vote. I think it was 0-97. When the Republicans get around to passing a budget, I assure you that it will not make as many or as deep of cuts, because they only *claim* to be fiscal conservatives.

Obama is nice guy, but I fear he is too nice. He seems unwilling to get knee-deep in the politics game. It makes him look like a saint, but it does nothing to turn up the heat on conservatives who are refusing to do their jobs.

[FlorenceHamilton]

EmmieDahl- That was one fabulous analysis. Kudos to you!

[emmiedahl]

Aw, thanks! I have begun following politics closely, it's the reason I became a liberal after being a long-time right winger.

[FlorenceHamilton]

One of the great things about Free Jinger is that it is filled with people who have really interesting brains.

[freejoytoo]

I find it so funny that Obama is considered this crazy liberal in the states by lots of people yet here, in the UK, he would be part of the Conservative party. I wonder where David Cameron would fit in the American parties?

[emmiedahl]

I find it so funny that Obama is considered this crazy liberal in the states by lots of people yet here, in the UK, he would be part of the Conservative party. I wonder where David Cameron would fit in the American parties?

Obama is right wing even by American standards if you look at his voting pattern and ideology.

[freejoytoo]

So why do so many Republicans say he's too liberal? I'm not being snarky, just genuinely curious! The fundies don't surprise me much as they probably consider anyone other than Santorum as too liberal.

[emmiedahl]

So why do so many Republicans say he's too liberal? I'm not being snarky, just genuinely curious! The fundies don't surprise me much as they probably consider anyone other than Santorum as too liberal.

Part of it was the health care issue. Part of it is that anyone who is not actively trying to get rid of contraception and birth control is a liberal now. The scale has moved in the US, so that Reagan and Nixon would now be considered liberals.

eta: I had a TP FB friend criticizing Obama for underfunding Social Security. She said he was the first President to do that. A quick google search revealed that it has been underfunded at several points in US history and the presidents always responded by raising taxes. That is what Reagan did, in fact. But when I asked her if she supported Obama handling it the same way Reagan did, she was like "taxes? oh noes, he is an eebil socialist!!!"

[RR88]

Aw, thanks! I have begun following politics closely, it's the reason I became a liberal after being a long-time right winger.

And I used to be quite the leftist until I examined my viewpoints more thoroughly. It's interesting…And I'm NOT snarking on you or picking a fight. It's usually a good idea to evaluate one's own ideas on a semi-regular basis. Unfortunately, that lack of self-evaluation is absent in most fundie schools of thought; indeed, it helps perpetuate them.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

To add to emmidahl's post up there, look up "Southern Strategy" with regard to Reagan.

Personally I have a problem with the Grover Norquist "no new taxes" pledge, and the way the dialogue has been framed now by those on the right to imply that the government is always "other" and that it (and public-sector things generally) by their very definition can never do any good and simply must be crushed in favor of "free enterprise." It's pure ideology, political and patriotic correctness. The "public" is always bad, it's those other, unwashed people who are lazy and trying to rip you off.

Add in a healthy dose of American anti-intellectualism, and the idea that anyone with a credential or actual experience is similarly brainwashed by the liberals and trying to rip you off, that what matters is "sincerity" and having a heart of gold (a religious heart of gold, of course) and there you go. Shades of grey on any opinion, any sort of nuance at all, is for pussies!

So you end up with a bunch of people running for office on the platform that since they're "outsiders" (and know NOTHING of government! We're proud of it!!) they're somehow pure and untainted, promising to kill the government once they're elected to it.

[geniebelle6901]

"The Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe,â€

I haven't read through the whole threat yet, but I 100% agree with that statement. In my early childhood years I grew up in a somewhat lower middle class family. During the Reagan years, Daddy got 2 promotions. That bumped us up slightly to regular middle class, moved out of a trailer, moved into a modest house, and Daddy's employer began to offer better health and dental benefits, and more little perks. We could even afford to take small, short distance family vacations (no not to Hawaii or over seas...more like touring places close by), and my sister and I could afford to participate in school activities. I'm not saying we became rich, obviously we didn't. But it was apparent we moved up if only slightly. Many other families managed the same. Now I supposed the argument could be made that Daddy "moved up" because of his hard work and company dedication (factory job), and that's probably true. But I honestly believe we and other lower middle class families did benefit from Reaganomics & trickle down. Like I said, we didn't become rich, we just moved up a little bit economically. I'm also well aware a lot families didn't have the happy story we did, for some it was a downright miserable period. I'm just stating what I witnessed. But like I said nobody I new got rich during the Reagan ear. I'm also not touting Reagan as some kind of savior either.

The modern Republican party needs to rid itself of the Religious Rright and Tea Party factions, and find strong leaders. I know the Religious Right has always had at least one foot in the door of the party, but they have now taken over. We need strong leaders to kick both factions to the curb, and re-invent the part as one that is concerned about real issues like the economy, ending these wars in the middle east, health care, and welfare of the American people. Currently, I don't thing either party cares about any of that, Obama included, even though he is getting my vote.

Edited to correct grammar & punctuation

[Austin]

To those who don't think they can bring themselves to vote for Obama or plan to protest-vote for a third party, I have three words for you: Supreme Court Appointments.

[PennySycamore]

Thank you, Austin.

[FloraDoraDolly]

To those who don't think they can bring themselves to vote for Obama or plan to protest-vote for a third party, I have three words for you: Supreme Court Appointments.

Nice try, but Obama is incompetent, I don't like what he has done to this country, and I am not signing up for four more years of this. There are worse things than having a conservative Supreme Court.