Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, February 21, 2013

On January 1, 2013 one third of Republican congressmen, following their leaders, joined with nearly all Democrats to legislate higher taxes and more subsidies for Democratic constituencies.

The Republican leadership's kinship with the socio-political class that runs modern government is deep. Country class Americans have but to glance at the Media to hear themselves insulted from on high as greedy, racist, violent, ignorant extremists. Yet far has it been from the Republican leadership to defend them. Whenever possible, the Republican Establishment has chosen candidates for office – especially the Presidency – who have ignored, soft-pedaled or given mere lip service to their voters' identities and concerns.

While a majority of Democrats feel that officials who bear that label represent them well, only about a fourth of Republican voters and an even smaller proportion of independents trust Republican officials to be on their side. Again

Advertisement

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

paneocon

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

The Supreme Court's decision in Baker v. Carr (1962) inadvertedly legalized gerrymandering by setting "one man one vote" as the sole basis of legitimacy for drawing legislative districts. Subsequent judicial interpretations of the 1965 Voting Rights Act demanded that districts be drawn to produce Congressmen with specific features.

In our time, the Democratic Party gave up the diversity that had characterized it since Jeffersonian times. Giving up the South, which had been its main bastion since the Civil War as well as the working classes that had been the heart of its big city machines from Boston to San Diego, it came to consist almost exclusively of constituencies that make up government itself or benefit from government. Big business, increasingly dependent on government contracts and regulation, became a virtual adjunct of the contracting agents and regulators. Democrats' traditional labor union auxiliaries shifted from private employees to public.

Thus by the turn of the twenty first century America had a bona fide ruling class that transcends government and sees itself at once as distinct from the rest of society – and as the only element thereof that may act on its behalf.

Fact is, Republican leaders become less significant with every passing year because they have no way of reversing the intellectual trends from above or the popular pressure from below.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you have comments about site moderation, contact the site publisher in email.

This article is well worth the read. Republicans rubbing their heads wondering why the folks didn't show up to vote for a Republican in the last cycle, it's because the Republican have joined the Democrats as members of the ruling class and neither party represents the people any longer.

#1 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-21 09:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Republicans are really three parties right now: the military/neocons, the fiscal conservatives and the (practicing) Christians.
The Democrats are only two parties right now: labor and the northeastern/entertainment biz monied interests.
That agreement among northeastern monied Republicans and Democrat northeastern (old) monied happens is of no surprise, and baffles true believer in both parties. Labor, fiscal conservatives and social/religious conservatives are being had big time and by both parties.

#2 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-21 09:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

How many rich people asked for Obama to raise their taxes?

Growing up I heard that the day the rich did this hell would freeze over.

#3 | Posted by Tor at 2013-02-21 09:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Tor, rich like Soros or Hollywood stars make more money supporting the higher taxation of other rich people. California keeps taxing the rich more. Hollywood pays stars for movies out of Nevada/Delaware shell corporations. The stars do not pay those higher state income taxes, only people who produce something do.
But the Obama administration also made sure the tax-the-rich jihad had exemptions for movie producers. Guess what kind of political slant that makes them want to favor when your kids go to the theater? Guess where the Hollywood stars invest their money to get tax shelters?
Halliburton! Oil companies! Those are the enemies of democracy!?

#4 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-21 10:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Another salient point from this article. Neither party is serving the people they calm to have as constituents.

Considering that, according to a 2013 Pew poll, 53% of Americans view the government as a threat to their welfare and liberties (up from 36% in 1995 and that a third of those who feel that way are Democrats); considering that government's very legitimacy decreases as government grows in size, that victory may come sooner rather than later.

#5 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-21 10:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

TY, Paneocon. The Dems keep whistling in the dark.
But the only thing to replace them is...the Republican Party?

#6 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-21 11:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh my god, tears, tears!!!

AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

#7 | Posted by Harry_Powell at 2013-02-21 11:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, George Lucas,

I think they've all called for higher taxes on themselves.

#8 | Posted by Tor at 2013-02-22 01:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

Thus by the turn of the twenty first century America had a bona fide ruling class that transcends government and sees itself at once as distinct from the rest of society – and as the only element thereof that may act on its behalf.

Republican leaders neither parry the insults nor vilify their Democratic counterparts in comparable terms because they do not want to beat the ruling class, but to join it in solving the nation's problems.

What we have here is progressivism, The progressivism of Wilson, Roosevelt, Nixon, Clinton and Bush is no different than that being practiced by Obama right now. Comments like Carl Roves last week and the deeds of John Boehner only reinforce that there is not a dollar worth of difference in the two parties only the speed to which we get there.

#9 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-22 06:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

This internal contradiction was unsustainable. The Republican leadership, regarding its natural constituency as embarrassing to its pursuit of a larger role in government, limited its appeal to it. Thus it gradually cut itself off from the only root of the power by which it might gain that role. Thus the Republicans proved to be "the stupid party."

The Republicans are all open arms to the Tea party and the libertarians but did these two parties get the representation their voter turnout deserved? The immediate public slap down of 4 conservatives (loss of committee seats) with links to the tea party followed by a roll over and play dead for the democrats on tax increases while not returning with the previously agreed upon spending cuts would make one wonder if they got the representation they deserved and I would make be say a resounding HE)) NO.

#10 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-22 06:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

"What we have here is progressivism...."

A subject about which you've shown yourself to be alarmingly ignorant.

#11 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-22 07:35 AM | Reply | Flag:

#11 | POSTED BY DOC_SARVIS

"What we have here is progressivism...."

I doubt that but lead on professor, school us on the finer details of progressivism.

#12 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-22 07:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

The progressivism...Roosevelt...
#9 | Posted by paneocon

Yeah, that Teddy, what a RINO!

#14 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-22 08:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

#13 | POSTED BY DOC_SARVIS

Sad when the patriarch of the DR left are so demoralized that they no longer have the energy to defend their idealism.

#15 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-22 08:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

The progressivism...Roosevelt...
#14 | POSTED BY DOC_SARVIS

Franklin D not Theodore but the case could be made for Theodore with out too much effort.

#16 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-22 08:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

Franklin D not Theodore but the case could be made for Theodore with out too much effort.
#16 | Posted by paneocon

Well, since it wouldn't take much effort, that ought to be something you could get onto and perhaps even accomplish.

TR - a RINO?!?! - was a progressive's progressive. The rest of the research, I leave up to you.

But, be wary of your sources. Although there's some evidence your approach is catching on:

"Amazingly, Shapiro -- who is the editor of Breitbart.com -- stands by the [Hagel-Hamas] report, explaining, 'The story as reported is correct. Whether the information I was given by the source is correct I am not sure,' he said. His story has no correction or update indicating that it is false."
www.salon.com

Right up your alley, kiddo, right up your alley.

LOL!

#17 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-22 08:15 AM | Reply | Flag:

who pissed in your corn flakes this morning, Doc?

#19 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-22 09:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

#19 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Doc is pleasantly surprised when ever that function works on its own, bowl identification may be a reach at his advanced age.

#20 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-22 10:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2013 World Readable

 

Advertisement