Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, January 27, 2014

Michael Tomasky: At its winter meeting, the Republican National Committee passed a resolution condemning the NSA's data-mining policy. The language about "unwarranted" government surveillance being an "intrusion on basic human rights" passed by voice vote, with only a few dissenters. ... The passage of this resolution is mostly about the guy in the White House. If you want to try to tell me this was an act of principle by the RNC, then put Mitt Romney in the White House for a moment. Do you think the RNC would have considered such a resolution? Please. Reince Priebus would have had a stroke. He'd have quashed it in minutes.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

Doc_Sarvis

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

[T]the thing to keep looking for is Republicans having no memory of LB09 -- Life Before 2009. It makes no difference what position the party or any individual Republican took before January 20 of that year. All that matters from their way of seeing things is that on January 20 of that year, everything changed. That's the governing emotional reality of the GOP opposition, and it will remain so until the day the black guy leaves the White House.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

The GOP's situation is a decidedly unenviable one, as Brian Beutler points out in "How the Right Destroyed Itself: History, Ideology and Strategic Blunders" (www.salon.com).

The basic idea is contained in the lede: "Republicans can't moderate because their base won't allow it. Even if they could, Democrats already beat them there."

I think it's fairly evident that Republicans' increasing reliance on an older, whiter, more conservative constituency has trapped them into a number of non-negotiable policy dogmas. And I think they they bear most of the blame for their own circumstances. It's an outgrowth of a conscious political strategy. They began the country and their party down this road, hoping, as Pat Buchanan famously put it, to "split the country in two and…take the bigger half." They fused the low tax, low regulation agenda of wealthy elites to the worldview of religious conservatives. They birthed the Reagan Revolution, then milked it so vigorously that they've become unable to wean themselves from it more than 30 years later.

But there's more to the story than one losing bet. And I believe the historical backdrop supports the conclusion that there's no space in U.S. politics for Republicans to undergo a DLC-style reform.


Much of what Beutler has to say is premised on his observation that, "A big part of the story here is that Republicans probably didn't have much choice but to begin a long trek into an ideological cul-de-sac."

#1 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2014-01-27 08:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

"That's the governing emotional reality of the GOP opposition, and it will remain so until the day the black guy leaves the White House."

Yup.

#2 | Posted by Zed at 2014-01-27 08:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

I can understand politicians blatantly lying about this, but their sycophants blissfully toting the line is what is truly remarkable.

#3 | Posted by 726 at 2014-01-27 09:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

#4 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2014-01-27 09:35 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

I would wager that the author is guilty of the same crime.

I highly doubt he was an apologist for domestic spying under the previous president.

#5 | Posted by Sully at 2014-01-27 09:42 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Tomasky writes:

"Do liberals do this too in reverse? Sure, to some extent. But on the topic of the NSA and data mining, you certainly can't say that liberals and Democrats have been silent. Many have been fierce critics of the administration, far more so than conservatives and Republicans, in fact. To the extent that Obama is changing his policies in these realms, it's because of pressure from the left, not the right."

#6 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2014-01-27 09:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I would wager that the author is guilty of the same crime. I highly doubt he was an apologist for domestic spying under the previous president."

Newsworthy.

#7 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2014-01-27 01:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

He only tells half the story. The other half is that the Gotp won't even acknowledge that bush was president. Let's start there, then move on to laws, wars, etc... that they are in denial about.

#8 | Posted by kudzu at 2014-01-27 01:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

He doesn't begin to cover all the ways. The GOTP suddenly becoming angry with Bush's bailouts the moment he left office. "Deficits don't matter." That one should be rubbed and kicked in their face every day for the duration of Obama's 8 years. Etc. Of course, Sully is absolutely right - Obama did an abrupt 180 towards many of the very Bush policies he ran against.

What it all serves to illustrate is the hypocrisy of mainstream politicians. Coming from the far left, I can honestly tell you that Obama has gone so deep into imperialism and civil-liberties violating territory, not to mention abject corporatism that were the very hallmarks of everything I decried during the Bush presidency, that his party and legacy are tainted for me. If Dem's nominate Hillary while Rep's nominate a libertarian and not another Romney-style neocon, I will vote Republican for the first time in my life.

#9 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-01-27 02:14 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

If Dem's nominate Hillary while Rep's nominate a libertarian and not another Romney-style neocon, I will vote Republican for the first time in my life.

Posted by zeropointnrg

Did you hear that? That's the sound of Danni's ---- soufflé falling.

LOL

I have no idea what I'll do come election day.

#10 | Posted by eberly at 2014-01-27 02:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

Before Obama there was GWB. That is all the explanation a person needs for why GOP memory does not go back beyond Obama.

#11 | Posted by moder8 at 2014-01-27 02:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

while Rep's nominate a libertarian

#10 | Posted by eberly at 2014-01

First of all, they won't do that. Secondly, if they do do that, it'll be Mr. Paul.

Republicans hate winning elections. Perhaps loathe is not too strong a word.

#12 | Posted by Zed at 2014-01-27 02:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

"If Dem's nominate Hillary while Rep's nominate a libertarian and not another Romney-style neocon, I will vote Republican for the first time in my life."

So you'd be voting to end SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and virtually everything else the Democratic Party has worked for 80 years to gain.
I agree that we need to reform our intelligence services but to throw the baby out with the bathwater would be foolish. Not to mention SC appointments which would insure corporate personhood is permanent.

#13 | Posted by danni at 2014-01-27 02:56 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

"He doesn't begin to cover all the ways. The GOTP suddenly becoming angry with Bush's bailouts the moment he left office. "Deficits don't matter." That one should be rubbed and kicked in their face every day for the duration of Obama's 8 years. Etc. Of course, Sully is absolutely right - Obama did an abrupt 180 towards many of the very Bush policies he ran against."

Don't get me wrong. I hate tea party hypocrites.

The "low information voter" meme even drives me crazy considering who its coming from. If you voted for Bush when he ran the 2nd time, you have no right to ever criticize anyone else's voting habits, knowledge, patriotism or whatever else. Ever.

But yeah I can't ignore that Obama's supporters have no memory of what Obama was saying before he took office.....

I didn't vote for Obama because he supported the Bush bailouts. It was the first sign to me that he would be more of the same. I wish I had been wrong.

#14 | Posted by Sully at 2014-01-27 02:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Republicans hate winning elections. Perhaps loathe is not too strong a word."

you know that isn't true. They wouldn't exist otherwise....and don't think the GOP is going extinct. They have to make changes....but rest assured, they know that, despite the rhetoric you hear from some of them.

#15 | Posted by eberly at 2014-01-27 03:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

If Dem's nominate Hillary while Rep's nominate a libertarian and not another Romney-style neocon, I will vote Republican for the first time in my life.

#9 | Posted by zeropointnrg

If the republicans nominate their definition of a libertarian, the candidate would most likely have significant Tea Party affiliation. IMO, that's even worse than the current republicans.

#16 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-01-27 03:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

There was more push back from the left when Bush was pres than there is now and it is get even time. How nice was it when Harry Reid said the war was lost. Nothing will ever be lower and that was typical during his administration.

#17 | Posted by fishpaw at 2014-01-27 04:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

"and it is get even time"

From "the party of principles and values"? LOL!

#18 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2014-01-27 04:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nothing will ever be lower and that was typical during his administration.
#17 | POSTED BY FISHPAW AT 2014-01-27 04:10 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

As much as I hate Obama as a hypocrite, liar, and sell out, you're delusional. Reid was the lowest part of that?!? Bush lied us into a war that cost thousands of our service member's lives, tens of thousands of combat injuries, literally hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi lives, a ballooning unpaid for deficit, a destabilized middle east, and basically only shouldn't be compared to Hitler or Stalin because he was too inept to do more carnage, but nothing Reid has done approach the world tragedy that was Bush. Nor does Obama approach Bush as a dark time in our national history, even if he is actually worse with money and civil liberties.

#19 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-01-27 05:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Here's one that goes back 100 years:

The upper 80 miles of the Kanawah is called Chemical Valley and for over a century has been home to the highest concentration of chemical companies in the U.S. The mineral wealth of Appalachia literally built this country as we know it today, powered its mills and factories and made the belching smokestack a symbol of prosperity. It was a deciding factor in both world wars. Indeed it was the WW1 that created Chemical Valley as federal dollars rolled in to replace our almost total dependence on chemicals from Germany. Charleston is still the world's leader in the manufacture of chemicals, and in the poisoning of the world's water. If you ate a fish caught any place in the world, you have chemicals from Charleston in your body.

The fact that most of the people in this state remained poor while the huge fortunes of the Gilded Era were being amassed has not evaded the occupants of the land that contained this wealth. Mountaineers have a brave history of fighting and winning historic struggles against all sorts of invaders, yet the result were always the same. Things did not change for the better. They usually got worse.

So what of the rest of the country? Are any of us really that different? Isn't their fate in the hands of the same Toxic Overlords as our own? We face a global crisis, and solutions need to be global. Yet there is reason to keep our attention on Charleston, and on mountain top removal, because this is where much of the chemicals released into the global environment originate. It is also where much of our fresh water originates. It was the birthplace of the labor movement. (MIKE ROSELLE)

#20 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-01-27 05:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

"So you'd be voting to end SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and virtually everything else the Democratic Party has worked for 80 years to gain."

Almost all of it, Danni.

#21 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-01-27 11:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

Almost all of it, Danni.

#21 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-01-27 11:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's the way to be. Be proud of your ignorance of history. Embrace it and show your ignorance to the world. Yell to the mountain tops that sick people should have no health care and that old people should just die, and starving children are a sign of a wealthy country. Compassion for others is a mystery you will never solve. I bet you are a Christian. You aren't bright enough to be an atheist.

#22 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2014-01-28 12:06 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Yeah, yeah, Buffalo. Heard it all before.
These programs are to provide jobs for the party faithful and do little, if anything, to fight poverty.

#23 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-01-28 12:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

Diablo, multiple nominee for all time Wrongo Bongo.

Has never understood the real meaning of Christ's words "Love thy neighbor".

Never really understood when Christ said "That which you do to the least of my brothers, this also you do to me."


www.cbpp.org

#24 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2014-01-28 09:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Social Security Keeps 21 Million Americans Out of Poverty: A State-by-State Analysis
PDF of this report (6pp.)
By Paul N. Van de Water and Arloc Sherman[1]
October 16, 2012
RELATED AREAS OF RESEARCH
Poverty and Income
Social Security
Accomplishments
Social Security benefits play a vital role in reducing poverty. Without Social Security, 21.4 million more Americans would be poor, according to the latest available Census data (for 2011). Although most of those whom Social Security keeps out of poverty are elderly, nearly a third are under age 65, including 1.1 million children. (See Table 1.) Depending on their design, reductions in Social Security benefits could significantly increase poverty, particularly among the elderly.

#25 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2014-01-28 09:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

The Dems can't even remember candidate Obama, before President Obama.

Hope & Change, anyone? Forward?

#26 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-01-28 11:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

And.................... the dems can't remember yesterday under ovbummer.

#27 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-01-28 12:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

I remember not being able to see the pictures of lots of Dead Soldiers brought home during Operation Enduring Freedom. To bad death is permanent or the joke would be on us.

#28 | Posted by mutant at 2014-01-28 01:17 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

How this game works with Rethugs and Wussies alike. When an Independent or Third Party Candidate put forth a proposition which enjoys an immediate majority approval, one or both of the monopolist parties adopts it in their platform, culling off voters for third party candidates. Then, when one or the other win the election, they throw that idea under the bus. They do this over and over gain, yet voters think that, somehow with this new monopolist candidate, things will be different.

#29 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-01-28 02:22 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

These programs are to provide jobs for the party faithful and do little, if anything, to fight poverty.

#23 | POSTED BY DIABLO AT 2014-01-28 12:39 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

You should seek medical help with your mental condition. Reality eludes you. You would think differently if your next meal relied on receiving your SS check or welfare check. Did you ever wonder why the US population soared and the average lifespan expanded? Did you think it was magic? Probably so.

#30 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2014-01-28 02:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

#29

Some of it sticks, progressive or regressive in nature. Which do you prefer becomes the question.

#31 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-28 02:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

I highly doubt he was an apologist for domestic spying under the previous president.

#5 | Posted by Sully

Provide a quote where he apologizes for obama's domestic spying or admit your full of crap.

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-01-28 02:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Poor piece of sophistry, NSA spying was beginning to be noticed in Bush years as well, it is just climaxing during "this guy"s presidency And nobody cares that the President is supposedly a "black American". The true point of this piece is to not-so-subtly paint republicans as racist.

#33 | Posted by danv at 2014-01-28 08:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

"If you want to try to tell me this was an act of principle by the RNC, then put Mitt Romney in the White House for a moment. Do you think the RNC would have considered such a resolution?"

So this writer is just now catching on? Pretty dense.

#34 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-01-29 02:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort