Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Nov 11, 2008 - 01:37pm PT
|
The NYT today has some analysis based on the election's strong regional patterns. The regional aspects seem to complement the good "rationalism" piece posted by Norton above.
The Republicans, meanwhile, have “become a Southernized party,” said Mr. Schaller, who teaches at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “They have completely marginalized themselves to a mostly regional party,” he said, pointing out that nearly half of the current Republican House delegation is now Southern.
Merle Black, an expert on the region’s politics at Emory University in Atlanta, said the Republican Party went too far in appealing to the South, alienating voters elsewhere.
“They’ve maxed out on the South,” he said, which has “limited their appeal in the rest of the country.”
http://www.nytimes.com/
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Nov 11, 2008 - 02:13pm PT
|
They are having this discussion on NPS "Talk of the Nation" right now. Probably can hear it later on the NPR website
Peace
Karl
|
|
GOclimb
Trad climber
Boston, MA
|
|
|
Nov 11, 2008 - 04:05pm PT
|
Uh, MH - Chiloe just mentioned that two posts up.
GO
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Nov 11, 2008 - 04:10pm PT
|
"They are having this discussion on NPS "Talk of the Nation" right now. Probably can hear it later on the NPR website "
Yeah I just heard most of it. It was probably the most sane Republican discussion I've heard in years. If they talked like that all the time they'd run unopposed most of the time. Even Rick Santorum came off well...and I mean he's the one who inspired http://www.santorum.com/ (NWS)
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2008 - 08:18pm PT
|
The effort to divert our attention from the real problem yet chugs onward.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/11/15/america/Meltdown-Summit-Optional.php
Econ summit takes safe steps in response to crisis
The Associated Press
Saturday, November 15, 2008
WASHINGTON: In assessing the risky-to-reckless behavior that brought economies to the brink of disaster, world leaders were not about to take risks of their own.
They settled Saturday for a series of safe steps to blunt the crisis and prevent future ones, striking a balance between the bullish capitalism that they agreed brings dynamism to economies and the stiff regulation some of them wanted to combat destructive excesses.
There was only so much that a group as large and diverse as the nearly two dozen leaders could all agree on.
For the most part, they settled for watchdog solutions instead of overarching new rules. They agreed to work toward common accounting standards to make it harder for companies to cook the books in an era of global finance and patch-quilt regulation from one nation to the next.
Their meeting came with one key player unavoidably missing: the next U.S. president, who on Jan. 20 will inherit aftershocks of the housing crisis, clogged credit lines, tumultuous stock market and the first measured steps of prime ministers and presidents to do something about all of that together.
President-elect Barack Obama stayed in Chicago so as not to upstage President George W. Bush and sent representatives to meet on the sidelines with foreign leaders, as in the case of Mexico, or their aides, as with Canada.
"We must lay the foundation for reform to help ensure that a global crisis, such as this one, does not happen again," the leaders said after the emergency summit.
Perhaps as important as the modest concrete steps they took, the leaders of the planet's richest nations — and some of the fastest-developing — made clear their recognition of the world's increasingly interconnected financial networks and the responsibilities that go along with it.
"There shall be no blind spots," German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared. "There is here a great common will to ensure that such a crisis is not repeated."……………
End excerpt
http://www.newsweek.com/id/169173/output/print
A Way Out of the Wilderness
We've been walloped in consecutive elections, but we can't just dwell on the past. The future is already here.
Karl Rove
NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Nov 24, 2008
Yes, we lost the election. But in a year when all currents were running against Republicans and our campaign was lackluster and erratic, Barack Obama received only 3.1 points more than Al Gore in 2000 and only 4.6 points more than John Kerry in 2004. The Democratic victory becomes durable only if Republicans make it so with the wrong moves.
Losing the election has led to a debate about whether the GOP should return to its Reaganite tradition or embark on a new reform course. This pundit-driven shoutfest presents a sterile, unnecessary choice. The party should embrace both tradition and reform; grass-roots Republicans want to apply timeless conservative principles to the new circumstances facing America.
In the coming year, we will be defined more by what we oppose than what we are for; the president-elect and the Democrats in Congress will control the agenda. We must pick fights carefully and center them around principle. The goal is to have the sharp differences that emerge make the GOP look like the more reasonable, hopeful and inviting party—which is easier said than done. A road map:……………………….
End second excerpt
http://bobmccarty.com/2008/11/11/georgia-runoff-election-key-to-stopping-obama/
Georgia Runoff Election Key to Stopping Obama
November 11th, 2008 · No Comments
In a letter to his fellow Americans, National Republican Trust PAC Executive Director Scott Wheeler warns about what will happen if Democrats defeat Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) in the runoff election set for Dec. 2:
0. If the Democrats defeat Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss, they will be very close to getting the 60 votes they need in the Senate to pass Obama’s radical legislation.
0. Without the 60 votes, Obama can’t pass legislation to increase income taxes, increase capital gains taxes, increase FICA taxes or any other taxes.
0. Without the 60 votes, Obama won’t be able to pass a new Fairness Doctrine limiting the power of talk radio.
0. Without the 60 votes, Obama won’t be able to pass new social spending programs estimated as costing as much as $1 trillion.
0. Without the 60 votes, Obama won’t be able to nationalize the healthcare system.
Without the 60 votes, Obama won’t be able to give 12 million illegal aliens citizenship and other government benefits.
End of third note
It would appear this republican official believes the republican party intends to filibuster the US government into inaction despite the need to deal with the crises left over from the Bush administration.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2008 - 02:32pm PT
|
In this thread the problem Blue outlined was that of stating the fundamental principles behind which the party can reformulate itself. I will try to make the case Blue has the right idea, but the wrong process.
Unfortunately the Bush administration has cast into doubt the competence itself of the party. That being the case stating principles gains no traction. Who cares about my principles if I am so fatally flawed even were I to gain power I would only make bad things happen?
As the NYT pointed out, the party is still so stuck in the "southern strategy" as a process they can conceive of nothing else. The party will take the election data as it becomes available and expend megaWatts of electrical power in computers to build a case for "principles" they think can "win" them POWER once more. That they will take to their funding sources and try to make a sale.
The truth of it is, IMO, Blue had the right idea but the process wrong. The party will continue to have no impact as long as it continues its feverish attempts to gain POWER in the absence of an overall vision of where the country needs to go. That just telegraphs their continuing lack of competence. If they resort to filibusters in Congress the party will in fact destroy itself - finally. My post above suggests the party intends to do just that.
What is needed is for an eloquent person who can make clear the party's gaining power is no longer the issue. The only issue is how the party can contribute to the country's future well being. At least in the near term that will happen only as they work with the Democratic Party to achieve this. Indeed during this cooperative process the needed eloquent person and thinker should become visible.
This is what I had in mind when I said I thought Barack Obama would be the person who actually does save Lincoln's Party. As an admirer of that great gentle soul, I think this is the way it should happen.
The first step that has to be taken is for us all to take responsibility for the disasters we have created. That establishes integrity. Then we have to let go the anger we see everywhere around us and begin actually to listen. That establishes good will.
Without both integrity and goodwill the US itself will follow the republican party into total destruction.
IMO
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2008 - 02:43am PT
|
bluering,
After more reflection, and reading about 70 more comments on this thread, I would add a few other things to the list I posted at about Post 101.
First, I hope people differentiated between what I thought conservatives were (something I intentionally left vague), and specific things I think conservatives should be.
Next, I offer the following additional comments.
10. We need to encourage more conservatives to enter the intellectual strongholds of the left, namely entertainment, academia, and the media. While we have the Wall Street Journal and the University of Chicago (and the University of Chicago at Los Angeles) economics departments, we have too little else. I know I became a conservative through life experience, mostly trying to forecast economic activity. Maybe for that reason, I've relied too much on the natural Churchillian progression (. . . those who aren't liberal when they're young have no heart. Those who aren't conservative when they're old have no brains.)
BUT
11. We must be intellectually honest, and admit mistakes. While much of what Bush-haters attribute to him is myth or propaganda, I think their criticism of his inability to own up to mistakes rings true. We must not do that, if for no other reason than preserving our own truthfulness. This leads to:
12. As jstan and others have said, we need to shun an obsession with power. I personally don't care about the affiliation of those in power, I care about their policies, honesty and competence. This led me and several other Republicans here to vote against an incumbent Republican Congressman, because we felt he was lacking that honesty and competence. We were stuck with a liberal Democrat for a couple of terms, but this eventually allowed us to elect a competent and honest conservative -- and a much better representative.
13. We should shun demonization. As several pointed out, I was guilty of that in my Point 4 of my original post, in part. The less we try to demonize people, and the more we promote sound policy, the more likely we are to convince others of those policies' desirability.
14. Finally, we should remember that fair government requires compromise. We need to believe in our ideals (unless they prove wrong, in which case we repent and move on, the way we did with high tariffs and isolationism), but the virtual dysfunction in Sacramento and, to a lesser extent, D.C., comes from government officials more loyal to posturing and power than to governance. Despite comments to the contrary, we are and remain a big tent. We will never be a majority if we insist on poitical, economic or (most destructively) cultural "cleansing."
Thanks again for this thread.
John
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2008 - 03:42am PT
|
It's a heartening sign that Obama is making a point to meet with McCain.
The left and right should help to keep each other find the expression of their philosophies that can best serve them. Then we win no matter who is in power.
Dragging half of the people down just means half the people won't be empowered to work together towards where we need to be.
peace
karl
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2008 - 08:10am PT
|
From a politico.com's piece on the problem with the GOP:
"As for this year, Barbour argued there was a way to defeat Obama—by rendering him unacceptable to American voters. "
Folks like Haley Barbour is the reason they lost.
What do they have to offer?
Even if they could've succeeded in tearing Obama down, then what?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15676.html
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2008 - 09:41am PT
|
In this, perhaps the most exciting period in American life since WWII, courage and trust in the goodwill of our fellows form the ground upon which we may hope to stand.
My props, Blue. You have rendered valuable service.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2008 - 04:00pm PT
|
I was gonna start a new thread, but this may be appropriate here. This is why the conservative movement must go back to it's principles.
http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/ShowArticle.asp?id=andersonb&date=081118
Our country is already marching in the direction of National Socialism, only with an honest and truly conservative movement can we slow and maybe stop the progression to destroying our parents' country.
(I know some of you actually think that's a good thing, that 'progressive' is good, but I think it is masking something else).
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2008 - 04:04pm PT
|
What alarmist horsesh#t. I stopped reading after a line or two.
You guys deserved the electoral ass-whipping you got. You've got fear and bogeymen and little else. That fringe column is classic.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2008 - 04:07pm PT
|
On another thread there is talk of Copernicus DNA as well that of a Wooly mammoth. If they were combined would that make a Smart Republican genome?
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 20, 2008 - 04:11pm PT
|
Dirtbag, you can call the site 'fringe', but it's based on this guy's insights from Weimer Germany through the end of the war.
http://www.voncampe.com/home.html
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2008 - 04:19pm PT
|
Bluering, this is straight up racist sh#t you linked to.
I'm calling you on this.
Frankly, I'm shocked you'd post such crap.
Of all the pro-apratheid apologist garbage I've seen, this is classic. From that column you cited:
"“But, woe to you if - or more likely, when - the rules change. White Americans may soon find themselves unable or unwilling to stand up to challenge the new political methods that will be the inevitable result of the ethnic metamorphosis now taking place in America. Unable to cope with the new rules of the game - violence, mob riots, intimidation through accusation of racism, demands of proportionality cased on racial numbers, and all the other social and political weapons used by the have-nots to bludgeon treasure and power from the haves - Americans, like others before them, will no doubt cave in. They will compromise away their independence and ultimately their way of life.
“That is exactly what happened to South Africa. I know because I was there and saw it happen.”
“Faced with revolution in the streets, strikes, civil unrest and the sheer terror and murder practiced by Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC), the white government simply capitulated in order to achieve ‘peace’”.
“Westerners need peace. They need order and stability. They are builders and planners. But what we got was the peace of the grave for our society.”
….“Those in the West who forced South Africa to surrender to the ANC and its leaders did not consider Africa to be the dangerous, corrupt, and savage place that is now in Zimbabwe and South Africa. Those Western politicians now have a similar problem looming on their own doorsteps: the demand for power and treasure from the non-western peoples inside the realm.
“It is already too late for South Africa, but not for America if enough people strengthen their spine and take on the race terrorists, the armies of ‘politically correct’ and, most dangerous of all, the craven politicians who believe ‘compassionate conservatism’ will buy them more votes, a few more days of peace.”
…..”We lost our country through skillful propaganda, pressure from abroad (not least from the USA), unrelenting charges of ‘oppression’ and ‘racism’ and the shrewd assessment by African tyrants that the white man has many Achilles heels, the most significant of which are his compassion, his belief in the ‘equality of man’ and his ‘love thy neighbor’ philosophy - none of which are part of the Third World’s history."
Yeah, "westerners" like "order." Like APARTHEID.
I guess black Africans don't crave order.
Do I need to even bother pointing out the other racist codewords?
I'm sure it's a coincidence this just happened to be posted as a man with African descent is about to become President. Read the skinhead propoganda and there is no difference.
Yes, I've been to South Africa. It has major problems with crime. But this is a real winner there, Bluering.
You deserve to lose, you and your xenophobic white people's party.
GOOD RIDDANCE.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2008 - 04:21pm PT
|
"You guys deserved the electoral ass-whipping you got."
"...would that make a Smart Republican genome?"
While I admit to a certain part of my psyche that revels in the collapse of the GOP and is in agreement with statements like these, the higher principled part of me knows that this kind of commentary is a non-starter in any kind of productive dialogue. Maybe dialogues like this thread are nothing more than idealistic wishful thinking that old beliefs can adjust and change, but I suppose that it is in small communities that great change begins. I, for one, will support it by refraining from my base instinct to rub anyone's nose in any failure that might befall them. (Unless someone puts Bushy, Cheney & Rove in stocks, and gives me a bunch of rotten eggs...then I can't be responsible for my actions.)
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2008 - 04:23pm PT
|
I don't know about restoring conservatism, but we at least seem to have somewhat restored conversation around here.
Back on topic, it seems to me that if true conservatives want to have an honest debate about their future, they need to first agree to jettison the hate rhetoric and double speak for which Republicanism has become known. Perhaps it was imposed on them by their unholy (and uneasy) alliance with religious zealots and radicals. You can't have an intellectually honest discussion unless you agree on what terms mean, and those terms reasonably relate to the thing defined.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2008 - 04:31pm PT
|
Let me add yet another thing we should be doing (well, in addition to ignoring dirtbag's name-calling trolls). We should be demanding value from every pulbic expenditure, not just those we don't like.
Too many nominal conservatives give spending on prisons, law enforcement, miltary, etc. too little scrutiny. Most people have their own opinions on military waste, so let me focus on my own pet peeve: prisons. In California, we spend massive amounts of money to feed, clothe, and guard people in ways that keep them allegedly harmless, but also quite useless to society. Most prisoners will return to the outside world. What has the money we've spent on warehousing them given us?
Not much, I submit. If we spent that kind of money per capita on schoolchildren, and got such poor results, we'd all be screaming about the waste of money. Why do we keep passing laws adding length to prison sentences when, as near as I can tell, no one has attempted to compare marginal costs and benefits? We should insist on such comparisons for everything the government does. We usually fight for that sort of analysis for regulation, say, but we need to be consistent and inisist on it for everything.
The cynical among us (I know, there aren't any!) might say that we don't do that because the military and prisons are very big business, employing a great many people. True, but does that mean we couldn't spend the money better elsewhere, including keeping it in our own pockets to use as we see fit? I know my own answer on the prison deal: nonviolent prisoners should be confined to their homes for certain hours, and required to work and pay taxes the rest of the time, within reason. It would both increase revenue and decrease expense. We may even get more productive members of society.
John
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2008 - 04:32pm PT
|
"While I admit to a certain part of my psyche that revels in the collapse of the GOP and is in agreement with statements like these, the higher principled part of me knows that this kind of commentary is a non-starter in any kind of productive dialogue"
Apogee,
If Bluering was interested in dialog he wouldn't have revamped the thread by claiming we are on a path towards Naziism then using a racist article to support his view. That was the non-starter.
So don't blame me.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!