This Week’s Cover

Here’s this week’s cover story by Michael Grunwald on the state of the Grand Ole Party. An interesting tidbit: Joe the Plumber is leaving the Party in disgust. An excerpt:

So are the Republicans going extinct? And can the death march be stopped? The Washington critiques of the Republican Party as powerless, leaderless and rudderless — the new Donner party — are not very illuminating. Minority parties always look weak and inept in the penalty box. Sure, it can be comical to watch Republican National Committee (RNC) gaffe machine Michael Steele riff on his hip-hop vision for the party or Texas Governor Rick Perry carry on about secession or Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann explain how F.D.R.’s “Hoot-Smalley” Act caused the Depression (the Smoot-Hawley Act, a Republican tariff bill, was enacted before F.D.R.’s presidency), but haplessness does not equal hopelessness. And yes, the Republican brand could benefit from spokesmen less familiar and less reviled than Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich, but the party does have some fresher faces stepping out of the wings.

The Democratic critiques of the GOP — that it’s the Party of No, or No Ideas — are not helpful either. It’s silly to fault an opposition party for opposition; obstructionism helped return Democrats to power. Republicans actually have plenty of ideas.

That’s the problem. The party’s ideas — about economic issues, social issues and just about everything else — are not popular ideas. They are extremely conservative ideas tarred by association with the extremely unpopular George W. Bush, who helped downsize the party to its extremely conservative base. A hard-right agenda of slashing taxes for the investor class, protecting marriage from gays, blocking universal health insurance and extolling the glories of waterboarding produces terrific ratings for Rush Limbaugh, but it’s not a majority agenda. The party’s new, Hooverish focus on austerity on the brink of another depression does not seem to fit the national mood, and it’s shamelessly hypocritical, given the party’s recent history of massive deficit spending on pork, war and prescription drugs in good times, not to mention its continuing support for deficit-exploding tax cuts in bad times.

I asked Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel about this same subject in an interview not too long ago, here’s his take:

We have a long time to go but I’d still bet on us in 2010. If you look at history, I mean it happened in ‘72, people talking about the dominance of the Republican Party because of Richard Nixon’s trumping. In 1980 they were saying that about Ronald Reagan. I just think that anybody that tells you that they can predict the future — I mean ‘64 to ‘66 and then ’68 — I don’t think anybody should be in the business of predicting two years out let alone 10 years out. That said, first, we have a New York 20 race that should’ve been a lay down for the Republicans and it wasn’t. Second, I think what Republicans tactically and strategically are saying today is a mistake. And, third, look at long-term trends in the country, the ascending groups in the population are Democratic by proclivity of three-to-one and the descending groups are Republicans in almost every group. You know, you see the rise of the Hispanic vote, the rise of the young voter, the professional couple, as a larger proportion of the electorate; those are all Democratic in proclivity.

Update1:
Commentator Alaskanturkey has a point: here’s the other side as presented by MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough who has a book out on the subject.

Update2:
Grunwald tells me that Joe the Plumber also said he didn’t vote for McCain in the primary; he voted for Huckabee! “I was not a fan of McCain. That amnesty bill was the most asinine thing I’ve ever heard in my life.”

Subscribe to Jay Newton-Small on Facebook
Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • 53_3
  • 53_3

    What’s Joe the Plumber going to become?
    .
    A spokesman for the mentally ill*?
    .
    *Apologies to the mentally ill. They really don’t deserve this. Perhaps I should qualify this to mean those who simply don’t want mediation.

  • spob

    Some really really really unbiased and even-handed journalism here.
    .
    You want to talk about Bachman, fine, what about Obama? Remember his response on CG tax rates? Or what about Obama’s desire to increase the price of energy? Is that popular?
    .
    Gimme a break.

  • Art Pepper

    obstructionism helped return Democrats to power.
    .
    What does this mean?

  • queencersei

    While I am not prepared to say that the GOP is dead yet, it is hard to see how they will be able to emerge from their current death spiral. Given how they are circling the wagons on the very ideas and policies that a majority of the electorate have rejected.

  • mccainfluffer

    The Democratic critiques of the GOP — that it’s the Party of No, or No Ideas — are not helpful either. It’s silly to fault an opposition party for opposition; obstructionism helped return Democrats to power. Republicans actually have plenty of ideas

    The Democrats’ obstructionism? Huh? Under Bush we had the Patriot Act, Warantless wiretapping, the Iraq War, the appointment of right wing ideologues to the Supreme Court, lack of congressional oversight, etc etc. Your intrepid reporter obviously observed some things that the rest of us missed over the previous 8 years.

  • alaskanturkey

    Joe Scarborough’s article is worth reading too – http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1896604,00.html
    .
    Not anything that profound, but I like -
    .
    “Burke’s thinking can be summed up easily: Respect reality. Understand the age you’re living in, and understand its facts. As William F. Buckley said more than two years before his death, “Conservatism implies a certain submission to reality.” But the approach championed by Burke and Buckley is a far cry from the mind-set embraced by today’s Republican Party.

    If the GOP is to move toward victory, it must again find the middle of American political life and stop being seen the way liberals were viewed for a generation: as tone-deaf ideologues mixed with self-consumed radicals. Don’t get me wrong. I do not believe that conservative leaders should seek out a mushy middle ground. Rather, they should boldly call for a new era of responsibility in the U.S.

    Instead of building empires abroad, Republicans should aim to balance their books at home. We should not only fight to conserve tax dollars but also work as aggressively to defend the environment. As Reagan once said, conservatives are supposed to conserve.”

  • rustyreturns

    A little history lesson on “extinct” political parties. Do any of them sound familiar?
    .
    Here is a listing of some significant political parties who are no longer with us, in roughly chronological order:

    Federalist Party
    The Federalist Party is considered the first American political party. It advocated a strong national government, and prominent Federalists included John Adams and Alexander Hamilton. (Sounds more like our current day Democrat party to me).

    The Federalists did not build a sustaining party apparatus, and the party’s defeat in the election of 1800 led to its decline. It essentially ceased to be a national party after 1816.

    (Jeffersonian) Republican Party
    The Jeffersonian Republican Party, which, of course, supported Thomas Jefferson for president in 1800, was formed in opposition to the Federalists. The Jeffersonians tended to be more egalitarian than the Federalists.

    Following Jefferson’s two terms in office, James Madison won the presidency on the Republican ticket in 1808 and 1812, followed by James Monroe in 1816 and 1820.

    The Jeffersonian Republican Party then faded away. The party was not a forerunner of the present day Republican Party. At times it was even called a name which seems contradictory today, the Democratic-Republican Party.

    National Republican Party
    The National Republican Party supported John Quincy Adams in his bid unsuccessful bid for reelection in 1828 (there had been no party designations in the election of 1824). The party also supported Henry Clay in 1832.

    The general theme of the National Republican Party was opposition to Andrew Jackson and his policies. The National Republicans generally joined the Whig Party in 1834.

    The National Republican Party was not a forerunner of the Republican Party, which formed in the mid-1850s.

    Anti-Masonic Party
    The Anti-Masonic Party formed in upstate New York in the late 1820s, following the mysterious death of a member of the masonic order, William Morgan. It was believed that Morgan was killed before he could reveal secrets about the masons and their suspected influence in American politics.

    The party, while seemingly based on conspiracy theory, gained adherents. And the Anti-Masonic Party actually held the first national political convention in America. Its convention in 1831 nominated William Wirt as its presidential candidate in 1832. Wirt was an odd choice, having once been a mason. And while his candidacy was not successful, he did carry one state, Vermont, in the electoral college.

    Part of the appeal of the Anti-Masonic Party was its fiery opposition to Andrew Jackson, who happened to be a mason.

    The Anti-Masonic Party faded into obscurity by 1836 and its members drifted into the Whig Party, which also opposed the policies of Andrew Jackson.

    Whig Party
    The Whig Party was formed to oppose Andrew Jackson’s policies and came together in 1834. The party took its name from a British political party which had opposed the King, as the American Whigs said they were opposing “King Andrew.”

    The Whigs candidate in 1836, William Henry Harrison, lost to the Democrat Martin Van Buren. But Harrison, with his log cabin and hard cider campaign of 1840, won the presidency (though he would only serve for a month).

    The Whigs remained a major party throughout the 1840s, winning the White House again with Zachary Taylor in 1848. But the party splintered, mainly over the issue of slavery. Some Whigs joined the Know-Nothing Party, and others, most notably Abraham Lincoln, joined the new Republican party in the 1850s.

    Liberty Party
    The Liberty Party was organized in 1839 by anti-slavery activists who wanted to take the Abolitionist Movement and make it a political movement. As most leading Abolitionists were adamant about being outside politics, this was a novel concept.

    The party ran a presidential ticket in 1840 and 1844, with James G. Birney, a former slaveholder from Kentucky as their candidate. The Liberty Party drew meager numbers, garnering only two percent of the popular vote in 1844.

    It has been speculated that the Liberty Party was responsible for splitting the anti-slavery vote in New York state in 1844, thereby denying the state’s electoral vote to Henry Clay, the Whig candidate and assuring the election of the slave-owning James Knox Polk. But that assumes Clay would have drawn all the votes cast for the Liberty Party.

    Free-Soil Party
    The Free-Soil Party came into being in 1848, and was organized to oppose the spread of slavery. The party’s candidate for president in 1848 was former president Martin Van Buren.

    Zachary Taylor of the Whig Party won the 1848 presidential election, but the Free-Soil Party did elect two senators and 14 members of the House of Representatives.

    The motto of the Free-Soil Party was “Free Soil, Free Speech, Free Labor and Free Men.” After Van Buren’s defeat in 1848 the party faded and members were eventually absorbed into the Republican Party when it formed in the 1850s.

    Greenback Party
    The Greenback Party was organized at a national convention held in Cleveland, Ohio in 1875. The formation of the party was prompted by difficult economic decisions, and the party advocated the issuing of paper money not backed by gold. Farmers and workers were the party’s natural constituency.

    The Greenbacks ran presidential candidates in 1876, 1880, and 1884, all of whom were unsuccessful.

    When economic conditions improved, the Greenback Party faded into history.

  • yoshiattack

    The GOP will rise when they actually practice the conservative principles they preach about. It boggles my mind how some Republicans can internalize blatant violations of the personal privacy and freedom principle they are supposed to hold dear, all the while raining sanctimonious fire on those who dare question waterboarding, warrantless wiretapping, and other terrible constructions.
    -
    Then there’s a good part of the population that think Palin can do no wrong. I like her, but there is no time for idol worship, ever. It will come back to bite people in their behinds. That’s one good thing the GOP has got going – Obama hysteria will eventually fade.

  • Friar Tuck

    “It’s just a flesh wound!”

  • Paul-no not that one

    “moderates like Charlie Crist in Florida and Jodi Rell in Connecticut as well as pragmatic conservatives like Mitch Daniels in Indiana and Jon Huntsman in Utah have remained popular despite their brand.”
    .
    Crist and Daniels have some national profile, and I’ve read a little about Huntsman, does anyone know anything about Rell other than what was in the story?
    .
    At this point, ignoring the whispers, I would guess that Crist is the best positioned to move the republicans forward. And that’s still a long shot considering that party’s base.

  • queencersei

    I’m not sure the GOP wants to move forward. They do seem intent on doubling down on the extreme conservative ideology that has pushed so many moderates within their party and independents away. If they lose again in the next election cycle, that might be enough to finally jolt them awake. I don’t know what else would.

  • queencersei

    And thanks for the history review Rusty. I guess the moral is don’t try to build a national party around one individual or a very narrow ideology.

  • spob

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/05/023506.php
    .
    Yeah, Barney Frank is what America wants. Jeez. We had a toungue-tied party leader who didn’t fight back, and we’re in the soup now. But remember, “the facts of life are conservative.”

  • vastwastelander

    One thing that isn’t going to work for the Republicans is trying to determine motives based on outcome: every time Rusty, et al. try to pin “advocate big government” on the Dems, they breeze right by reality.

    I doubt any Democrat/ Liberal on this page would say “I believe in Big Government, period.” What most Democrats advocate is government providing efficient, effective programs and strong policies designed to help the populace and keep our country moving forward, especially when these programs and policies CANNOT effectively and fairly be provided by the private sector.
    .
    Conversely, many Republicans fall back on “I advocate small government,” regardless of the facts on the ground.
    .
    So with Rusty’s limited knowledge of the Federalists, he picks out “strong national government” and decides “wow, sounds like Democrats.” Anyone else out there think that Alexander Hamilton had much in common with the modern Democratic Party? Based on my read, he would have been a George Bush Republican . . .

  • textee

    Jay Newton-Small: “Here’s this week’s cover story by Michael Grunwald on the state of the Grand Ole Party.”

    -

    Cover “story”? ROTFLMAO! Try: Leftist editorial/fairy tale/wishful thinking. Has Time magazine ever had a cover editorial not written by a leftist loon like Michael Grunwald or Joe Klein or …?

  • plukasiak

    I think that there potential for a “third party” effort is substantial — if the economy doesn’t improve Obama won’t be terribly popular but will still be the Democratic nominee, and if the GOP continues its insistence on marginalizing itself, someone like Mike Bloomberg could probably win the presidency in 2012.

  • spob

    “What most Democrats advocate is government providing efficient, effective programs and strong policies designed to help the populace and keep our country moving forward, especially when these programs and policies CANNOT effectively and fairly be provided by the private sector.”
    .
    Does anyone, I mean anyone, think that government can efficiently run anything? Have any of you people ever gotten a driver’s license in a big city? Ever wonder why there’s a saying, “Only in the District”?

  • FlownOver

    Right – they’re all the same. It’s equivalent for Democrats to oppose warrantless wiretapping because it erodes our rights, while Republicans oppose health care reform because Nancy Pelosi is a b!tch who represents The Gays.
    .
    Yeah. They’re all the same.

  • spob

    And speaking of Michelle Bachman, she sure made Barney “My BF is a prostitute” Frank look foolish . . . .
    .
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/05/023506.php

  • spob

    FO, please explain how warrantless wiretapping of international calls violates the Fourth Amendment.

  • vastwastelander

    Yeah, spob, I think the lower-than-5% administrative costs for Social Security are pretty efficient. Same with police and fire departments. And hey, for the most part, the military. Compare the Marines with Blackwater, or Ze, or whatever the f*** they’re calling themselves this week . . .

  • spob

    Yeah, vastwastelander, tell that to someone who has had his or her social security number used by an illegal alien and is trying to get his or her tax refund.

  • http://privcorr.blogspot.com/ wvng
  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    spob,
    Have you ever had a productive non-aggravatying encounter with and Insurance company or a Bank? Do you know what a telephone maze is? Have you ever talked to a tech service rep from India?
    .
    The question isn’t whether government can efficiently run anything. The question is whether ANY bloated oversized organization can. There’s nothing magical about the private sector and if it’s in a company’s interest to screw their customers, they do it in a heartbeat. Whic is why we need government in the first place.
    .
    Failure to understand that IS the root cause of the demise of the Republican brand that is our current topic of discussion.

  • vastwastelander

    Yeah, because the private sector NEVER loses track of credit card numbers and bank accounts, and when they do, they NEVER call the police and ask the government to fix things.
    .
    The whole existence of laws against stealing your identity are the result of the government’s existence. I’d LOVE to see a private, for-profit government make fair, effective, and DEMOCRACTIC laws and then enforce them. That would be a hoot . . . or maybe you’re against democracy too?

  • FlownOver

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    .
    Show me the exception that invalidates this fundamental right if I happen to place a call to an American temporarily in Canada, but the U.S. government just feels like tapping my phone “in case.”

  • rmrd

    spob
    .
    For all your horror stories about government, there are equal horror stories about business. When I walk into a large electronics store, I go in knowing that at some point someone will attempt to sell me something I don’t want or lie to me about a particular device’s capability.
    .
    I also realize that there is a chance that the device I purchase will be DOA when powered up at home. We are in an era where business is viewed as putting out shoddy products. Customer service is a distant memory.
    .
    If you don’t trust the government to handle auto registration, why are you cheer-leading government surveillance?

  • http://smoothlikeremy.blogspot.com/ sgwhiteinfla

    Still trying to reason with the unreasonable I see. Waste of key strokes, believe me.

  • apollyon07

    Richard Viguerie has often spoken about conservatism remaining a third force in politics, not necessarily a party. Note that he has been vehemently opposed to what Bush has done to the Republican party. While Republican party ID is low, it has been standard in modern times that there are more Americans who identity as Democrats (admittedly not at this much disparity), but at the same time more Americans classify themselves as conservatives. Hence, the reason you hear America described frequently as a center-right country. Many polls/statistics can be cited here, if anyone here desires.
    .
    I really don’t want to go into as much detail about why I don’t think the Republican party is doomed to disappear as I did in the last post about this, so I’ll just leave it at this: 1: the current, rigid system does not allow for a third party to replace one of the two as in the past, and 2: get back to me in 15 years.

  • afguy

    Still trying to reason with the unreasonable I see. Waste of key strokes, believe me.
    .
    Hear, hear. The only variable is how long it takes those concerned to realize that.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    The real glaring point for me is that Rahm speaks in terms that are grounded in reality, while every single republican comment I see comes straight out of la-la land.
    .
    Well, that’s not quite fair. Megan McCain and Steve Schmidt showed some understanding of the situation. And were derided by the fantasists of both the base and the leadership.

  • apollyon07

    rmrd, while I agree that there are many, many horror stories about business, the difference is (in most, though not all) cases if you are dissatisfied with a business, you can stop doing business with them and move to someone else. Not so with the government (unless you want to leave the country, RICK PERRY). I’ll admit one notable exception that comes to mind, which is health care, but much of that has to do with most Americans being forced to get whichever plan their employer sticks them with, rather than being able to go get the plan that’s best for them. You can thank wage freezes put forth back in the 30s for this, which forced companies to find other ways of compensating their employees (ie, healthcare).
    .
    Though yes, I do not subscribe to the notion that business is 100% infallible compared to the government.

  • hellslittlestangel

    Joe the Plumber does everything in disgust. Life is just one slimy, greasy sink-strainer to him.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    The GOP will rise when they actually practice the conservative principles they preach about.
    .
    They never have. What makes you think they will ever start?

  • apollyon07

    jayackroyd, I liked what Steve Schmidt had to say, unfortunately I think a lot of conservative leaders have a “shoot first, don’t ask questions later” approach to alternate ideas, rather than a “ask questions, then decide whether or not to shoot” approach. I’m not saying Republicans should welcome into open-arms any unorthodox (from a conservative stand-point) idea that comes across, just that ideas in question should be at least given a chance and thorough review before making a decision.

  • afguy

    Though yes, I do not subscribe to the notion that business is 100% infallible compared to the government.
    .
    apollyon07,
    .
    An open-minded look at recent economic history should reveal that to anyone willing to do so.
    .
    We shoudl be at the point now of asking, “OK, NOTHING is GUARANTEED to work simply by ideological definition. Let’s find something that does and try that-whatever it is.”

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    pluk
    .
    There are two substantial barriers to a third party. 1) The media needs two sides to present their “balanced” savvy stories. 2) States have serious barriers to ballot access for third parties.
    .
    Still, I can see a “centrist” Bloomberg/Lieberman/Specter party forming if the Republicans continue their death spiral.

  • apollyon07

    afguy: as Radiohead said, “Pragmatism, not idealism”. I like it!

  • spob

    FO, for your edification, take a look at Katz (a seminal wiretap case) and precedent on border searches. You may not like it very much, but the current law is on the side of this not violating the Fourth Amendment.
    .
    rmrd, PD, I am not a no-government guy. Not at all. I believe that there are core functions of the government (one of which is police and fire–and the military). But I am very wary of government power, be petty tyrannies like the City of Boston charging money to contest a parking ticket, even if the ticket was erroneously issued, or abuse of forfeiture power or the abuse of Jane Harman’s privacy by the leak (funny how none of you privacy advocates in here are all that worked up about that) or when Ohio government officials released confidential info about Joe the PLumber (once again, I don’t recall much outrage here).
    .
    And I get that dealing with big companies sucks. But I can tell you this, they won’t take your kids away because you are privileged like DC’s version of DCFS has done.
    .
    I am very leery of government surveillance of international phone calls. Not because I really care if someone listens in on one of mine (remember, these people have big fish to fry–they really don’t care about your call), but because of the possibility for abuse. For example, Jane Harman, or for a more petty one, remember the people laughing over people’s foreign phone sex calls.

  • apollyon07

    afguy: my interpretation to what you said is “Pragmatism, not idealism”. I like it!

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    The whole existence of laws against stealing your identity are the result of the government’s existence.
    .
    Actually, the reason identity theft happens at all is that the credit card companies are not liable for damages. If they were, they’d have secure systems. It’s not hard to work out methods of securing your credit cards.

  • afguy

    The media needs two sides to present their “balanced” savvy stories.
    .
    jayackroyd,
    .
    You can balance things on a plate using three sides, but it’s tricky . . . many don’t have the steadiness and patience to do it.
    .
    Maybe that’s the problem. Too many sides to an issue might require them to havve to work a lot harder than they are used to.

  • spob

    So guys, why weren’t all you privacy people worked up about the egregious actions by government officials against Joe the Plumber? Why?

  • afguy

    afguy: my interpretation to what you said is “Pragmatism, not idealism”. I like it!
    .
    apollyon07,
    .
    As long as you entertain the “idealism” of getting coverage to as many as you can, rather than the “pragmatic” position of telling some that “political realities” mean they’ll have to wait until some time in the future for their relief.
    .
    I just really hate that word “pragmatic” at times. Too often it just means “I got mine – you’re just going to have to wait for yours because I wasn’t willing to fight for it.”

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    , while I agree that there are many, many horror stories about business, the difference is (in most, though not all) cases if you are dissatisfied with a business, you can stop doing business with them and move to someone else
    .
    No, in fact, the problem is you can’t. The companies that provide the worst, overpriced service are oligopolies that do not compete with each other on price or service. Cable television, health insurers, internet service providers, cell phone providers all are set up in such a way that the consumer is mistreated, with nowhere else to go.
    .
    Sure, I can pick from the dozen pizza places within three blocks of my apartment. But I’ve only got two cable choices, and they both suck. Many people don’t even have two choices.

  • apollyon07

    I said “most, though not all”. In any case you have more choice than in the government. And many oligopolies such as cable and especially energy exist because of rigid government rules put in place.

  • afguy

    Jerk Congress’ health care coverage – then see how big a priority it becomes for them to pass something that works.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    You can balance things on a plate using three sides, but it’s tricky
    .
    Actually, it’s the period of time during which there is only one side that’s the problem. You can see it now. People saying absolutely insane things are given airtime and column inches, just because they are the other side.

  • afguy

    Cable television, health insurers, internet service providers, cell phone providers all are set up in such a way that the consumer is mistreated, with nowhere else to go.
    .
    See “Comcast Cable” in our area. Perfect example.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    One of the nice things about having the trolls around is it provides running confirmation of why the death spiral is happening.
    .
    And, spob, there were plenty of people on the left unhappy with the invasion of JtP’s privacy. Our ways are not your ways.

  • afguy

    People saying absolutely insane things are given airtime and column inches, just because they are the other side.
    .
    jayackroyd,
    .
    You mean they might become “airtime/publicity whores”? Why would you think such a thing???

  • afguy

    One of the nice things about having the trolls around is it provides running confirmation of why the death spiral is happening.
    .
    And do they even understand that it is happening while they do it . . .

  • apollyon07

    A recent example of mine: when the wretched Time Warner bought the previously wonderful cable company that I was subscribed to, when our contract expired (I think it was three months), we switched to what we thought would be better, Verizon. And in fact, we liked it much better! Same thing happened with our energy company . Now, when I have to go get my driver’s license renewed at the end of the month, I only have one choice, that happens to suck. Note- don’t take this as an end-all scenario, this is just what I’ve experienced. I agree their are no absolutes here by a long-shot, this is just what I generally believe.

  • apollyon07

    AND, if there is an entity that exists as a monopoly, it should be dissolved, as are the current, reasonable regulations. Enforcement, enforcement, enforcement, this is half of the problem.

  • formerlyjames

    To borrow from Twain, the demise of the Republican Party is greatly exaggerated.
    .
    The party will continue to reamain viable as long as the most base human instincts and ingorance, fed by mainstream religions, which appeals to their base, exists. This issue just begs for a Francis Church editorial, “Yes, Virginia, there is a Republican Party…”.

  • centfan

    So why isn’t Somalia the perfect example of a Republican’s idea of a small government utopia? I doubt they ever passed a seatbelt law. If you have enough money, as all good Somali citizens do, you can pay for your police and military protection. Your flush toilets empty directly into areas of people that no one cares about. Hell, I’m surprised Intel and Microsoft haven’t relocated to their zero tax zones.
    -
    Why isn’t Somalia the Republican City on a Hill?

  • afguy

    AND, if there is an entity that exists as a monopoly, it should be dissolved,
    .
    apollyon07,
    .
    How many of our present monopolies started out as one of multiples and just “merged with” their competitors, ostensibly in order to “have a stronger competitive position in the market place”.
    .
    Seem to remember that rationale when the FTC approved a number of mergers as exceptions to what would have been in the past violations of anti-trust laws on the books.
    .
    Oversight won’t work if the “overseers” don’t want to “see” what’s in front of them.

  • afguy

    Or, more accurately, it’s in their economic interests NOT to see what’s in front of them.

  • choska

    Two points:

    1) The GOP will start to win elections again once people forget the damage their bad ideas have caused. Sometimes that takes from 1932 to 1950. Sometimes that takes from 1976 to 1980.
    .
    2) Grunwald isn’t giving the GOP enough credit for their bad ideas. It isn’t that most of their ideas are unpopular, but that ALL of them are completely unworkable.
    .
    Can anyone name an actual GOP favored policy position that functions in the real world? They say they are for smaller government, which is an okay concept, but when have they ever actually proposed and passed a workable solution for cutting a government program?
    .
    They say the Government is inefficient and wastes money. Fair enough. But when have they come forward with an actual solution that would streamline government services? Last time I checked they were fighting Obama because he wanted to cut the middle men – who add zero value – out of the student loan process. Isn’t that a great example of the government simply wasting money?
    .
    Why not get on board allowing Medicare to negotiate directly with the pharmaceutical industry? Why not work with Obama on cutting defense contracts for weapons systems that don’t make us safer? Why not champion an updated electrical grid and water systems so we can start transporting energy and water more efficiently? Why not champion rail transportation – it is more efficient than cars?
    .
    The Democrats in Congress are leaving a world of opportunities open. They aren’t actually delivering on their promises. How is it not “conservative” to push for more efficient and more productive use of tax dollars?
    .
    Like a lot of Progressives, I’ll vote for anyone who makes the trains run on time, gets clean water to my house, makes it less expensive for my kids to go to college, and balances the budget by cutting out spending on stupid crap like the Star Wars missile defense system. Yet – still – no one in DC is listening or acting. Instead you have people like Harry Reid who is to busy playing game with Arlen Specter to do the people’s business.

  • apollyon07

    afguy: that’s exactly what I mean, current laws need to be enforced. And I assume that by overseers you mean government watch-dog groups. So isn’t this partially the fault of the government, for not enforcing current, reasonable laws?
    .
    And I think you misunderstood me on pragmatism and idealism. I should’ve been more clear, I meant idealism in regards to extreme examples, such as “the economy should be able to be fixed over night” or “if we just sprinkle Democracy over the Middle East, everything will be solved!”

  • afguy

    So isn’t this partially the fault of the government, for not enforcing current, reasonable laws?
    .
    apollyon07,
    .
    In the recent past, I think that the occupants of the office were just idealogically opposed to oversight – “let the unfettered free market reign”, in other words.
    .
    That wasn’t a government failure per se, but one of ideology. Put people in those positions who believed that oversight was proper and you would have gotten a much different result.

  • afguy

    I meant idealism in regards to extreme examples, such as “the economy should be able to be fixed over night” or “if we just sprinkle Democracy over the Middle East, everything will be solved!”
    .
    I would definitely agree with your viewpoint on this. It’s the “we really need access to their ports this year, let’s give them approval for nuclear technology” type of pragmatism that is killing us.

  • apollyon07

    afguy, those are all valid points. I would love to continue this but I have massive studying to do (finals week looms, ugh). More on this later, hopefully.

  • afguy

    In other words, we have what we see as an immediate short-term need, but we often give up something extremely long-lasting to get it, something that can’t be recalled if the crap hits the fan in ways we did not foresee.

  • afguy

    apollyon07,
    .
    Good luck with finals. Been there. It’s been a pleasure . . .

  • sacredh

    The republican party might not be actually dying, but it’s sick enough that nobody really wants to be around it because nobody is really sure what disease it has. It affects the brain. We can see that. The illness causes delusions. Listen to them talk. People are scared of catching whatever it is they have. Look at how many are running away from them. Medication isn’t an effective treatment…is it Rush? Call the CDC. We have a pandemic on our hands. The south has been REALLY hit hard.

  • junkmailqueen

    RE: Jodi Rell. A wildly popular Republican in a blue state. Came to office after being Lt. Gov. under a disgraced governor and won re-election after having two years to play governor. So she never had to struggle through a first-time candidacy.
    .
    Interestingly, a lot of people think she’s popular because … she doesn’t actually stand for anything or even have a personality. In fact, I surprised myself when I couldn’t initially think of anything at all to say about her. She’s just kind of … there.
    .
    Interesting stuff here:
    http://ctlocalpolitics.net/2009/04/11/figuring-out-jodi-rell/#more-3725
    .
    A recent poll from the Connecticut Business & Industry Association :
    1. Level of approval for the policy actions and decisions of the following – Governor M. Jodi Rell
    Strongly approve 19%
    Somewhat approve 58%
    Somewhat disapprove 14%
    Strongly disapprove 4%
    Not sure 5%
    .
    Numbers for the same question regarding the Democrat-controlled state Legislature were almost the same.
    .
    http://www.cbia.com/newsroom/Surveys/documents/zogby2may09.pdf

  • apollyon07

    Thanks afguy! This has been enjoyable for me as well. (Okay, now I’m really gone, just had to check one more time before I left my computer for several hours).

  • rmrd

    …….One of the nice things about having the trolls around is it provides running confirmation of why the death spiral is happening.
    .
    It is also fascinating to see that they can only attack positions taken by Democrats but have nothing to offer for reform of the GOP. They also fail to present alternative solutions.
    .
    I view exchanges with them as entertainment. I don’t expect anything of value to be presented by the wingnuts. apollyono07 is not included in the wingnut grouping.

  • afguy

    apollyono07 is not included in the wingnut grouping.
    .
    rmrd,
    .
    Same here with her. And, as a suggestion, when you do find conservatives that will engage in a good discussion sans all the name-calling and label-throwing, tell them you appreciate it.
    .
    I think it encourages further meaningful dialogue. People like her are the type that will be needed to help bring the country back from where it is right now.

  • flacidcasual

    The Republican Party has a task on its hands. It’s likely that any move to reclaim some of the center ground will be opposed very loudly by those on the hard right. I’m not even talking about Limbaugh, Hannity and the other entertainers, but people like Sanford and DeMint. I don’t see how they could overcome a fuse-blowing outcry by the base.

  • hold2file

    If the leadership of the Democratic Party is smart, they will not criticize the Republicans but let the Republicans be their own source of destruction.

    The problem with “Republican ideas” is NOT that they are unpopular, but that they are wrong, stupid, and hypocritical.

    The Republican Party and “Conservatism” used to stand for responsiblity, sensibility, thrift, and morality. Instead we have “Enron economics,” the Halliburton War, violations of civil liberties that would make the 1776 British proud, and Sarah Palin’s bastard grandson as the poster child of “Republican Morality.” And if Cheney and Rove don’t keep their mouth’s shut, their complaining about Obama’s tactics will have them both exposed for their frauds of the last 8 years and both of them sent to jail without Obama’s ability to pardon them like he did Ted Stephens. (Newt is fortunate in that not being in office, he can’t be punished for his hypocrisy.)

    The Repubican Party will “be back” once the hypocrites and idiots who are now running it are replaced if only because there may not be enough room in the Democratic Party for the people who want to be in government. But it will take 8 years to purge the current crop of fools.

    And I have been a “life-long Republican” for the last 40 years.

  • afguy

    If the leadership of the Democratic Party is smart, they will not criticize the Republicans but let the Republicans be their own source of destruction.
    .
    hold2file,
    .
    Maybe not overtly criticize, but definitely keep pushing the current crop of clowns to continue shooting themselves in the foot. Then keep pointing out the self-inflicted bullet holes for all to see.
    .
    In other words, continue to “help” them to make a “laughing stock” of themselves.

  • afguy

    We do need to be prepared to accept any GOP “converts”, but Reid’s habit of giving concessions to GOP “deserters” without any demonstration that they are REALLY prepared to support Dem positions is just sucky.
    .
    I’m really not impressed with him as a leader and DEFINITELY not as someone with any vision for the country whatsoever. He just seems to be a different side to the same corroded, corrupted coin.

  • gysgt213

    “If the leadership of the Democratic Party is smart, they will not criticize the Republicans but let the Republicans be their own source of destruction.”
    .
    hold2file-The problem with that is politics is a very dirty and nasty sport. The dems are always depicted as weak by the media. So if they didn’t kick em when they are down so to speak, there would be no reward in taking the high road. Instead the dems would take heat for not going in for the kill.

  • ogliberal

    spob: “So guys, why weren’t all you privacy people worked up about the egregious actions by government officials against Joe the Plumber? Why?”
    .
    Was prying into a individual’s state records the official policy of the State of Ohio? Did the people who did the prying in Ohio get in trouble?
    .
    Dude, you are the master of false equivalency. I mean, your response to a commment about the relatively low administrative costs of Social Security is that some people – very, very few, relatively speaking (I’m sure much fewer than those who have had their credit card number stolen, as vastwastelander note) – have had their SS#s stolen by dirty Mexicuns? Try harder, man.

  • 53_3

    Well, Yoshi, rusty thinks it’s the Sleeping White Giant, whatever the hell that is. You say it’s their “ideals.
    .
    Which one of you is right? Which of you is the real American?
    .
    Hysteria? The investers are voting with their money.
    .
    na na na na
    na na na na
    say hey now, goodbye…

  • vastwastelander

    afguy – For the most part, I’m with you on Reid. He’s a decent middle managment type, but when it comes to actual leadership, he’s weak . . .

  • 53_3

    Sounds to me like Joe the Plumber is:
    .
    1. Not a plumber. He didn’t have a license
    2. A tax evader. This is a speshul class of people, who, according to the Great White Whale, should be allowed to indulge in corruption, too, otherwise he’ll leave*.
    .
    *Uhyuh. Uhyuh. But which socialist country will chose to go to?

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    gunny-
    .
    I think Obama has the perfect tone–mockery.

  • afguy

    I think Obama has the perfect tone–mockery.
    .
    jayackroyd,
    .
    Works for me, too . . . but he does it a LOT better!

  • afguy

    He’s a decent middle managment type, but when it comes to actual leadership, he’s weak . . .
    .
    vastwastelander,
    .
    Perfect description of Reid. He believes his job begins and stops with maintaining a Dem majority (and Senate comity) by any means. The party accountant/host, if you will.

  • jcapan

    “someone like Mike Bloomberg could probably win the presidency in 2012″
    ~
    I agree that if things don’t begin to improve in the next 3 years, Obama will be in trouble (there will be no one else to blame by then), and, yes, it is hard to imagine the electorate lurching back to the party of Rush. OTOH, our estab. is fundamentally determined to prevent any viable 3rd party from having a place at the debate. God knows, look at how Nader was treated before (even before he became a complete egomaniac, or even marginal voices within the 2 parties, i.e. Paul or Kucinich.
    ~
    As for “someone like Bloomie” you must be crazy. Outside of NY, he’s about as appealing as day old dog-sh!t. If a 3rd party will ever have a chance, it will need to be lead by someone like Bloomie, wealthier than god, but like Perot, he also needs to be appealing, charismatic. However, if the media-courtiers are all dead by ’12, anything is possible, as with the discourse-gatekeepers out of the way, a 3rd party would get a fairer shake on the ‘nets, but I’m not sure I see the paradigm swinging that far that soon. Though I’d like to see it swing the likes of JNS out the friggin door.

  • 53_3

    Here is a bit of humor JNS, from your own back yard, and probably explains better than anything why there are so many people with shovels standing around:
    http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/05/07/sean-hannitys-smear-of-mustard/

  • formerlyjames

    jcapan, appealing and charismatic is a thing of the moment. Even, punk GWB pulled that off. Doesn’t take much, apparently.

  • jcapan

    Good pt. formerly, though I should have said “unlike Perot” in my hasty post above. W. did pull off the man-of-the-people/barbershop thing, with major propaganda-assists and an aversion to tough ?s by the press. How Palin was a dum-dum but W. wasn’t will never cease to amaze me. It would have simply taken one Katie-Couric-like interview.
    ~
    ’12 is too soon for a return to el estupido. But here’s hoping the fringe GOP is just that in embracing the likes of Palin.
    ~
    Personally, I’d love to see a 3rd party take fire, from whatever direction. If things don’t improve, a Paul/libertarian figure will be all the more compelling next time. Obama’s popularity and the GOP’s irrelevance should not leave dems ODing on hubris–the fastest growing party in this nation is neither of the above.

  • FlownOver

    Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) holds that a person is free from warrantless intrusion wherever he/she has a reasonable expectation of privacy – e.g., even in a public phone booth. I see nothing in the decision that vitiates this protection in the case of a private call with someone who happens to be outside the U.S. Unless your argument is that the Bush Administration’s abuses have destroyed all reasonable expectation of privacy, your argument doesn’t hold up.

  • spob

    FO, I also asked you to look at precedent regarding a border search. Here it is: the sovereign has the right to inspect what crosses the border–and wiretaps are on the same footing as a physical search. Hence, the communications that cross the border, constitutionally speaking, should be searchable.

blog comments powered by Disqus