How A Republican Civil War Took Over My Home District

Were I living in that district what would tick me off the most was the fact that Doug Hoffman doesn’t seem knowledgeable about local issues. And doesn’t seem all that interested in becoming knowledgeable either. And yet he is the one garnering all the support from these other “outsiders”. They say all politics are local so I would find it somewhat surprising if he were in fact to win the election.

Thanks, Kate, especially for the inside stuff from your “home field advantage.” I asked Jay earlier if someone would cover this. Do YOU think this mutiny was planned here (hardliners find a weak point and attack), or was it really a Gettysberg-like flash mob? Sarah Palin’s leap into this has garnered lots of media coverage. I’ve been waiting for the fiscal / biz + social / religious R alliance to fracture any day; will this be the tipping point? Is the state Conservative Party part of a national movement? You would know better than me: are polls there reliable? If so, an Owens / Hoffman tie would mean an Owens win if Scozzafava stays in. Is she staying in? thx

That’s the most galling thing, really. He’s absolutely braindead as far as the actual issues, and yet he’s surging, because the base is ‘fired up’ for a ‘real conservative’.

Kate Pickert:
.
You mention:

…the key issues in the rural district that sprawls across the northeast part of the state are typically things like the future of the local Army base, falling milk prices and whether anyone can ever lure enough jobs back to the area to replace those that were lost when the region’s manufacturing sector dried up in the 1980s and ’90s.

How well are important issues like regional reliance on DOD spending, policies either leading or indifferent to the destruction of an industrial base, and the effects of government/private sector economic activity on inflationary/deflationary trends (especially family necessities) covered by the press corps tasked with reporting on this race?
.
If (and I’m only guessing, of course) the national coverage doesn’t somehow reflect those key issues, wouldn’t it then go a long way in explaining how much of the dynamic of this race is possible…or predictable?

What is interesting is how this fight is being covered. If this were a Democratic feud, the media would be all over it, saying how Obama has divided the party and the party is dying, etc.

But it’s no big deal for Republicans, no barometer of the future of the GOP whatsoever?

http://www.political-buzz.com/

It is interesting to me that Hoffman is polling ahead of Scozzafava. Even allowing for Scozzafava’s moderate status, Hoffman being an “outsider” would be the kiss of death were this happening in my district. All the heavyweights campaigning on Hoffman’s behalf would just piss off the folks in my area that much more. Interesting how that doesn’t seem to be the case in NY-23 though.

I’m only guessing (no links) that this is really a GOP mutiny that happened to start here. Our entire country is still trying pull out of a recession. Name ANY region that’s on fire with job growth, soaring home prices, etc. …not many. Each region has its own woes – losing a DOD or major private employer, mass foreclosures, etc. – but the overall pattern is across the board. Didn’t NYC get whacked from the Wall St. bank collapses? The fiscal and social conservatives that bought, I mean, brought W to power have different agendas, so their alliance could be split. But why start here in KP’s home town? (no argument, just pondering…)

Oh, there’s a story alright.

The story is that Scozzafava is a bad conservative and there’s no room for that in the movement, screw party, this is about ideological purity as it should be.

Oh, and that somehow, no matter who wins, Scozzafava, Owens, or Hoffman, it’s Good For Republicans.

The Sarah Palin endorsement will put Hoffman over the top and mark her as the GOP presidential frontrunner for 2012.

At least that’s my hope!

Like most rural areas, the “conservative” base is upset with the more “progressive” Republicans that are attempting to take over the party.
.
I commend Hoffman for taking a stand. He is showing the country how the Republican Party is also being infiltrated by so-called “Republicans” who are no more than John McCain, more of the same. Progressives.
.
True conservatives are concerned about the fiscal responsibility of our government. We want less government intrusion into our daily lives. We see the Government as the “evil” people who are eroding the Constitution for the rights and liberties of the “collective”. In a progressive Republican’s mind, the “collective” are those evil Wall Street types who want to rape and pillage the tax payer dollars to support “stimulus” and take over of our businesses by the mega-world companies. The major companies who do not hold our national interests at heart, but those of the “new world order”.
.
George Bush II was a Progressive. That is why you saw the start of the spending spree which continues under Obama. That is also why you are seeing the ground swell of opposition from the Tea Party folks who are out protesting and demanding at least from the Republican Party to make the changes necessary to bring back fiscal responsibility that we had in the 80′s and early 90′s.
.
Hopefully with people like Hoffman, we shall see change in the Republican Party, and we will elect people who will hold conservative values at heart, and not the special interest groups that people like Jack Abramanoff represented.
.
If not, I hope we get a third party who will bring about real “change we can believe in”.

There are no local issues it is all about Ideology. Take a few zealots, talk radio, and brain dead voters and this is what you get.

We have health care disscussions all the time at work, and one guy says he doesn’t belive the polls showing support for health care, cuz he hasn’t heard anyone he talks to support it. What have all of us been talking about then I asked him. Flew right oiver his head.

==============off topic – as in dying, you know

” .. Clinton was pressed .. But she refused to discuss the USA’s drone strikes along the porous border area with Afghanistan that have killed key .. leaders (and) scores of civilians. ..”

Yes, the other side has also killed leaders and scores of civilians. Now, who is who?

———-
Scenario:
Clinton: We will not buckle. We will pursue you ( – We will unleash on you the terror of “shock and awe”). We will fight you. We will kill you.
The Other side: We will not buckle. We will pursue you. We will fight you. We will kill you.

Now, who is who?
[Another version of the age-old vendetta between the Israelis/Americans and Palestinians?]
———

Deja Vu – all over again …

American soldiers enter a village in Vietnam and kill every child, woman, man, old person, livestock in it – in fact every moving, breathing thing seen – and burn the village down.
Asked why they did it the American Nazis say they ‘sanitized’ the village – to save it from communism.

[And as usual, the white man's UN sees here no crimes against humanity committed by whites against barbarians ... Oh, goody: Can it be, Mme Clinton, that we will have no Taliban or Al Queda to worry about if we 'sanitize' the whole of Afghanistan and Pakistan, Indonesia and Somalia, and Yemen, .... and UK, ... and Detroit?..]

I’m sure you’d do that.
.
Meanwhile, what I’d do is highlight what the MSM won’t tell you about Doug Hoffman and direct Hoffman’s supporters to this Dick Armey video.
.
Only the SorosChip in Dems’ brains prevents them from doing that.

Let’s all remember that a third party win over both national parties, in which the candidate truly represented the principles of a plurality of the electorate would be a great victory for people, whether conservative, centrist or liberal.
.
What seems to be forgotten (on MSNBC, at least) is that people having the choice between centrist Democrat, centrist Republican and conservative Conservative is a beautifully small-d democratic thing, and not a spectacle to be mocked.

Yeah d@mn carpetbagger! Reminds me of another such yankee loving carpetbagger who was really from Park Ridge, Ill. a known Cubs base….for shame, for shame. How dare someone give up hope for the Cubs.

The problem here is that the third party candidate doesn’t seem to truly represent the principles all that well, and seems to be woefully and horribly tone deaf to the concerns of the constituents he’s going to represent if he wins.

The only reason he seems to be winning is that the tea bagger contingent in the national GOP is trying an ideological purge by rejecting the local GOPs own candidate for being ‘too liberal’.

Rustydog:
.
I’m with you, although you’ve once again mis-applied the term “progressive”.
.
If you were to use find-n-replace to change every time you wrote “progressive” to “bi-partisan centrist”, you and I would be in relative agreement.
.
Don’t you see?
.
It’s not that John McCain is a liberal, he’s a centrist who calls himself a conservative when he’s directly in front of them, but who talks the Village centrist line about “bi-partisanship” and “coming together across party lines” when he’s in front of reporters.
.
He doesn’t like people like you, Rustydog, and it seems that everybody understood that picking Palin for VP was a grumbling concession to your wing of the party (the popular wing) that the Beltway centrists obviously don’t like.
.
John McCain has a ton in common with the Democratic leadership, and you know it.
.
If you were honest, and not trying to make a political point painting everybody to the left of Hannity as radical socialists, you would say that the Democratic leadership are what they are: centrists who despise their left-wing base much more than the Republican leadership despises you and the rest of the true rightists.

George Bush II was a Progressive. That is why you saw the start of the spending spree which continues under Obama.

No, George Bush truly represents the right wing negotiating with the establishment center, who adopted a big government line and policies as a concession to those who helped his administration take power in Washington. George Bush was the edge of the far right in centrist politics, and the establishment still forced him to say “I’m a uniter, not a divider“, but then trusted his administration with almost total power, and defended that established power with zeal.
.
You guys got played by Bush II, sure, but he was far more rightist than John McCain ever was, and far more rightist than the New Democrat Obama is left.
.
You must remember, and I’m telling you, and I’m an honest liberal: Only centrists like the New Democrats and the Democratic Leadership Council are into big government for its own sake, because they like to form “partnerships” between big government, big industry and big finance. That’s their “Third Way”. Look it up: here (link).
.
The reason why real liberals are into government is so that we can contain the power of robber barons, Rustydog. We don’t think that gigantic, institutional industries or banks or anything really works in favor of the little guy/gal. We want trust-busters, we want the power of huge corporations to control our choices and intrude on our lives taken down to more acceptable levels, and the only power big enough to exert that influence on our behalf is the state, Rustydog.
.
Don’t you get it?
.
If Wal-Mart has its way, there won’t be any small businesses. Liberals don’t want the government to be Wal-Mart (that’s socialists, who we don’t agree with about that), we want the government to break up Wal-Mart, so that it isn’t as powerful, and the free market can be more free.
.
That’s why we’re socially liberal, too. We want the government to stay out of individuals’ private lives, even if what people do to themselves hurts them, morally or otherwise.
.
We want freedom, Rustydog. That’s what we’re about. We’re not libertarians, because libertarians can’t imagine Teddy Roosevelt breaking up monopolies, and we’re not conservatives, because conservatives don’t build public bridges for small businesses to use without paying big businesses. We’re not socialists, because socialists think that everything would be better if the state controlled everything about the choices people have in an economy.
.
We just need to use the government to engineer that freedom, and then we need to limit that government, too, which is why we’re in favor of people controlling the government, not the centrists’ favorite powerful elites and technocrats.
.
Please, will you do that find-n-replace exercise on your post, Rustydog? Will you replace “progressive” with “right-wing centrist”, and then think about it?

Ideally, in the long-term, we would modify our government to be compatible with a multi-party system. Our two-party system that rewards demonizing one’s opponents and simply being better than the alternative is deeply flawed.

Until that wonderful day arrives, we need to encourage the GOP to return to national respectability. What is worse than a two-party system is a two-party system where one of the parties acts outside the boundaries of legitimate political debate.

And until the party returns to sanity, the GOP will continue to hurtle towards rock-bottom.

To the extent that Hoffman hastens the GOPs implosion and provides some laughs to boot, I can’t complain.

When you say the term “an ideological purge”, it sure sounds to me like what the national media repeated ad nauseum about Ned Lamont defeating Joe Lieberman with the help of the netroots.
.
How is it a bad thing that that the local GOP machine is being competed against by a contingent whose problem is the lack of rightism in an admittedly centrist Republican candidate?
.
If the guy doesn’t represent his constituents well, that’s one thing, but he’s got to get elected to have a chance at doing that, and he might get elected instead of the Republican, because enough people are unhappy with the choice usually given them.
.
Sounds like democracy and activism in action, to me…

Stuart, how exactly did you extract this “analysis” from NY-23? Hoffman doesn’t know or care about the local issues, Scozzafava (who was at least elected locally) is now being denounced by her “own” party, and Owens hasn’t said much of anything. What are we supposed to celebrate in this contest between the Three Blind Mice? As for your discovery upthread that you and Rustydog are really on the same team – well, I hope you can find some better meds, because you clearly need them.

Sqr1:

…we need to encourage the GOP to return to national respectability. What is worse than a two-party system is a two-party system where one of the parties acts outside the boundaries of legitimate political debate.

Please, please hear me when I say that I mean absolutely no disrespect by asking you:
.
WTF are you talking about?
.
Why on earth do you care about whatever “national respectability” means?
.
Why is it worse when “one of the parties acts outside the boundaries of legitimate political debate“, if the parties actually represent their popular, grassroots constituencies more than “legitimate” leadership would like?
.
You’ll hopefully forgive me when I say that invocations of something like “legitimate political debate” sounds very, very Village. That’s the kind of thing that David Broder would invoke when Howard Dean said that the capture of Saddam didn’t make America safer. It’s redolent of Congressional censure of Moveon.org.
.
Please, please explain why its better to have an unrepresentative, less-outwardly-radical, unpopular, “legitimate”, “nationally respectable” GOP sitting across the round-table from David Gregory than the one that actually exists and truly represents the bunch of hard-core rightists that they are?
.
I’m not trying to argue here, I genuinely have no earthly idea what you’re talking about or trying to achieve…

As for your discovery upthread that you and Rustydog are really on the same team – well, I hope you can find some better meds, because you clearly need them.

What does that even mean?

Where are you from in NY-23 Kate? I am from Madison County.

Not too many 315ers out there in the elite media.

…I feel left out (#3.1 feeds the crickets; rusty, krypt, mav, and sq. get thoughtful replies)…

There’s a distinct difference between what happened with LIeberman and what’s happening here with Scozzafava.

1) Lieberman faced a primary challenge. That’s not the main diff, but it sets up the next point.

2) Lieberman had the support of most of the national Democratic Party figures in the Congress, and still maintained quite a lot of those significant supporters even after he lost the primary and decided to run as an independent. Scozzafava has lost nearly all support from the national party outside of Gingrich, with everyone else pushing their muscle behind Hoffman.

The second part is important, because where the support for Lamont came from Connecticut dems and liberal activists, the Hoffman support is coming straight from the national GOP themselves.

I feel left out
.
I’m sorry; unintentional.
.
I didn’t disagree with or need clarification from you on what you said, and don’t really know about the “beginning of the mutiny” part.
.
If there ever represented anybody who was establishment, MTP-roundtable, Beltway GOP, it would be Newt Gingrich.
.
It seems like an insider/outsider positioning thing that may turn into a mutiny…for the better of the country, I think.

RE:
.
lost nearly all support from the national party outside of Gingrich
.
and
.
Hoffman support is coming straight from the national GOP themselves
.
That’s not how I understand the situation.
.
Who is more establishment GOP than Newt Gingrich?
.
Does Palin represent the national GOP?
.
Powerline sez ( link to douche at Powerline ) that the NRCC isn’t supporting Scozzafava, which speaks to your point, but they’re notorious cheerleaders, not reporters.
.
Do you have any evidence that the National GOP has really swung over to a non-Republican candidate?

…thanks. The “mutiny” is my guess but I first found that description in this LA Times story –
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gop-identity-crisis27-2009oct27,0,3534419.story

Oh, this is too funny:

The Working Families Party, an ACORN front group whose ballot line Newt Gingrich-endorsed radical leftist Dede Scozzafava has embraced on multiple occasions, is up to no good again.

That’s right: Maglalang is calling the Republican candidate a radical leftist ACORN pawn.
.
Wow.

Link link to the Wrath of Maglalang here

kryptik1:
.
Here’s the lunatic gasbag Maglalang shrieking against the “GOP Establishment” supporting Scozzofava:

Yes, it’s time for the upside-down elephant. The Stupid Party is at it again. The subject of today’s column: An abomination in the NY23 special congressional race to replace former GOP Rep. John McHugh, who accepted President Obama’s Army Secretary position. Way to go, Beltway GOP establishment. Grass-roots fiscal conservatives are fired up over ACORN, the SEIU, tax-and-spend radicals. Grass-roots social conservatives are battling radical abortion and gay marriage policies. You have been asking movement conservatives to give you money to fight the ACORN-friendly, union-pandering, tax-and-spend, radical Democrats.
.
Then you use their money to try and elect Dede Scozzafava, an ACORN-friendly, union-pandering, tax-and-spend radical Republican. And you use that money to fight Doug Hoffman, a viable, bona fide conservative candidate in the race who is closing the gap in the polls.
.
Watch your campaign coffers dry up, NRCC.
.
The GOP establishment: Always, always its own worst enemy.
.
Get out your air sickness bags. Guess who endorsed Scozzafava this morning? Newt Gingrich. I hear Al Sharpton and Nancy Pelosi approve!
.
Fight the GOP Beltway establishment. Contribute to Doug Hoffman today.

link to lunatic gasbag Maglalang

Stuart,
.
You’ve been on a roll lately, and your essay today is another winner…

We want trust-busters, we want the power of huge corporations to control our choices and intrude on our lives taken down to more acceptable levels, and the only power big enough to exert that influence on our behalf is the state…

.
Sh!t, we want Teddy Roosevelt back who, despite his warts, busted up trusts, created the National Forest Service / National Park System, and knew how to “speak softy” and not just wave his big…stick…around (are you listening, Dick Cheney?).
.
That said – is the Dem Centrist line all that bad? The 1990′s were great economically, we managed to run a gov’t surplus and pay down some of the deficit, and you’ve said yourself that VP Gore was making progress on reducing the size of gov’t.
.
Had this progressive/centrism continued after 2000, where do you think we’d be today?

What it means, Stuart, is that you are being excessively self-important. You do NOT speak for all liberals or progressives, and it would be nice if you confined yourself to speaking FOR yourself. When did you ever win election? What official position do you hold as a liberal or a progressive? As for your attempt to ally with Rustydog, you seem to forget his extremely unpleasant past. If you want to delude yourself about forming a new friendship, go for it, but do it for yourself and leave out the claims about what “we liberals” think.

LOL
.
You’re free to disagree with me, of course.
.
I think that I know what the term “liberal” objectively means, just like I think that I know what “conservative” or “libertarian” or “socialist” or “fascist” means, but by all means, set me straight:
.
What exactly does “liberal” mean?
.
What have I got wrong, then?

“Social liberalism, a reformulation of 19th century liberalism, rests on the view that unrestrained capitalism is a hindrance to true freedom. Instead of the negative freedom of classical liberalism, social liberals offered positive freedom that would allow individuals to prosper with public assistance in health, education and welfare.[1] ”

(just so you don’t imagine that I’m making all of this up link to wikipedia article )

The GOP establishment appears to have been caught completely off guard by Hoffman’s surge. He was way behind in the polls just a few weeks ago and Palin’s endorsement gave him a huge boost in terms of last-minute fundraising. As for the polls – the most reliable for the district is put out by Siena College, which will release a new poll this weekend. I can’t imagine that Scozzafava will drop out, even as her chances for victory get slimmer by the day.

I’m originally from the NY 23rd Congressional District as well – it’s surreal to see this race become national political fodder. It’s as “parochial” a place as you can get – insulated & economically depressed. The national hot-button culture war issues are rarely discussed in this race, and it’s sad to see this nonsense invade the race now. Oh well, nothing to be done about it except wait out the nonsense.

Thanks for the article, Kate. As a fellow North Country-er (Massena here), I enjoyed it.

kbanginmotown:

You’ve been on a roll lately…

You’re too kind; thanks for reading.

Sh!t, we want Teddy Roosevelt back…

Yes, although not the Spanish-American war TR, I suppose, but this guy:

In his term, Roosevelt vigorously fought the spoilsmen and demanded enforcement of civil service laws. Close associate, friend and biographer, James Bucklin Bishop, described Roosevelt’s assault on the spoils system indicating that,

The very citadel of spoils politics, the hitherto impregnable fortress that had existed unshaken since it was erected on the foundation laid by Andrew Jackson, was tottering to its fall under the assaults of this audacious and irrepressible young man…. Whatever may have been the feelings of the (fellow Republican party) President (Harrison) — and there is little doubt that he had no idea when he appointed Roosevelt that he would prove to be so veritable a bull in a china shop—he refused to remove him and stood by him firmly till the end of his term. [39]

During this time, the New York Sun described Roosevelt as “irrepressible, belligerent, and enthusiastic”[39]

or this guy

Roosevelt became president of the board of New York City Police Commissioners in 1895. During his two years in this post, Roosevelt radically reformed the police department. The police force was reputed as one of the most corrupt in America. The NYPD’s history division records that Roosevelt was “an iron-willed leader of unimpeachable honesty, (who) brought a reforming zeal to the New York City Police Commission in 1895.”[41]

I like the populist, reformer Roosevelt a lot. We wouldn’t have the America we have today without this guy, and we could benefit a lot more of people like him –especially right now.

…to be continued…

…as unbelievable as this is, a full third of my comment is being held for moderation, for no discernible reason…
.
Here’s the end third of it:
.

Had this progressive/centrism continued after 2000, where do you think we’d be today?

First of all, we (progressives) aren’t allied with, nor are our agendas actually congruent with the centrists. We weren’t co-holding power with them, they rejected us and took over the Democratic Party with corporate money and backing. Liberalism wouldn’t have continued in 2000, because liberals haven’t been in control of anything for 30 years. That the House Progressive Caucus is even being mentioned in the news media is a testament to grass roots whipping efforts, but that’s minimal at best. We got nothin’.
.
To your question, though, I don’t think we would be suffering as badly as we are today, certainly, but we would have continued on an unsustainable course.
.
The centrists with their Third Way ( more held for moderation incompetence, wikipedia link not accepted, please look up ) work to lock us, the people, into structures that they seem to ultimately lose control over to the right. They would have continued preserving and coalescing power into fewer and fewer (more reliable) hands, and their faith in all kinds of mystical bullcrap would have continued, to our eventual doom.
.
Unless the partnership that they envision between the globally-oriented state and global capital works to benefit Americans flawlessly, the fruit of oligarchy historically has been oppression and repression.
.
I just don’t think that the centrists who took over the Democratic Party are such geniuses, are that competent. And, as such, they are so anti-democratic and concerned with the preservation of elite privilege that they make the authoritarian and populist right look like the Green Party.
.
Bottom line: they may be genuinely better and smarter technocrats than the lucky charms of the kind we had in the Iraq Coalition Provisional Authority, but I’d rather live in a democracy, where we citizens get to make the call whether the people in power are competent or not, and the centrist Democratic Party will stop at nothing to see that us rabble are silent.
.
If they had kept power, ordinary people would probably be kept even more silent and out of governance, although we as a nation would be enduring much less pain and humiliation than the rightists gave us. Would Al Gore have been better for the country? H*ll yes.
.
Would the banks have still failed on their watch? Would ordinary people still largely be at the mercy of corporate and state interests? Would liberals still be locked out of any say in how the country is run? Would we still be on the road to perdition?
.
Unfortunately for our wonderful country, yes.
.
Thanks for reading and considering this, kbanginmotown.

Thanks so much for responding to commentary, Kate Pickert, it is very much appreciated.

Maverick, what in SZ’s 2:34 post defining liberalism do you disagree with? Be specific, b/c as a (social-democracy) progressive, I find it pretty spot-on.
.
Should we all preface “Socialism means…” with “I think” or “IMO, socialism means…” In lieu of “MS is a wanker,” is it really necessary to say IMO?
.
And as if SZ requires anyone’s defense, I think you’ve been around long enough to know that he’s not making friends with R-D. He’s striving to calibrate the terms, willfully misapplied by almost all parties. By Time staff who abuse the term liberal frequently, by rightists here who declare Joe Klein or Time liberal!!! Even by many liberals who choose to throw N-R & Apol in with the likes of R-D or textee etc.
.
And more to the pt. it seems to me that he’s merely using R-D as a foil, so he can illustrate two things. One, that the estab. is against all populist movements, right or left. And that if these various movements, the Paul supporters and the Kucinich voters, for instance, would at least respect each other enough not to willfully misindentify one another, that we might make some progress in overthrowing a corrosive centrist regime. For ex, calling a Paul voter the equivalent of a Bush voter or a Kucinich voter the equiv. of an Obama supporter. After a couple years of reading his comments, I think R-D is an irrelevant entity. It’s about other eyes that encounter their juxtaposed ideas, one almost always carefully crafted and eloquently delivered (and I’d guess expressing views you by and large agree with wholeheartedly) and one, well, we can all agree, not.

Hey Oregon JC:
.
Thanks for the cogent (succinct) restatement.
.
Can you DM me on Twitter or something, so that I can email you the full reply to kbang’s question “Wouldn’t it have been OK if we had continued uninterrupted by Bush II?”, half of which is inexplicably sitting in moderation after twenty five minutes of my thought and time?

Well, where shall we begin? Let’s just look back and see how much evidence Zechman provides for his claims at 3.3. Does he ever cite McCain’s actual voting record or votes on key issues? Hell, no – that would just get in the way of the “everyone but me is a centrist” bloviating.

the Democratic leadership are what they are: centrists who despise their left-wing base much more than the Republican leadership despises you and the rest of the true rightists.

Evidence? Hmmm? How about some facts, not just your views/rumors/old stories you read somewhere but can’t quite remember where?

No, George Bush truly represents the right wing negotiating with the establishment center, who adopted a big government line and policies as a concession to those who helped his administration take power in Washington. George Bush was the edge of the far right in centrist politics, and the establishment still forced him to say “I’m a uniter, not a divider”, but then trusted his administration with almost total power, and defended that established power with zeal.

The edge of the far right in centrist politics? A far right centrist? Is this supposed to be English? What does any of this mean? The edge of the far right? As in Stormfront? Are we going to get some facts, rather than vague rhetoric?

You guys got played by Bush II, sure, but he was far more rightist than John McCain ever was, and far more rightist than the New Democrat Obama is left.

Why does that little word “evidence” come to mind? Why do I long for an occasional fact or historic event to break the flow of this vague string of banalities?

You must remember, and I’m telling you, and I’m an honest liberal: Only centrists like the New Democrats and the Democratic Leadership Council are into big government for its own sake, because they like to form “partnerships” between big government, big industry and big finance.

This is self-contradictory. Either they want big government for its own sake (and who defends this position, hmm?) or they want it for the sake of something else (presumably the partnerships you speak of in such menacing tones). As for “honest” liberal, please, quit putting yourself on a pedestal.

they make the authoritarian and populist right look like the Green Party

Stop me if you’ve heard this before, but how about putting some facts on the table? I know you love your own rhetoric, and indulge at excessive length, but arguments need to be based on something!

The reason why real liberals are into government is so that we can contain the power of robber barons, Rustydog. We don’t think that gigantic, institutional industries or banks or anything really works in favor of the little guy/gal. We want trust-busters, we want the power of huge corporations to control our choices and intrude on our lives taken down to more acceptable levels, and the only power big enough to exert that influence on our behalf is the state, Rustydog.

Well, that’s one relatively limited strand of liberalism, although you seem a bit confused about the role of the state as opposed to the role of pressure groups, political parties and so forth.
.
The point is this: I have no problem with you giving your opinions, and being honest enough to label them as such, but when you don’t offer evidence, and start going on about “we liberals”, I really wonder whether you need to dial down the self-promotion and start actually arguing a case, rather than just presenting your oratory as some sort of Holy Writ.

themaverickfor…
.
Those are great arguments, thanks for the response.
.
You’re right: I should provide more in the way of links and quotes to back up my claims.
.
Thanks again for reading.

SZ, I’m not a Tweeter. But might I just take a sec to once again say you ought to consider starting your own blog. Not meaning that you shouldn’t continue to comment here/elsewhere, or even via Tweet/soundbites, but you have a unique voice–carve out your own space.

Sorry stuart, but despite your best efforts you cannot convice me that I have “progressives” confused with “bipartisian centrists”. That I am wrong to say that “progressives” have infiltrated both Republican as well as Democrat parties.
.
Roosevelt who you hold near and dear was the start of Republican progressivism. Dear Teddy brought about more progressive ideals than any other individual before him. Wilson, a die hard progressive and Democrat, continued the progressive march forward so far as politics are concerned.
.
It wasn’t until 1980 that you saw a return to more conservative values and ideals with the election of Ronald Reagan. His focus being on fiscal responsibiity and individual accountability. Something that all progressives abhor. Did Reagan spend? Absolutely to re-enforce our military that had been all but completely destroyed by the previous Carter Administration in the name of domestic progressivism.
.
No stuart, it is not “bi-partisian centrist” in place of just plain “progressive”. A true progressive in my mind is simply a person who sees change, and hopes that from that change something of benefit will come of it for him or her personally. Progressivism is all about the greater good of the collective, and what part of the pie I get out of it for myself. Instead of individualism, and what I can do for myself. That is why progressiveism is so closely linked to socialism.
.
Unfortunately the lines have blurred with all of the name changing from “liberal”, “moderate”, and “conservative”. To now defined as “leftist”, “centrist” and “rightist”. But, progressivism falls within all three. That is all I am saying.
.
Even in this race that Ms Pickert has brought to the blog, we have clearly three different and opposing individuals. However, what has been defined is that only Doug Hoffman can be identified as a non-progressive. Someone who has clear-cut conservative values and ideals. He stands for fiscal responsibility, cutting taxes, cutting spending and upholding the constitution as it is written. The two progressives, Owens and Scozzafava are in favor of changing the constitution, continuing progressive ideals such as gay marriage for example. They are both tax and spend progressives. They are both exactly what conservatives are so vehemently oppose.
.
Believe in what BasilBrush says, we are not on the same page stuart. Not even in the same book. You believe it is the Governments responsibility to take care of you no matter what. In the health care debate, you believe it is the governments responsibility to take care of your health care needs and pay for it. I believe it is the individuals choice to choose to take care of those needs themselves and pay for it out of their own pocket. You believe that the collective should benefit before the individual, I believe the individual should benefit if it is his or her hard work that produced. You believe that everyone should get a trophy in the game no matter what their contribution. I believe the honor should go to the individual who contributed the most to win the game, who put out their best effort above and beyond all the rest.
.
You believe that wealth should be spread around and equally enjoyed. I believe that if I work hard, I should keep my reward, my compensation. I believe if Walmart has the best deal, then I will go and shop at Walmart. If Joe Schmoe has the best deal, then I’ll buy from him. But, it all comes down to my choice, and the Government should not dictate unless all the Joe Schmoe’s of the world are gone, and we are only left with one big Walmart. Then and only then should Walmart be busted up, and we start all over again.
.

BREAKING:
.
Dede Scozzafava has dropped out: link to AmericaBlog

Stuart:
.
If you can get the rest of your comment out of moderation, I’d still like to read it…thx

Stuart: If you can get the rest of your earlier comment out of moderation, I’d still like to read it…thx

square1:
.
If you desire (as I do) a multi-party system, then I believe that the current situation with a GOP may actually hasten that day, not hinder it.
.
Regaining “national respectability” would bring the GOP, if I understand you correctly, back to the center and back to the status quo of of the 20th century. No progress would be made.
.
A couple of days ago, I commented about the situation that has evolved in Germany, after last month’s national elections…
.
In short: a dominantly 2-party system has turned into (nearly) a 5-party system over the past decade!
.
– The social conservative CDU/CSU (35%) still run things together with the fiscally conservative FDP (12%), despite losing voters. Frau Merkel is still chancellor.
.
– The social democrat SPD (22%) took a big hit as it lost voters to the surging Left Party (13%) and the Greens (11%). The Left Party is led by none other than Oskar Lafontaine, former #2 of the SPD.
.
So, about 1/3 of the electorate can now identify with the party that is most closely aligned with their interests. At this point in time, this splintering has not brought the “liberal” side of the aisle to power, but the dominant trend is that the 3 “minor” parties are making gains at the expense of the 2 “major” parties.
.
Ross Perot almost accomplished this in 1992. Perhaps the next 4 years can make this happen…

Oregon JC:
.
I’ll consider what you’ve said.

Thanks for the thought, but they’re still screwing me.

[...] still struck me as surprisingly swift and bloodless considering that the campaign had been rather contentious. Well, Hoffman is now having second [...]

[...] It's worth keeping in mind that neither Armey nor Gingrich officially speak for the Republican Party. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has so far not said that calling for full repeal of the health reform is a winning 2010 campaign strategy. (It's also very very unlikely Republicans could repeal all of health care reform even if they wanted to.) It's too early to be making definitive predictions about how the 2010 campaigns and elections might take shape, but it's certainly possible health care reform could further divide the GOP – with Tea Party activists shunning Republican candidates who don't call for full repeal. Remember New York's 23rd? [...]

[...] Hoffman, conservative cause célèbre in last year's high profile NY-23 special election, is running [...]

[...] the beginning, there was the 23rd district of New York. Sarah Palin shook up a 2009 special election in that district – left vacant when Obama appointed [...]