We have gotten to the point now where conservatives pretty much fuck up on a daily basis. It's fun to watch how stupid they look (see: American people not listening) because the same old tricks in their magic bag of bullshit don't work. They remind me of an old record album that is stuck in a groove at the end of the vinyl. We have seen how they govern and it hasn't worked. In fact, their performance has been poor. Piss poor.
On some days...and yesterday was one of them....they go that extra mile and do something really stupid. Grover Norquist, anti tax dude and one of the chief architects of neo conservatism (his Wednesday meetings are essential to the movement), dropped by the Time's Washington bureau for an interview on the election. He was giving his views on who McCain should pick for VP when he was asked what he thought about Senator Obama. He said:
"He's basically John Kerry with a tan."
Hee Hee. This is going to be more fun than I thought.
17 comments:
Norquist is definitely anti-tax and pro limited govt. I've never heard him talk about foreign policy or national greatness - the two keystones of neo-conservatism.
If you weren't so tone-deaf M, you would hear that a lot of conservatives never bought into the neo-con program. Certainly not a paleo-con like Buchanan, nor the social-cons or economic-cons (which is what I figure Norquist to be). You might be interested in Bruce Bartlett's book on W and how he has damaged conservatism.
And how I will laugh at you when President Obama is unable to accomplish shit because the Democratic Congress won't go along with him. It will set the stage for another 1994 - if the Republicans can get their act together (highly debatable).
Out of the loop for awhile....did Norquist actually say this?
Wow....
Yes, he did say it. I think we are going to see more comments like this throughout the election. The Republican Party is filled with bigots like Grover Norquist who have done a very effective job of playing the "deflect" race card. This is a classic example. They make a comment like this, obviously racist, and then say "Stop being so sensitive about race-people are past that now" or "all you lefties do is whine about racism" and then suddenly, as if by magic, the original comment is forgotten.
Actually, tom, there are several people who post on this blog who use this same tactic all the time.
The Republican Party is filled with bigots
I'm curious, is this how you think you can reach out to people how haven't voted Democratic in the past? People like those in Kansas (that Tom Frank riffed on)? Or does it serve a different purpose, like re-affirming the moral superiority of your tribe?
Juris has a point, tom and sara. The bigots in the Republican Party used to be Democrats until some yahoo name Humphrey, from my state, decided that African Americans should have equal rights. The Democratic Party has a much longer history of racism than the Republicans who, according to many Democrats in the time of Lincoln, had "nigger on the brain."
But the question is...how do we reach out to Kansas? It's a good one and the Tom Frank book is a great start to understanding how "flyover country" (where I live) thinks.
I still contend that Democrats will have just as much of a problem as the elite Republicans will in connecting to these voters and that is why Obama, who spent some of his life there, is starting to lure these folks into his camp.
Whatever Sara. You know nothing about me. I remember that discussion you are referencing like it was yesterday. It was about diversity.
There is nothing wrong with diversity.
There is something wrong with being so diversity-whipped that the police have to go talk to "community leaders" before investigating someone of a different skin color that is suspected of committing a crime. THAT'S what I was talking about. You just let us know if you think things should work that way.
Speaking as somebody who isn't interested in getting into the "you're a nazi and a racist"/"no you're a nazi and a racist" debate, I will simply offer that thus far the campaigns of the two "presumptive nominees" doesn't inspire a great deal of hope for the future. In my book, anyway. Any chance we can get a do-over of the primaries?
While I believe he is more often proving to be the candidate who speaks grounded in the real world, McCain consistently is contradicting that by spouting the most contradictory rubbish about his economic plan that I think I've ever heard. Ultimately I think the entirety of his economic platform relies on the fact that the general population doesn't really know what "earmark" means, and that they are too lazy to go beyond their "earmark = bad" perception. His numbers just don't add up, presumably he knows that, and it seems as if he's just hoping to score enough points in other ways to prevent people from really caring about the realities of his economic "plan".
Simultaneously, Obama seems intent on doing everything he can to blur the line between "fact" and "reality", a disgusting trait that is doing nothing to endear him to those who are actually open-minded in wanting a change in Washington. It seems to me this guy can and should have a 10-15 percentage point lead, given the negative feeling in this country about the last 8 years, yet he's been so busy lately tearing down (he must be reading this blog) that he's spending less and less time trying to build up. He must love the taste of polished patent leather because "open mouth, insert foot" is becoming a daily routine.
Truthfully, I don't know how anybody is excited about either one of these guys.
Well you sure are listening to them Markadelphia. Your credibility has taken a hit recently seeing as you seem to only give half the story so my guess is that you are trying to shift the focus off of your fuckups and onto someone elses. Keep trying.
"you are trying to shift the focus off of your fuckups and onto someone elses. Keep trying."
Actually, sw, that's the mantra of the current crop of conservatives. Mark is one of the most reflective people I know. If he wasn't, my foot would be up his ass on a daily basis.
Actually, sw, that's the mantra of the current crop of conservatives.
As opposed to some mythical conservatives of years gone by?
C'mon tom h., is your moralizing what you consider outreach or are you just circle-jerking?
[p.s. just finishing my second glass of wine tonight, so dont' take it personal]
I'm glas it's only conservatives making statements these days. My statements will no doubt save lives, drop the price of gas, improve health care, educate our children and fill potholes. Whatever GWB and company did to McCain in 2000 we're continuing it this year aren't we! Thank you - I'm off the shortlist of veeps now aren't I?
Juris, what kind of wine?
M, Pinot Grigio (from Costco) - complimented the pork stir-fry.
I'm more of a Pinot Noir or Chianti person myself. If you like Reds, check out Pepperwood Pinot Noir. Very great taste and only 8 bucks a bottle!
I really like the Oregon Pinot Noirs (Drouhin when I can afford it, Bethel Heights and others are more reasonable) - but they're done in small volume, and can be difficult to get (esp east of the Rockies).
Chianti is my favorite for pasta with meat/tomato sauce. Zinfindel is a good fallback.
Have you tried Syrah (the French Rhone reds)?
I haven't tried those in years. I drank some of those quite a bit when I live in France years ago. I will pick one up and give them I try. Thanks!
Post a Comment