The Future of the GOP, the New Media Obsession
There are several articles out there in the last few days about the inevitable reformation of the Republican Party. It’s become the “in” thing for GOP Pundits to deny they had any part whatever in the creation of the ugliness that has permeated their party for so many years. Not one has a sensible notion of how to purge that notion, either.
I got up this morning to the second straight week of Michael Smerconish in the morning Philadelphia Inquirer. As loyal readers may remember, Smerconish, a Republican radio talk show host and columnist, endorsed Barack Obama last week. I went over the top with my headline about Smerconish, wondering if he now hates America. This week Smerconish writes about hundreds of readers who do indeed think he hates America, concluding that there’s a new Republican Party in the future. Not so fast, Mike. Not so fast.
You write about the real ugliness out there in the Republican Party, and even indicate you understand that there are many Republicans who have such a tenuous hold on the concept of Democracy that they don’t think twice about condemning those who don’t agree with them. It shouldn’t surprise you, Mike, that these people were influenced by right wing talk radio over the last 20 years or so. The divisiveness between Americans may in fact extend back to the 60’s, but it is vital that Republcian Pundits Gone Wild, such as yourself, note the media role in the broken political system in this country, your media tole.
I would aver that the raving right wing talking heads like Limbaugh and Coulter and Savage and O’Reilly have helped create a political sphere in our country where anyone can make up anything about a candidate and it will be reported on “fairly,” even if the facts clearly show otherwise. The “Fairness Doctrine” was struck down, and made it possible for stations such as your 1210 to run right wing talkers 24/7, and you’ll admit, I’m sure, that there’s some real whack jobs out there. Rush Limbaugh said earlier this weak he was afraid after Obama comes into office there would never be elections in America again. Give me a freaking break! Talk Radio has developed because of the demise of the Fairness Doctrine, but regular news has swallowed that pill.
In this world there is no reason any media must be “fair” to something that is factually and/or morally wrong. That’s where the media has got it wrong, Michael, your paper more than any. Brian Tierney’s mockery of a response to the Inquirer’s endrosement of Barack Obama was shameful, the Inquirer simply failed to stand tall. Tierny has transformed the Inquirer, clearly, into a place conservatives, and even the whack jobs, know they can get a job, regardless of their moral merit. Pennsylvanians rejected Rick Santorum a couple years ago by the widest margin any incumbent Senator has been defeated in years. I’d argue that Santorum was defeated because his brand of morality, of the government sticking its nose into everyone’s business, was just fine. Santorum is not morally fit for the American people, but he’s fit for Brian Tierney, and he writes a regular column there. Today Brian Tierney had John Yoo, the man who defended torture for the Bush Administration, defended torture for GOD’S Sake, as a new columnist, to, get this, discuss the history of great US Presidents. Many lesser people that Brian Tierney would be able to see that irony. Tierney’s notion of “fairness” is to load up the conservative side of the political spectrum with writers the American have rejected as morally wanting, or in Yoo’s case, insufficiently respectful of our founding documents. That’s not “fairness,” but intellectual dishonesty.
I think it is important to note that Michael Smerconish, while he does not adequately lay the blame for an ugly America, one that can claim he hates America, where it belongs, right in the right wing lap, he does note that he wants to help reinvent the Republcian Party. Here he is from this morning’s Philadelphia Inquirer:
Not all the correspondence I received was hatriolic. There were a few like-minded Republicans who think John McCain has ceded too much ground to the periphery of our party to get elected.
These are the folks I’m hoping are ready to begin a battle for the future of the Republican Party. I want to advance a suburban manifesto as a means of expanding the tent of the GOP. It calls for remaining tough on Islamic fundamentalists while staying out of people’s personal lives and rejecting the electoral strategy of using social issues to stoke the base.
There are many of us who were appalled by efforts to have the federal government determine Terri Schiavo’s end-of-life plan, who want to find room in our party for pro-life and choice views and believe that what two guys do in their bedroom is their own business. We’re tired of the “liberal” or “conservative” labeling game, and find “reasonable” a better descriptor.
Which is why I won’t be bullied by the nasty, doctrinaire types who’ve had a stranglehold on the GOP for far too long. My work is just beginning.
Pardon, Michael, but you don’t make a very good Don Quixote. You’ve stacked up quite a goal there, but I’m not sure you’re going to have anyone joining you in the good fight to save the Republican Party. Really, Michael, there are people out there who think Sarah Palin is the future.
Now I take this notion of reforming the Republican Party seriously. Heck, all weekend I’ve been looking for an approach to discussing the topic, and Michael Smerconish has given me one. I do believe the Republican Party should be reformed. I’d like to see the hate and vitriol leeched out of the political discussion in American, and as Smerconish notes, the way to do that is for the Republican Party to abandon the divisive social issues it so feeds on, abortion, gay marriage, sex education in schools. Oh, this rebellion in the Sarah Palin camp may well be a prelude to a revolt in the Republican Party, but it’s going to take more than a few Republican bigwigs to either start or finish this fight. Frankly, I respect the power of the extremists of the social issue persuasion. They are not going to give in on their ugly campaigns, they will continue to demonize liberals, and from that group will spring more racist hoaxes, more homegrown terrorists, and more evil Pastors.
You’ve got a lot of cleaning up to do to get the Republican House in order, and I’m beginning to wonder if it is worth it. Perhaps the best solution we could have is that the extremists on the Christian right, the group that has the Republican Party in thrall, leave the party. That might leave the Republican with all six of its moderates, though John Sununu and Gordon Smith may not be among them. But of the real people in this country, there is a hunger, I think, for a Republican Party that is far more Goldwater and far less Falwell. Far more calm facts and far less screaming talk radio hate jocks. That needs to be acknowledged by people like Michael Smerconish before any sense of a rebuilding of the Republican Party can begin.
I’m not counting on Smerconish to “get it” any more than I would count of Rush Limbaugh to get it.
It’s about time that the GOP started cleaning house of its weird and unwholesome associations for once.
The sooner, the better.
Even if it means a split of the sort brought about by “the Winona Speech” of 1909 as may have indirectly translated into Woodrow Wilson’s election to the Presidency in 1912.
DON’T FALL FOR THE SWEET TALK!!!
TEN COMPELLING REASONS TO VOTE MCCAIN
1. CHECK ON LIBERAL CONGRESS. The only way the liberal Congress will be checked at all is if McCain gets elected. Otherwise Pelosi, Dodd, and Frank(the very same people who contributed greatly to the current crisis through resisting reforms to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and pushing “affordable housing” to those who weren’t credit worthy) will have unchecked freedom to cause further economic havoc and impose irresponsible, unaffordable spending programs on this country(we’ve had a Democratic Congress for the last two years and frankly they’ve done a terrible job—-the last thing we need to do is to give them unchecked power)
2. OBAMA TAX POLICIES WILL TURN CRISIS INTO CATASTROPHE Obama, despite his promises, will turn a crisis into a catastrophe if his economic policies are implemented. This will not help the average “Joe”. Raising taxes in a weak economy is the worst possible economic policy one can do. In 1932, for example,(in an effort eerily similar to the rationale Obama is using) Congress raised taxes on the wealthy and the result was an 8 point jump in unemployment. Moreover, taking money from the pool of funds job creators have means less money to pay wages, less money to pay health care and other benefits, and less jobs. What good is a $500.00 government check if the tax punishment meted out by Obama on your boss forces your boss to cut salaries, health care benefits, raise prices on consumers or, in the worst case scenario, close the business?
3. REAL OBAMA VIEWS MIDDLE CLASS AS “BITTER CLINGERS” AND OBAMA’S JOE THE PLUMBER ENCOUNTER SHOWS HIS TRUE DISDAIN FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS We’ve seen evidence of what Obama really thinks about the average “Joe” and it isn’t encouraging or pretty. Remember Obama’s remarks that Pennsylvanians were “bitter clingers to guns and religion”. These remarks were made when Obama wasn’t expecting them to be recopied(they thus represent the real Obama). And why should we be surprised at this elitist worldview given the fact Obama is a Ivy League lawyer who spent 20 years in the hate filled church of Jeremiah Wright? Further, look at Obama’s appalling treatment of “Joe” the Plumber. “Joe” is an average guy who wants to buy a business but his dreams can not happen under the Obama tax plan because Obama takes away any incentive to gross more than $250,000.00 in income. And both Obama and Biden essentially mocked “Joe the Plumber” once they learned he was probably a McCain supporter. They and the media made sure(within a days time) that this average “Joe” would have numerous embarrassing details about his life exposed worldwide in an effort to discredit him. And why, all because(when Obama came to his house—he didn’t seek out Obama—Obama sought him out) he dared to ask a reasonable straightforward question that any private citizen should be able to ask their President? Vote for other Democrats if you like(except Murtha who in my view shares the same elitist worldview as demonstrated by his comments Pennsylvanians are “racists” and “rednecks”) but we don’t need more elitists like Obama in leadership positions.
4. DEMOCRATIC PARTY LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CURRENT CRISIS. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, and Barney Frank, and ACORN have pushed for the “affordable housing” policies that have encouraged or pressured banks into making loans to poor minorities and whites who weren’t credit worthy. These bad loans are at the root of the current crisis(not “deregulation” as Obama demogogically claims—there was little to no financial “deregulation” under Bush—in fact even more financial regulation in the form of Sarbanes Oxley—and Gramm Leach Bliley was under Clinton and may have helped the current crisis by making mergers between commercial and investment banks easier). Obama and Dodd were the top two recipients of Fannie Mae campaign contributions. Obama also picked Jim Johnson(former Fannie Mae executive) to lead his vice presidential team. According to the Washington Post, one of Obama’s economic advisers is Franklin Raines(another Fannie Mae executive who in Raines’ case raked in 90 million dollars from Fannie Mae). Obama represented ACORN, trained ACORN workers, he and Ayers gave $200,000 to ACORN, Obama’s campaign gave $800,000.00 to ACORN, the Democrats included a grant for ACORN in the original bailout bill and ACORN intimidated many banks into giving bad loans to minorities with discrimination lawsuits. John McCain, in contrast, called for reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, and Dodd, resisted those reforms. Bush called for numerous reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the Democrats also opposed these reforms. So why in the world, given the fact the Democrats largely caused this crisis, would we want to put Obama, Dodd, Reid, Pelosi, and Frank in total unchecked command of the country?
5. HEALTH CARE PLAN DISASTROUS On health care, Obama’s plan is unaffordable and will lead to a total collapse of the system ultimately. Obama wants a single payer system(he doesn’t say that now outwardly but that’s what he wants—-in 2003 in a speech before the AFL-CIO he said he favored a single payer system—-further his plan will ultimately lead to single payer because private insurers will be crowded out of the market—-they will be subject to costly new mandates and won’t be able to compete with Obama’s government subsidized plan) And single payer is an abject disaster and the the worst possible choice for health care. Why? For one thing, if you have single payer, you never get rid of it and you have no other option if you don’t like the way the single payer treats you. Further, in single payer countries like Canada, you have enormous wait lines(many Canadians flock to the US for care because of these wait lines), health care gets rationed(the government covers less because they have to in order to cut costs), and quality doctors leave the system(because they are paid low wages under single payer systems or less than they could make elsewhere). So Obama’s health care plan will not only not help the average “Joe”, his single payer dream will only lead to further hardship for the average “Joe” and a collapse of the system.
6. OBAMA ENERGY PLAN LEADS TO GREATER, NOT LESS DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL On energy, Obama’s energy policies will do next to nothing to help this country achieve “energy indepedence”. The last time a “windfall profits tax” was imposed(under Carter) our dependence on foreign oil grew and this happened because the windfall profits tax kills innovation on the part of oil companies(why should they drill more if they can’t make any profits from more drilling because Obama will take the money away) Moreover, Obama and the Democrats have historically railed against more drilling(Obama even scoffed we could save more energy by inflating our tires than we could gain from drilling for more oil) and nuclear power(two energy sources which are critical to helping us lessen dependence on foreign oil) so McCain and Palin are much more reliable in terms of drilling for more oil and building more nuclear power plants. Biden also said he and Obama wouldn’t build any “clean coal” plants. You should also note Obama wants to keep gas prices high(in fact he said he wasn’t upset about the fact gas prices rose, only that they rose too fast). Keeping gas prices high certainly doesn’t help the average “Joe”. And Obama also favors keeping gas taxes high while McCain has favored suspending the gas tax in the summer. The gas tax clearly hurts the average “Joe” because everyone has to buy gas(regardless of income level) yet it is McCain, not Obama, who is willing to give the average “Joe” the tax relief.
7. OBAMA FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE There is also no reason to believe Obama will be more fiscally responsible than McCain. McCain has proposed a spending freeze while Obama propses a trillion dollars in new spending. The resulting debt burden created by these spending programs will place an incredible burden and yoke on future generations. McCain is much more likely to keep spending in check.
8. MCCAIN MORE EXPERIENCED. OBAMA’S FOREIGN POLICY DISASTROUS In terms of foreign affairs, McCain has 26 years experience, Obama has 2. And Biden’s experience shows he has made the wrong judgment numerous times so he can’t be counted on to offer much help to Obama(after 9/11 Biden proposed giving $200 million to Iran—-a ridiculous idea, Biden also proposed partitioning Iraq—an idea Iraqis almost unanimously rejected, Biden and Obama opposed the surge while McCain’s judgment was vindicated on the surge). In terms of an unsteady hand, Obama has certainly shown an unsteady hand with his foreign policy gaffes already(e.g. wrong on the surge, 3 different answers on the Georgia situation, talking with dictators “without preconditions”, invading Pakistan). And, more recently, Biden said Obama would experience an international crisis if elected because he’s so inexperienced and that “America hang with us because our response won’t seem to be the right one”. There’s no evidence therefore Obama is capable of handling foreign policy crises better than McCain.
9. PALIN MOST EXPERIENCED ON ENERGY ISSUES, PALIN AT LEAST AS EXPERIENCED AS OBAMA In terms of Palin, Palin has at least as much experience than Obama. And on the critical energy issues, it is Palin who arguably has the most experience and knowledge of ALL the candidates on energy issues(because Palin was an oil and gas regulator, her husband has worked in the oil business, Palin negotiated the natural gas pipeline deal in Alaska, and Palin has lectured and given speeches on energy issues). Palin also hasn’t been given a fair shake by the media so if you’re relying on CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, or the New York Times for your information on Palin, you are not, in my view, getting a fair picture of her. You should know that in the ABC interview Palin had, portions of it were edited out and were not shown to the public(these edited out portions would have made her answers appear more complete).
10. OBAMA’S ALLIANCES RAISE CRITICAL DOUBTS ABOUT HIS JUDGMENT AND SHOW HE LIKELY HAS RADICAL POLITICAL LEANINGS. And I haven’t even discussed Obama’s numerous alliances with radicals, party hacks or corrupt individuals such as
a) Reverend Wright
b) Bill Ayers/ACORN
c) Tony Rezko
d) Rashid Khalidi
e) Khalid al Monsour
f) Stroger
g) Richard Daley
h) Father Pfleger
Ten compelling reasons to vote McCain over Obama.