Category: Republicans

Strange Patriotism

Josh Schrei has a very thoughtful post up that aims to blow up the flawed perception that Republican views are normative for defining patriotism, while Democratic views are somehow unpatriotic. Based in large part on Josh’s time working on the NASCAR circuit and experiencing these memes first-hand in debates with people across the country, he identifies several of the central falsehoods that underly the “Republicans are more patriotic” narrative. It’s a long post worthy of repeated readings, but here are the bullet points that Schrei takes down:

1. Wanting smaller government = being more patriotic
2. Rekindling the rebelliousness of the confederacy = being more patriotic
3. Questioning your nation’s foreign policy = being less patriotic
4. Being an intellectual = being less patriotic

These are insidious, pervasive narratives that underlie the key to much of the contemporary Republican Party’s argument to voters. Needless to say, Schrei’s rebuttals are powerful and accurate.  Rather than quote them here, I hope you will just go read the original post.

Things Mike Johanns Quit

Check out Things Mike Johanns Quit…, a hilarious new site on the Republican Nebraska Senate candidate who has a nasty reputation of quitting on the job. Here’s one example:

The Unfinished Death Star

That’s right. A little known fact about Mike Johanns was that as Secretary of Agriculture for the Bush Administration is that he was charged with construction of the a weapon so powerful even Dick Cheney trembled at its sight.

However, with only months left until the project was completed, Mike Johanns vacated his post to run for United States Senator leaving an opening for the Rebel Alliance to destroy the unfinished Death Star and defeat the Empire once and for all.

Hopefully, Mike Johanns will have failed us for the last time.

I’ve also heard that Mike Johanns quit moving the Dodgers back to Brooklyn, quit mending that fence over there, and gave up solving the Jack the Ripper murders.

American Anti-Intellectualism

My friend Josh Schrei recently launched The Schrei Wire and is kicking things off with some searing commentary on the McCain-Palin ticket and the dangerous encroachment of outright anti-intellectualism at the highest levels of American politics.

There’s a simple reason why the years after anti-intellectual purges aren’t fun. Because intellectuals matter. It really shouldn’t even need to be said, but frighteningly in the current political climate, it does.

Obviously no-one in the United States is overtly advocating violence against the intellectual elite, but in metaphorical and increasingly real terms, the Republicans are waging a war pitting middle American ‘Joe Six Pack’ and ‘Hockey Moms’ against coastal elitists with Harvard degrees. Sarah Palin is the personification of this, taking George Bush’s strategy of ‘everyday speak’ to even greater heights (or lows) than George ever did. Apparently, in the Karl Rove strategy book, ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’, so much so that now the war of ‘everyday America’ vs. ‘the smart people’ is absolutely central to Republican electoral strategy.

There should be no underestimating how dangerous and toxic this strategy is. By simultaneously gutting the very educational and social programs that support and sustain ‘Joe six pack’ with one hand and with the other creating a vitriolic culture in which those who actually are educated are seen as ‘other’ and therefore not worthy of governing, the Republican party is toying with the future of this country in ways that can and will cause irrevocable damage.

We all might laugh or cringe when Sarah Palin talks about being ‘five weeks on the job’ and bringing ‘Joe Six pack’ into the white house or describes herself as a ‘pitbull with lipstick.’

What we should be is very, very afraid.

…

A nation such as ours, founded on a very heady document written by some very smart and very well educated people, should never, ever shy away from electing scholars as president. We have, and we should, embrace it.

There are two saving graces here. One is that thinking Republicans are actually starting to realize the danger that Palin — and the campaign of class war that she represents — poses to their party and are becoming more and more vocal about it.

The other is that everyday Americans have suffered the most at the hands of the current administration and many of them realize it. Hopefully more will.

Schrei goes on to make a Tom Frank-esq observation that the end result of Republican driven popular anti-intellectualism is a negative impact on those who vote for it. He speculates that electoral defeat of Palinism at the hands of Barack Obama could recenter the Republican Party and renew their Party in a more thoughtful direction.

I am not optimistic that electoral defeat will derail the path the GOP is on. The Rove-Bush-Palin chain has been successful in energizing their base for eight years. In the face of a plummeting economy, there will be a greater value in political parties embracing populist rhetoric, not a reduced one. The GOP isn’t about to start winning elections talking about corporatism and increased global hegemony — they have to rely on the culture war. And in many respects, Palinism is the addition of a strong dose of anti-intellectualism to the traditional Republican sour brew of “God, Guns, & Gays.” If anything, I expect the GOP to stir the muck even more as they face off against President Obama. It will be ugly and I shudder to think as to how deep the rabbit hole (as Schrei describes in other countries) could really go.

Ted’s Been Preparing for Jail for A While

The prosecution in Theodore Stevens’ federal corruption case has played audio tapes of Stevens talking about the possible consequences of what he was under investigation for. The transcripts are remarkable. Reuters:

“These guys can’t hurt really us. They’re not going to shoot us. It’s not Iraq. What the hell?,” Stevens told Bill Allen, founder of the former VECO Corp. oil-services firm based in Alaska.

Stevens is charged with lying on Senate disclosure forms from 2001 to 2006 to conceal more than $250,000 in renovations to his property and other gifts provided by VECO.

“The worst that can happen to us is we run up a bunch of legal fees, and might lose and we might have to pay a fine, might have to serve a little time in jail. I hope to Christ it never gets to that, and I don’t think it will,” Stevens said.

It’s harder to adequately state how remarkable it is that a sitting Senator would casually discuss the likelihood that his behavior would lead to “a little time in jail.” I suppose if it’s just “a little time” it’s not bad, right? I mean, if they’re not shooting Stevens (like they would in Iraq???), it’s hardly anything to worry about.

I’ve been following this case closely for a long while, but this strikes me as some of the most damning evidence against Stevens. He knew he could go to jail for what he did. If you know you might go to jail for your actions, it’s hard to plead ignorance when asked about your actions. Stevens is in deep trouble.

Disclosure: Most readers of Hold Fast likely know this, but until recently I served as Online Communications Director for Mark Begich, Ted Stevens’ opponent for the Alaska Senate seat. I am no longer connected to the Begich campaign in any way; these views are mine and mine alone.

The Zellification of Joe Lieberman

Joe Lieberman is about to go fully Zell Miller on the Democratic Party. Though in fairness to Zell, he just retired and Joe is embracing the GOP while serving in the US Senate as a self-proclaimed independent-Democrat.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), the Democratic Party’s 2000 vice presidential nominee, is leaving open the possibility of giving a keynote address on behalf of Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) at the Republican National Convention in September.

Republicans close to the McCain campaign say Lieberman’s appearance at the convention, possibly before a national primetime audience, could help make the case that the presumptive GOP nominee has a record of crossing the aisle. That could appeal to much-needed independent voters.

<!– if (!document.phpAds_used) document.phpAds_used = ','; phpAds_random = new String (Math.random()); phpAds_random = phpAds_random.substring(2,11); document.write ("”); //–>

<br>

McCain has yet to ask Lieberman to speak, either in primetime or elsewhere, at the convention. But if McCain thinks it will help make his case for the White House, as some of his allies suspect, Lieberman would be willing to speak on his behalf.

“If Sen. McCain, who I support so strongly, asked me to do it, if he thinks it will help him, I will,” Lieberman said in a brief interview.

Steve M. at No More Mister Nice Blog frames the situation and needed response well:

This is bad because the speech won’t be Zell Miller, it will be Zell Miller plus. The plus is the fact that the press — still — treats Lieberman as the cuddly, adorable, highly appealing independent (I almost typed “maverick”) who’ll make swing voters sit up and take notice…

Endless repetition of the notion that support from Lieberman equals support from a Democrat makes it seem true.

That’s why, well before this speech happens, the Obama campaign needs to neutralize Lieberman. Obama needs to make sure that everyone in American realizes that that elfin, soft-spoken, apparently nice guy is possibly the biggest apologist in America for a war the vast majority of the country hates. Obama needs to portray him as a dishonest faux-naif who acts shocked, shocked, when anyone dares to suggest that he’s exactly what he is, a Republican apparatchik still pretending not to be one.

Will that happen? I doubt it. But if it doesn’t, this speech will do real damage.

I think this is a spot-on assessment and I just don’t see Democrats doing what is needed to inoculate themselves from Lieberman.

Lieberman has been actively campaigning for John McCain since December 2007. He is willing to support Republican incumbent Chris Shays in the CT-04 against Democratic challenger Jim Himes. He has not, to my knowledge, endorsed a single Democrat this cycle. And now he sits on the verge of being a key speaker at the Republican National Convention.
The real question at hand is, what does it take to get someone kicked out of the Democratic caucus?

Republican Candidate Showing Netroots Savvy

Dean Barker of Blue Hampshire had an interesting email exchange with a Republican challenger to Paul Hodes (NH-02) and was given permission to publish it. Jim Steiner responded to a post by Dean on FISA and the exchange is interesting. They disagree on FISA and Dean had been cutting in his initial response to Steiner’s telecom immunity stance. One line stood out from the exchange. Steiner wrote:

I enjoy the approach you take, even in chiding me (or I would not read it), as you do so with a sarcastic vein of humor that is nonetheless accurate about my positions, and who I am, even if you (incorrectly) have reason to disagree.  One cannot ask for anything more from someone reflecting: (1) my position; and (2) addressing your own position with respect to my analysis.  Thank you for how you address the issues, as your post indicates at least a respect for acknowledging where I come from.

This is an impressive understanding of what Dean was doing as a blogger. I think Democratic candidates for office could take a lesson from Steiner on engaging directly with the bloggers who write about them.

I also think it’s interesting to see a Republican candidate doing direct outreach to a Democratic blog that will be actively working against him if Steiner is the GOP nominee for the NH-02. I wonder the extent to which that’s a quirk of New Hampshire’s fairly moderate, bipartisan political slant or something that we can expect to see more campaigns do in the future as bloggers like Dean become established political outlets in their home states.