Smart Conservatives draw a line in the sand
When I first typed that headline, I accidentally wrote, “Smart conservatives draw a line in the sane.”
I very nearly let the typo stand, because that’s what it looks like a growing number of pundits and activists on the right are doing, or trying to do.
Over the last week, in the kind of rolling narrative that suggests a tipping point has been reached, some of the nation’s smartest and most influential conservatives are demanding some coherence and common-sense from Republican candidates.
The main provocation for this common-sense backlash was Fox commentator and ostensible 2012 presidential nominee Mike Huckabee’s fact-free claim that President Barack Obama grew up in Kenya.
Huckabee went on to embrace the claim — widely held in fringe conservative circles — that Mr. Obama was shaped by some sort of radical, anti-colonialist African world-view.
He later “corrected” himself, claiming that the President grew up in Indonesia, a claim which is equally false.
“I have said many times, publicly, that I do think he has a different world view,” Huckabee argued.
“Most of us grew up going to Boy Scout meetings, and you know, our communities were filled with rotary clubs, not madrassas.”
It wouldn’t mean much if a blogger like myself once again pointed out all the utter nonsense in Huckabee’s he’s-not-one-of-us narrative.
But this time, it’s the conservative world that reacted with appropriate spleen.
Mark McKinnon, the political strategist who worked for George W. Bush and John McCain, wrote in the Daily Beast that Huckabee had “really stepped in it,” adding “I only wish I could believe it was entirely accidental.”
He went on to accuse the former Arkansas governor of “character assassination.”
Writing in the journal Commentary, respected conservative thinker Peter Wehner described the kind of claims that Huckabee is making as “politically discrediting.”
How about starting today, Republicans and conservatives accept the following two propositions:
Barack Obama was born in the United States and he’s a Christian. He may be wrong on a vast array of public policy issues, as I believe he is; and his animating philosophy (contemporary liberalism) may be defective in all sorts of ways.
But he not an alien, nor is he a Muslim, nor can his views be explained by Kenyan anti-colonialism. To argue otherwise, or even to hint otherwise, is irresponsible.
Writing in the Washington Post, George Will expanded his field of fire to include former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who has said and written similar nonsense about the President’s past.
If pessimism is not creeping on little cat’s feet into Republicans’ thinking about their 2012 presidential prospects, that is another reason for pessimism.
Will went on to describe Gingrich and Huckabee as “careless, delusional, egomaniacal, spotlight-chasing candidates to whom the sensible American majority would never entrust a lemonade stand, much less nuclear weapons.”
Ouch.
The problem, of course, is that a growing number of polls show that the GOP’s hard-core conservative base believes — and wants to hear their favored candidates embracing — this kind of creepy stuff.
Huckabee was only echoing the toxic idiom of the right’s most vocal and influential cheerleaders, from Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck to Michael Savage and Michel Malkin.
As they chase the Republican nomination, even very serious Republican candidates will be sorely tempted to dip a toe into those murky waters.
But perhaps this week’s conservative commentaries have begun to chart a different, and more responsible, path.
As always, your comments welcome.
Tags: politics
Agree. Hope too that the Republican leaders are now mature enough to avoid the 1994 Government shut down theatrics. Time is a wastin’, guys. Republican and Democrat alike, take another look at that Simpson-Bowles Deficit Reduction Report and tell me how you are going address the tough issues.
I’m not counting on political rhetoric getting sensible, logical or sane anytime in the immediate future. I wish it would. I’d like to hear someone propose solutions to problems when they stand up to speak not just verbally flail at the current administration. PBS ran a profile of former Senator Alan Simpson this last week. It was refreshing to hear someone who was conservative but rational. The two don’t seem to go together anymore.
Don’t count on it. Today’s Republican Party is perfectly capable of nominating a candidate for 2012 that will send moderates and a majority of independents running for the exits. Furthermore, after the Obama administration took a shellacking for not doing enough about jobs, the Republican Congress seems prepared to raise any and every issue except job creation. Are these people fit to govern? Are they going to take us off the cliff intentionally or through some miscalculation? Meantime, the contrast with the calm, steady, demeanor of the President is reassuring and striking.
Too much focus on national political personalities and not enough focus on its effect on the North Country.
The polling that I have seen over the last year or so seems to indicate that the president is personally more popular than his policies. And, those personal approval ratings bounce around the 50% mark. While there is a sizable minority that dislike him, it would seem that those folks would never vote for him in 2012, regardless who the Republicans run. So, strategically, it seems to make little sense to attack President Obama on the basis of his “un-Americanism” (which I would argue most Americans reject) rather than his policies. In addition, I beleieve that these personal attacks grate on many and may in fact diminish a candidate that embraces or even tolerates them.
It is truly sad that this is actually a topic of discussion. Remember the good old days when the lunatic fringe consisted of some nuts on the Left and the John Birch Society?
It was kind of fun when people who were clearly not attached to reality were “local color” not contenders for the head of the Republican Party.
There is the Republican Party and then there are these media types. It is not a clear cut connection at all, it may more be a sign of our obsession with fame and media over what is actually happening and what people actually believe. These guys are pundits that’s it, they are not in office, they don’t do anything except talk on t.v., it seems like we spend too much time on them.
There is a blurring of “media types” and Republicans when past and potential candidates like Huckabee, Palin, and Gingrich work for a media outlet. There are also politicians like Bachmann who voice these same sentiments. The argument that this blather just comes from talking heads doesn’t stand up to inspection. I would just reiterate that it is counterproductive to a discussion of the real issues in any event and that it won’t play well with the general public over time.
I agree. It makes the Republican Party and Conservatives in general look cheap, unsubstantial and not very bright. They have to get away from this reality t.v. style idea, Glenn Beck is not a real person he is a man with an act who sits on a t.v. set, he is entertainment. The fact that Republicans have to worry about him at all shows how far they have fallen.
I actually wish we could have the John Birch Society, they actually believed something, these guys on t.v. are just shills. They are not real leaders in any sense, leaders have something to lose, they put themselves out there, these guys just make money by spouting things. Even old Ronald Reagan who came from media had the courage of his convictions and ran for numerous office’s.
Huckabee is an idiot. That was established some time back folks. As for the rest, gee, where was all this outrage when liberals were spouting absolutely insane rhetoric about the last administration? The talking heads, be they Huckabee or Rosie O’Donnell/ Charlie Sheen/ Sean Penn/Keith Olbermann/Ed Shultz/ Mike Malloy/ Tom Hartman/ Rachel Maddow/ Randi Rhodes, etc. are all out to sensationalize and twist things to their benefit. “Facts” get blurred or even disregarded entirely when you are desperate to remain relevant. We choose who we want to believe and that goes for both sides of the isle. I find there’s usually an element of truth in both sides, how it’s viewed is what differs.
I’m sure Obama is a nice guy. So was Bill Clinton from all reports. That doesn’t mean I think Obama has our best interest at heart of that I’d leave my wife alone with a scumbag like Clinton or any other guy who had allegations of rape in his past. Kinda goes with the lemonade stand comment. I don’t care where Obama was born beyond the fact that it’s a requirement to serve and he’s spent millions, or his people have, hiding as much as possible about his past. Jeeze, you had clearly falsified documents about Bushs service produced by the left. Where did you guys stand on that? You had 8 years of investigation of his service record, charges he and Cheny took down the Towers and knew 9/11 was coming, was personally responsible for the levees bursting in N.O. Is that anymore inane than people who wonder why his grandmother says she was there in Kenya for his birth?!
Good Lord folks, I can accept my views may be different from yours, that’s fine. But look in the stupid mirror once in a while, eh?
I am shocked that Republicans are manipulating the fears and biases of the electorate for political gain. Uh-huh, totally shocked!
Bret, come up for some air.
I don’t disagree with your criticism of left wingnut commentary but the fact is that there are politicians and potential presidential candidates (Huckabee, Palin, Gingrich, Bachmann) who have taken a position on Obama’s un-Americanism. There are others like Boehner, Cantor and McConnell who are unwilling to be critical of those who try to delegitimize him as foreign born, a Muslim and anti-U.S.
I’m sure if someone tried hard enough they could find a democratic politician who may have claimed Bush and Cheney instigated 9/11 (although I’m not aware of one) or who said Bush was responsible for levees, but I don’t think anyone of national stature adopted that position. The criticism of the handling of Katrina was more akin to that of the handling of the oil spill and was to some degree bipartisan. In both cases, I think the criticism was fair game.
It’s also worth noting that those who made claims about Bush’s service record (Rather and his producer) were not politicians and they were fired.
I don’t like to be cast as an apologist for liberal talking heads. I firmly believe that the Michael Moores, Keith Olbermanns, and Ed Schultzes of the world only legitimize the right wing idealogues and that both camps do very little to advance the cause of thoughtful analysis. However, the blurring of media and politics on the issue of presidential legitimacy is in my mind a different kettle of fish.
But J-Bell that is what Democrats need to be careful of, disdain for the electorate, as if they were children who could be easily manipulated and must somehow be guided and taught by the educated elite.
Bill, Brians article mentioned more than just politicians. That’s why I went with more than just Dems that went overboard over the 8 years Bush was in office. As far as having to search for things just look at the complete pass Nagan and Landreau got for their inaction in N.O. Things like that just cement my belief the left/Democrats and absolutely no different then the right/Republicans. It’s all in perception, political view and what appeals to your gut. All of us do the same thing, we make a judgment call on what we hear or read. It’s 99% gut call, you have a bias to start with and go from there. Look at J Bels post above, shocked, eh? Were we shocked when Democrats were saying Republicans wanted the elderly to eat dog food? Were we shocked when Democrats said Reagan wanted to start WW3? Comon’, it’s the same thing. We had a TV show called “That’s my Bush” IIRC that ridiculed everything Bush did. Today when the right points out Obamas goofs and gaffs we’re called racist hate mongers. Same thing, different view point.
Bill what is interesting is that among those people you mention only Bachmann actually holds a political office. Bohner, Cantor and McConnell are all in government and have to make things happen, they have to do things and they have to take responsibility. Something the flame thowers are not burdened with.
I see I have hit a sore spot. I think you have to look at the narrative each side follows. Right now, the Republican narrative is all about hate and fear. The Democrats try to appeal to hope and unity. There are too many times when both sides name call and say things that are just over the top. That aside, the Republicans are the ones who want to cut food stamps, unemployment benefits, and the social safety net anyway they can. In Arizona, the Republican governor and legislature have cut off Medicaid clients access to life saving surgery. The anti-abortion party wants to cut programs like WIC and Head Start. I could give dozens of example like this but I have made my point.
I don’t know it sounds like talking points to me, MSNBC is not much different from FOX, just with less ratings, Republican narrative about hate and fear, give me a break.
My issue is that there is a pattern of whacky efforts to question the legitimacy of the President of the USA. That effort didn’t begin with Obama and isn’t restricted to the right wing of the political spectrum. The same types of attacks were made on Bush and Clinton. I believe that this type of attack undermines meaningful political discourse. Efforts of the other side to question the legitimacy of its elected leaders, particularly the President, is a recipe for disaster. I’m not a polyanna, but I do think that anything that detracts from fact-based, thoughtful analysis is a detriment to solving the real problems we face and that calling those who engage in spurious claims to task is a good thing.
The country is at a watershed moment. Major issues that have been swept under the rug for a decade or more, such as healthcare and public employee pensions, are staring us in the face. So, silly claims of the president being an America hater or a Muslim are nothing less than inexcusable distractions.
If you want to criticize, do so on the issues not some emotional level tripe.
J Bel, yeah, right, hope and unity. Thats why Our Beloved Leader advised his people to bring a gun to a knife fight, referred to the right as “enemies” and said we had to move to the back of the bus, etc. Perception, it’s all in your perception.
Incidentally, there’s a big diff between cutting off all the social safety net and reducing fraud, abuse, waste and duplication and moving to a more efficient and responsible safety net, preferably one that places more responsibility on the individual so that society doesn’t end up paying for his mistakes.
It has nothing to do with my perceptions by which I take it you mean ideological bias. Last week, for example, the Republican majority in the House voted down a change in the law that would have ended the subsidy paid by the US taxpayer to the oil companies. The oil companies have received $30+ billion in subsidies in the last 10 years. As a result of this vote by the Republicans, the oil companies will receive $4 billion in government subsidies this year. Another Republican example of sharing the sharing the pain?
As for your quotes, as I said before, both sides tend to deal in hyperbole. Government by sound bite will get us nowhere. It obscures issues rather than clarifying and solving them.
And, yes, hope and change. Hope for a better future and change to achieve that better future.
I have no problem agreeing with you on that specific item. But if we want to go that route then we need to look at the “porkish” items Dems vote for. Do we want to play that game? It’s a waste of time. So let me bring your post back on line- subsidies to oil companies, or anyone else for that matter, are part of the problem. Pork, entitlements, waste, fraud, abuse. It’s all part of what is driving us into bankruptcy. You want to blame Republicans and call then hateful, fine. I might agree depending on the specific subject. But you can’t say that about them an ignore the Dems when they act the same way.
There isn’t enough difference between politicians of the 2 major parties
to say so. I’d much prefer to deal with an open socialist like Bernie Sanders than a so called Republican that says one thing and does another. It may be polarizing, but at least it’s honest.
“Pork, entitlements, waste, fraud, abuse” are no doubt make up a very large part of the problem. I would add redundancy. The number of agencies doing the same thing is astounding and this is true on federal, state, and local level. Another large part is outright theft. Estimates run as high as 20% of all Medicare billings are for services never delivered or not medically necessary. Lastly, the feds don’t even keep track of our money. Billions have disappeared in Iraq and Afghanistan.
As, far as the parties, neither has dealt with these problems or seems interested in doing so.
I’ve argued the redundancy issue before. Just this week the CBO came out with a report on redundant programs. What our gov’t does about it remains to be seen.
I didn’t mean to pick on you so much as to use your post to help illustrate the blinders we all wear.