"Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult"

www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779

It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe. This trend has several implications, none of them pleasant.

"Over the last four decades, the Republican Party has transformed from a loyal opposition into an insurrectionary party that flouts the law when it is in the majority and threatens disorder when it is the minority. It is the party of Watergate and Iran-Contra, but also of the government shutdown in 1995 and the impeachment trial of 1999. If there is an earlier American precedent for today's Republican Party, it is the antebellum Southern Democrats of John Calhoun who threatened to nullify, or disregard, federal legislation they objected to and who later led the fight to secede from the union over slavery."

To those millions of Americans who have finally begun paying attention to politics and watched with exasperation the tragicomedy of the debt ceiling extension, it may have come as a shock that the Republican Party is so full of lunatics. To be sure, the party, like any political party on earth, has always had its share of crackpots, like Robert K. Dornan or William E. Dannemeyer. But the crackpot outliers of two decades ago have become the vital center today: Steve King, Michele Bachman (now a leading presidential candidate as well), Paul Broun, Patrick McHenry, Virginia Foxx, Louie Gohmert, Allen West. The Congressional directory now reads like a casebook of lunacy.

This comes as no surprise to anyone identifying with the ideals of the Tea Party. I would like to know what a former Democrat operative has to say about that party as well. It sure ain't what it used to be, either.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


looks like a false flag to me

this republican congress is as lunatic as any insanity the european political system ever came up with, no doubt.
following fox news as if their insanity was gospel for these loosers.

an alliance of bizarro religeous groups, scoundrels working for the criminals fleecing america, racist whites, and you might have a majority.

especially since obama has failed to stand up to insanity, giving people no hope of a better choice.

a plague on their house, may all who supports these criminals go bankrupt, and may history burry this human garbage.

my honest opinion and hope for future generations.

reply to post by citizen6511

an alliance of bizarro religeous groups, scoundrels working for the criminals fleecing america, racist whites, and you might have a majority

Sans "religeous" and "might", substitute "racist whites" with "racists", and that comment would fit the "majority" that elected Mr. Obama perfectly!

Well done!

See ya,
Milt

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by citizen6511

 

an alliance of bizarro religeous groups, scoundrels working for the criminals fleecing america, racist whites, and you might have a majority

Sans "religeous" and "might", substitute "racist whites" with "racists", and that comment would fit the "majority" that elected Mr. Obama perfectly!

Well done!

See ya,
Milt

edit on 10-9-2011 by BenReclused because: Add a few words

obama won the election because the country was in such bad shape the voters wanted a change.
without the economy and the wars he would not have been electable.

now voters would get rid of obama, but everyone is scared the republicans will come up with a worst candidate.
meaning no choice at all.

i'd like to see both obama and the republican congress gone.

reply to post by citizen6511

obama won the election because the country was in such bad shape the voters wanted a change.

I disagree:
1) A significant number of voters chose Mr. Obama because they felt he was of their own race.

2) A significant number of voters chose Mr. Obama because they always vote "Democrat", regardless of who their candidate is.

3) A significant number of voters chose Mr. Obama because they felt it was the "politically correct" thing to do.

4) A FEW voters chose Mr. Obama because they actually did believe in his promise of "Hope and Change".

without the economy and the wars he would not have been electable.

That's ironic, isn't it? Now they are both much, much, worse!

now voters would get rid of obama

That's the BEST news I have heard in a long, long, time!

everyone is scared the republicans will come up with a worst candidate

I'm not! I truly doubt that's possible!

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by BenReclused


Obama is at worse a middle of the road technocrat. The insane hatred and fear he creates in republicans has much less to do with his policies than the paranoia of those with a rightwing mentality.

Originally posted by citizen6511

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by citizen6511

 

an alliance of bizarro religeous groups, scoundrels working for the criminals fleecing america, racist whites, and you might have a majority

Sans "religeous" and "might", substitute "racist whites" with "racists", and that comment would fit the "majority" that elected Mr. Obama perfectly!

Well done!

See ya,
Milt

edit on 10-9-2011 by BenReclused because: Add a few words

obama won the election because the country was in such bad shape the voters wanted a change.
without the economy and the wars he would not have been electable.

now voters would get rid of obama, but everyone is scared the republicans will come up with a worst candidate.
meaning no choice at all.

i'd like to see both obama and the republican congress gone.

oh please. people came out to vote that had no idea about politics or what the man stood for simply because he was black. the only reason the man will actually compete this election is because those same people will vote for him again simply because hes black.

this whole idea that only white people can be racist needs to stop. infact, id wager that there are more 'african american' racists in this country than white, hispanic or asian combined.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

Obama is at worse a middle of the road technocrat.

No, Mr. Obama is incompetent, not "middle of the road"! If your comment were true, he would be much more popular than he currently is.

The insane hatred and fear he creates in republicans has much less to do with his policies than the paranoia of those with a rightwing mentality.

Having a "rightwing mentality", I can honestly tell you that the "insane hatred" you speak of is caused, not by Mr. Obama, but by the obvious hypocrisy, and accusations, of those with a "leftwing mentality".

Concerning the "fear" you mentioned:
Are you truly comfortable with the direction the United States seems to be heading? I must admit: THAT scares the HELL out of me! If you feel this fear is caused by my being paranoid, you are, without a doubt, a fool.

reply to post by e11888

There is only one comment in your post that I disagree with:

those same people will vote for him again simply because hes black.

Fortunately, I know many Democrats, both black and white, that won't make that mistake again.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by BenReclused


when possible, i vote for the person who is most qualified, whatever party.

between McCain and Obama, when Palin got on the ticket i wondered who else will be hired to form the government.
Obama hired Hillary's people at the time and they seemed intelligent.
vote for the least scary and hope for the best.

Romney will probably beat Obama, but Perry and Palin scare a lot of people.

it's that 10 to 20% of voters who don't beleive in either party, and vote for who they hope will do the least damage that often decide elections.

Ron Paul will get many votes in open primaries, because he speaks of the wars, a subject most candidates ignore.

the next election is far from decided, i'd like prefer a new congress and president myself.

id wager that there are more 'african american' racists in this country than white, hispanic or asian combined.

Yeah, you may not want to actually wager money on that. Because you would lose ten to one.

OP, this is a great article, thanks for sharing it. All you have to do is read some of the hard right posts on this site to know that "conservative" lunacy runs deep.

reply to post by Grumble


You're welcome and I totally agree.

It's funny how so many on ATS forget the most common conspiracies, which aren't governmental, but conspiracies run by businesses...

reply to post by Grumble

All you have to do is read some of the hard right posts on this site to know that "conservative" lunacy runs deep.

That's not a bad observation, though I suspect it's a bit biased.

What are your observations on the "liberal" lunacy, of the "left", that runs, at the least, as deep?

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

It's funny how so many on ATS forget the most common conspiracies, which aren't governmental, but conspiracies run by businesses...

No...:
The most common conspiracies are those used by one group to discredit the views of those they disagree with. Quite often they are based on stereotyping, and can easily be debunked by "critical thinking". Unfortunately, our schools and colleges fail miserably in teaching this crucial skill.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by citizen6511

I must now admit:
You are NOT as foolish as I originally thought! Thank you for showing that I was wrong. That is, indeed, quite refreshing!

Like you, I feel we need a new President, and need to get rid of MANY of the good ole boys, and gals, that are currently PRETENDING to be Senators and Representatives.

I fear you are correct about Mr. Romney, but I certainly prefer Mr. Herman Cain. He seems to be the only one with a feasible plan, and the sincerity to "carry through" with his "promises".

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by BenReclused


Yeeessssss... adn the most common group is a group of business men, not governement agents.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

Yeeessssss... adn the most common group is a group of business men, not governement agents.

Nope! Once again you ignore groups consisting of "common" individuals. They are far more prevalent than groups of business men, or groups of government agents.

Why such a "narrow minded" focus?

See ya,
Milt