Conservatives, don't despair...

Conservatives, don't despair

David Frum, - a contributing editor at Newsweek and The Daily Beast - a special assistant to President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2002.

Washington (CNN) -- The mood among American conservatives is now one of apocalyptic despair.

Having convinced themselves that this election arrayed freedom against tyranny, they now must wonder: Did their country just democratically vote in favor of tyranny?

On Fox News election night, BIll O'Reilly explained the meaning of the election: the "white establishment" was now outnumbered by minorities. "The demographic are changing. It's not a traditional America anymore." And these untraditional Americans "want stuff. They want things. And who is going to give them things? President Obama. He knows it, and he ran on it."

Happily, the view is wrong, and in every respect.

America is not a society divided between "makers" and "takers." Instead, almost all of us proceed through a life cycle where we sometimes make and sometimes take as we pass from schooling to employment to retirement.

Full article at the link above.

I find it amazing that Conservative media and it's large following has adopted the refrain that somehow we are no no longer the America of our fathers....we aren't...we are much more free and much more capitalistic.

The whole rhetoric about socialism, tyranny, the America of our forefathers being gone?? Look again at 1962, we are dramatically more liberated and capitalistic than our fathers or grandfathers America. This doesn't even account for civil rights, the womens movement etc...

Conservatives have nothing to despair...assuming they actually are sincere in thier rhetoric...

more free ? Lmao... sure kid your more free with the patriot act ... ndaa... dhs... tsa molesting travellers at airports ....communications all monitored... state controlled media that tells you only what the government wants you to know... last time I checked only police states and totalitarian regimes kept such strict controls on their citizens.... there is no freedom in amerika anymore....

I read this, this morning. I thought it was a great article.

Originally posted by Expat888

more free ? Lmao... sure kid your more free with the patriot act ... ndaa... dhs... tsa molesting travellers at airports ....communications all monitored... state controlled media that tells you only what the government wants you to know... last time I checked only police states and totalitarian regimes kept such strict controls on their citizens.... there is no freedom in amerika anymore....

Patriot Act...ever hear of the internment camps?? Where over a 100,000 Americans were rounded up, families and all and imprisoned by the US Gov. for simply being of Japanese descent? That happened just 70 years ago.

So we have a Patriot Act...that is a legislation that is hotly debated by the public in the light of day...vs. our gov simply arresting families and taking away thier homes and imprisoning them just cuz they look asian.

I think that is significantly "more free" ....

NDAA ...Not to re-litigate old falsehoods...but the National Defense Authorization Act has been passed every year for what? Forever? It was only with Obama in office when folks took issue with the wording...and even after the following was included...

sub-section 1021(d), also affirms that nothing in the Act "is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force". The final version of the bill also provides, in sub-section(e), that "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States."

TSA...Are you aware that up until 2001...Cops etc. contducting strip searches did not need to demonstrate clear cause or have it done by a member of the same sex? It wasn't until a 2001 Supreme Court ruling until it's application was limited.

I could go on and on, but the idea that an Obama re-election means the end of America? BS...

reply to post by Indigo5


Excellent article. However, it will fall on deaf ears.

Most of the right, especially on these boards, are in denial.

Because of this the Democrats will re-take the house in 2014.

So until the GOP get their act together......

reply to post by Indigo5


quite familiar with the internment camps.... was born in one - my parents only crime they immigrated to america from japan at the wrong time... spent the first couple years of my life in the americans camp.... have no intention of ending my life in another of the americans camps... people deluding themselves if they think it wont happen again... it will and it will be worse this time when it comes...

Originally posted by Expat888
reply to post by Indigo5

 

quite familiar with the internment camps.... was born in one - my parents only crime they immigrated to america from japan at the wrong time... spent the first couple years of my life in the americans camp.... have no intention of ending my life in another of the americans camps... people deluding themselves if they think it wont happen again... it will and it will be worse this time when it comes...

A difficult way to begin a life....but no, American Concentration Camps are not comming. You are certainly entitled to fear such a thing. According to your profile intro, you have lived in asia for the past 30 years? Uncertain how you might end up in an interment camp? America is the one place on the globe where that is least likely to happen. I understand you have a world view to affirm, more so being a proud Ex-Pat of the USA of 30 years, but such fear mongering is not credible, even less so from ex-pats half-way around the globe. Happy travels and peace.

Originally posted by BritofTexas
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Excellent article. However, it will fall on deaf ears.

Most of the right, especially on these boards, are in denial.

Because of this the Democrats will re-take the house in 2014.

They are hoping that Dems will not show up in 2014 mid-terms, much like they hoped they wouldn't show up last week. Of the 16 house seats where TPers ran for election or re-election, only 4 survived. Even Bachman just squeeked out a win and only by running ads for the last couple months touting her willingness to reach across the aisle and compromise!

2010 is gone...Now the in-fighting starts (again) between the moderate conservatives who are realizing the TP is a liability, not asset...and the TP who is doubling down on thier extreme views and gridlock mantra.

I don't see the remaining GOP moderates being able to successfully divorce themsleves in time...and the TP is becoming more marginilized by the day. Boehner has the most difficult job in DC right now, it wouldn't shock me if he chooses to step down in the near future. The GOP does not have a majority in the house, the GOP + the TP do. And the GOP is trying to keep that ship above water while the TP is sinking them. They just learned they can't spend thier way to victory. they are learning they can't BS thier way to victory...what's left? Gridlock and a sinking ship. The fiscal cliff will be the first sign of whether they can keep the GOP majority. Boehner needs a deal, but his TP caucus will not go along. The TP is threatening to run TPers against "establishment" in the 2014 nominations for anyone who doesn't follow them. If I was the GOP I would call thier bluff, I don't think the TP has the same weight they did in 2010...and money didn't help them this last time.

Originally posted by Indigo5

They are hoping that Dems will not show up in 2014 mid-terms, much like they hoped they wouldn't show up last week. Of the 16 house seats where TPers ran for election or re-election, only 4 survived. Even Bachman just squeeked out a win and only by running ads for the last couple months touting her willingness to reach across the aisle and compromise!

2010 is gone...Now the in-fighting starts (again) between the moderate conservatives who are realizing the TP is a liability, not asset...and the TP who is doubling down on thier extreme views and gridlock mantra.

I don't see the remaining GOP moderates being able to successfully divorce themsleves in time...and the TP is becoming more marginilized by the day. Boehner has the most difficult job in DC right now, it wouldn't shock me if he chooses to step down in the near future. The GOP does not have a majority in the house, the GOP + the TP do. And the GOP is trying to keep that ship above water while the TP is sinking them. They just learned they can't spend thier way to victory. they are learning they can't BS thier way to victory...what's left? Gridlock and a sinking ship. The fiscal cliff will be the first sign of whether they can keep the GOP majority. Boehner needs a deal, but his TP caucus will not go along. The TP is threatening to run TPers against "establishment" in the 2014 nominations for anyone who doesn't follow them. If I was the GOP I would call thier bluff, I don't think the TP has the same weight they did in 2010...and money didn't help them this last time.

The TP only got elected in 2010 because the moderate GOP and the Dems stayed away. They won't make that mistake again.

I still believe that Obama threw the first debate and that was why. He was comfortably ahead in the polls and was worried his supporters would think he was going to win again anyway so they did not need to go out and vote.

The Tea Party is finished. The Koch brothers found, to their surprise, that they could not buy the election. It will take losing the house in 2014 however for its rotting corpse to realize that it is dead.

The Radical Right media bubble did burst. But Rupert Murdoch is frantically re-inflating it, as it makes him far to much money.

Originally posted by BritofTexas

The Tea Party is finished. The Koch brothers found, to their surprise, that they could not buy the election. It will take losing the house in 2014 however for its rotting corpse to realize that it is dead.

The Radical Right media bubble did burst. But Rupert Murdoch is frantically re-inflating it, as it makes him far to much money.

edit on 13-11-2012 by BritofTexas because: (no reason given)

The bolded part is not entirely true. It is true that in the Senate races and the Presidential race, it didn't have a huge impact in the outcome. It did make running those races a very expensive affair, but they found out they can spend vast amounts on House seats and in State Legislatures and have a huge impact.

As to the rest true true keep up the good work.

reply to post by Indigo5


I wouldn't want to be Boehner right now. Because he has to decide what is best for the longterm health of the party. If they break and work with the Democrats to achieve a deal, he has to pray it goes really well and works. The only way Republican incumbents will fend off the Tea Party is to be able to say yes I voted for this and it did this this and this for you. And really it is in the best interest of the Democrats to not lean too hard on him, as long as they stay fair about it there is a chance that they can help get rid of segments of that Tea Party Caucus.

In my experience the far right has a very skewed view of "Freedom". They tend to really want only one thing - less taxes and smaller government. It's amazing to me that the NDAA is core rhetoric, while the first Patriot Act and the Military Commissions act of 2006 are now glossed over in some vain attempt at revisionist history. When these things are mentioned the standard reply is "Four years in - you can't blame Bush anymore". This is a red herring IMO. I can blame Bush for what he did - with the full blessing of the right and the establishment. Just as I personally blame the current POTUS for NOT undoing that damage. Each deserves blame.

The real debate currently is the same one that Hamilton and Jefferson were having at the beginning of our nations history - whether to put power in the hands of the many or into the hands of the rich and powerful few. It's an argument about ones own individual interpretation of "the American dream". Some define that as unlimited and unregulated opportunity - others define it as the creation of the most optimal country possible for all. I fall into the latter category and, thus, am branded a socialist, at best, and a filthy commie at worst. All because I think that giving a bit to help the needy is an honorable thing and part of the social compact and condition.

This is fundamentally the battleground - taxes for social services VS unbridled business interests. The rest? All of this rhetoric about "freedom". Just a smokescreen to mask and cloud the core issue.

Having said all of that - I cling to the hope that the uber conservatives and the uber liberal might all lay down their absolutist views and seek to come to the middle of the table with compromise and unity the ultimate goal. There are answers to be found that can make everyone winners here. We just have to get beyond this notion that victory must be an absolute thing. Victories are never absolute. They always involve loss.

~Heff

I remember it was just 8 years ago when my opposition to things like the Patriot Act, the Federal Reserve, warrantless searches, and endless wars made me a tree hugging, pot smoking, hippie loving, liberal. Now those same opinions make me an intolerant, racist, xenophobic, neo-nazi, conservative. I'm not sure which I like better.

But yeah, don't worry conservatives. Liberals are in the same sinking boat that you are. They just happen to like the captain better at this time.

reply to post by Hefficide

I wish what you are saying is true but I doubt it. There is a certain logical problem with the left that no one seems to bring up. According to the constitution we all have "God given rights." Remove God and we no longer have those rights. We are also no longer "equal" to one another. I may be wrong but the only religion that I recall believing in "God given rights" is Christian. The only religion I see being attacked by the left is Christianity. Remove Christianity and you remove "God given rights". Remove those and what do you have left? Not the US of A. The same can be said for evolution. Evolution means we are not all equal and again no "God given rights." And here I am an agnostic giving a logical discussion. Maybe I should become religious.

Originally posted by Jerk_Idiot
reply to post by Hefficide

 

I wish what you are saying is true but I doubt it. There is a certain logical problem with the left that no one seems to bring up. According to the constitution we all have "God given rights." Remove God and we no longer have those rights. We are also no longer "equal" to one another. I may be wrong but the only religion that I recall believing in "God given rights" is Christian. The only religion I see being attacked by the left is Christianity. Remove Christianity and you remove "God given rights". Remove those and what do you have left? Not the US of A. The same can be said for evolution. Evolution means we are not all equal and again no "God given rights." And here I am an agnostic giving a logical discussion. Maybe I should become religious.

Can you quote that part of the constitution for us?

God

It has often been seen on the Internet that to find God in the Constitution, all one has to do is read it, and see how often the Framers used the words "God," or "Creator," "Jesus," or "Lord." Except for one notable instance, however, none of these words ever appears in the Constitution, neither the original nor in any of the Amendments. The notable exception is found in the Signatory section, where the date is written thusly: "Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven". The use of the word "Lord" here is not a religious reference, however. This was a common way of expressing the date, in both religious and secular contexts. This lack of any these words does not mean that the Framers were not spiritual people, any more than the use of the word Lord means that they were. What this lack of these words is expositive of is not a love for or disdain for religion, but the feeling that the new government should not involve itself in matters of religion.

www.usconstitution.net...

reply to post by Jerk_Idiot


It was not the Constitution that discussed the concept of "God given rights" - it was the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Source

The context of the above words, and those that follow in the text are constantly debated - the right wanting to fixate upon the notion of taxation without representation - and what that means. IMO we are currently represented as we are taxed. Our tax dollars do go to our own national interests and not the interests of a foreign nation exclusively.

Having said that - I have no expectation of resolving those differences on ATS. Not today or otherwise. Over the past 20-30 years too great a gulf in definition has come into being.

~Heff

reply to post by KeliOnyx


If Boehner breaks to go with the Democrats then he might as well put a D behind his name rather then a R. It should remove him as speaker and another Republican be appointed in his place as speaker.

I think the full title of this thread should be "conservatives don't despair...you're just wrong and racist and unamerican". Not very reassuring. I'm pretty sure you won't win over conservatives this way. You don't like the way your country is headed? Your just wrong and unamerican. George W. Bush couldn't have said it better himself.

reply to post by LeatherNLace


My apoligies. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Declaration of Independence. Most people consider the Creator to be God. As it is not in the Constitution then I guess we should just throw it out. Shrug. Nobody is equal, and there are no unalienable rights. That will correct the problem.

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
reply to post by Indigo5

 

I wouldn't want to be Boehner right now. Because he has to decide what is best for the longterm health of the party. If they break and work with the Democrats to achieve a deal, he has to pray it goes really well and works. The only way Republican incumbents will fend off the Tea Party is to be able to say yes I voted for this and it did this this and this for you. And really it is in the best interest of the Democrats to not lean too hard on him, as long as they stay fair about it there is a chance that they can help get rid of segments of that Tea Party Caucus.

If Boehner and moderate GOP make a fair deal with the President...Yes...the vast majority of Americans, business leaders...nearly everyone but idealogues would support it. Raising taxes on those making over 250k has zero impact on job creation...economists know this, the OMB knows this, the non-TP GOP knows this...BUT the TP has shown a clear willingness to canabalize the GOP. Boehners BASE nominates thier candidate...ditto every other house member. Boehner could cruise to re-election if he makes deal...ditto other moderate GOP. The general public is behind a deal, BUT he and others might not get the chance to run if they are challenged and ousted in the Nomination which is decided by the base...which has moved far right. I saw a 60 minutes special a couple of years ago...Mitch McConnel (min. leader-GOP in the Senate) and Harry Reid (Dem Leader in the Senate) are long-time close friends...drinks and dinners, friends for years, but McConnel speaks like a TPer at every news conference...hell no to tax increases etc. If he doesn't the TP will run against him in the nomination...which is decided by the far right base...and funded by Billionaires.

Luger (GOP Indiana) was considered a good guy by most in congress, left and right...he had been there forever, the TP ousted him in Indiana nominations for not being far-right enough and ran a TPer in the general election. The TPer lost to a Dem.

That is the scenario I see repeating itself until something dramatically changes. The GOP moderates need to divorce themselves from the TP and Kochs...now or they are going to lose one way or another.