April 03, 2007

Value of Conservative Label Disintegrates

The right-wing has been assiduously working to destroy the value of the liberal label for the past several decades. During the Bush I v. Dukakis election in 1988, the fact that Dukakis was a "card-carrying member of the ACLU" was seen to be the epitome of someone outside the mainstream. During the Bush II 2004 campaign, Karl Rove celebrated the death of the "liberal" worldview and that the conservative view was set to prevail for generations to come. Yet, as with many arrogant and hubristic humans, the celebration was held too soon. In fact, the complete lack of any acceptable level of competency in governing has created a perfect storm where the "conservative" label is even more toxic than the "liberal" or "democratic" label was ever seen to be.

Glenn Greenwood puts the problem thusly:

Independently, the right-wing movement in this country has used as its principal rhetorical tactic over the last two decades the claim that they represent the "normal, mainstream Americans," while liberals are the subversive freaks on the coasts, hopelessly out of touch with mainstream American values. Hence, few things are more damaging to their political brand than for it to be acknowledged that on the most critical political issue of the decade -- Iraq -- they are about as isolated and fringe as a political movement can be. That is why they will deny whatever facts one presents, no matter how clear and compelling, which demonstrate just how repudiated their views are by the "normal, nonideological Americans" (h/t David Brooks).

The Bush II administration has done more to convince Americans of the bankruptcy of the conservative and indeed the Republican brand than they ever were able to do to the Democratic brand.

My brother-in-law is a perfect example of the problem. He has always been much more conservative than I, and in the 90s was a Rush fan. But no more. As this war drags on and as the Bush administration continues to blatantly encroach on our civil rights, he has become one of the ardent Bush-haters that so bedevil this administration. He was always more libertarian and anti-liberal (because he believed the caricature that liberals always take your tax dollars to help the undeserving), but no longer. Now he believes that the Republicans are corrupt and even when he worries that Democrats could be so too, he believes that Democrats with their more liberal philosophy care more about him and his family than the "mainstream conservative" Republicans. He swears he will never vote for a Republican in 2008.

This is the environment that Rove, Bush and Cheney created. Does it mean we are home free and don't have to worry about the outcome of the next election? No. Because there are still many true believers, and the most passionate true-believers are still on the side of the right-wing and they will do *anything* to win. The rest of America will lose if people are too complacent or too cynical to vote. We need to realize that during the next 20 months, Karl Rove and his partners will be searching for the perfect issues to get the fundamentalists to the polls while making everyone else so sick about politics (and our Democratic politicians) that they stay home. Our job is to detoxify the political environment and to reassure the skittish independents that we welcome them into our big tent. Rove, Bush and Cheney will be doing their part to keep the failure of conservative governance front and center. Then perhaps -- just perhaps -- we will regain control of our future again.

Posted by Mary at April 3, 2007 01:02 AM | Philosophy | Technorati links |

It is a shame how stupid liberals are, I feel like they are not in touch with reality. Everyday when I watch the news I see just how twisted and ignorant they are. Maybe another 911 will wake them up.

Always remember Democrats say what you want to hear because they want to make friends. Republicans concentrate on truth and could care less if you like them or not

Posted by: tsifknits at April 3, 2007 01:09 AM

Off topic-

There is a great post on The Carpetbagger Report from a couple of days ago about the mainstream media's (specifically Time magazine's) ignoring the prosecutor purge scandal.


What explains the failure of the mainstream media to cover the purge scandal for so long, and so many other scandals? Do you think somebody just set up newspaper editors to cheat on their wives, and threatened to tell if the editors wouldn’t play ball when they come back some day and ask for something?

It wouldn’t be that hard to do, when you think about it. People wouldn’t talk about it.

Also check out a new post on my blog.

Posted by: Swan at April 3, 2007 05:36 AM

This may be a nail in the coffin of the two-party system. Maybe there will be another competative party or two in there before too long and the strategy of polarization will be obsolete.

Posted by: tjewell at April 3, 2007 07:04 AM

Conservatives don't care what you think of them...a good example...Ann Coulter?

I don't think 'liberals', like John Edwards for example is out there trying to make people like him. He is trying to save America from the cluthces of a conservative movement that has been hijacked by tyrants and fools.

Posted by: Jim DeRosa at April 3, 2007 08:54 AM

Black eyed peas singer Fergie peps her sex life with special dessous and footwear.

She hinted that she and her lover dance before they have sex and she improves in erotic terms.

Fergie chuckled:"I do the full program. I bought these fantastic boots in the ´Hustler´ store. They reach up to the thighs, are made of black leather and got a long zip. It is difficult to get into them but it is worth 2 me."
(only translated-heck of an idea what she really said)

German msn

Posted by: ccoaler at April 3, 2007 01:36 PM

ABC: Iran added 1000 centrifuges

Posted by: ccoaler at April 3, 2007 02:54 PM