The election is going to come down to the undecided voters in Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania, and those voters cannot possibly be impressed with Gov. Romney's belly-flop into the pool of international diplomacy. Yes, the UK is our most important ally, and they need to be treated with the same care you treat your best friend. It's a critical relationship, but it's not a hard one. Somehow, Gov. Romney wrecked like the ABC Wide World of Sports "Agony of Defeat" ski jump while on the bunny hill of diplomacy. If there is any hope, a majority of the undecided voters watched this debacle, understand why it is important, and are now no longer undecided.
The GOP is still offering Pres. Obama low hanging fruit, though. Gov. Jindal says “We’re not worried about overseas headlines. We’re worried about voters back here at home in America.” Jindal Defends Romney (ABC News). Gov. Jindal doesn't seem to understand that Romney's insult was more than just stupid thing to say. It will have a very real impact on The Rt. Hon. David Cameron, and could create problems in our relationship with the UK.
Gov. Jindal doesn't care, but RH Cameron is up to his neck in the Fox phone hacking scandal, his austerity programs are being blamed for a double-dip recession, and he's getting flack from the right for deals he has to cut with the Liberal Democrats, his partners in the coalition government. The Olympic Games were about to begin in London; needless to say, RH Cameron is keen to see them go well. If these games are not perfect, RH Cameron is going to get slaughtered, and every segment on TV and every column in the papers will mention that RH Cameron is too stupid to avoid problems that a spectacularly tone-deaf idiot from America could spot the moment he stepped off the plane.
If they are deemed a success, RH Cameron could keep his job. If Gov. Romney becomes the president, the Special Relationship is going to be a rocky one, to say the least. If we get stuck going to war with Iran because Nit Momjeans ceded our foreign policy to the nut jobs that run Israel, I doubt we can count on the usual support we get from the UK.
The thing that drives me nuts, though, is that Pres. Obama isn't crushing these boneheads at every turn. He should be running against the entire Republican Party. I think that an ad with Michele Bachmann and her weird homosexual therapist husband, saying "Mitt Romney is in the same political organization as this dangerous simpleton. That organization is the Republican Party." There are about 100 republicans that say crazy things all the time, so they could run the same ad with a different lunatic all day and night until the election. Pres. Clinton would be grinding these guys into a pulp by now. Clinton's opponents were far more reasonable, better politicians, and better people; he ate their lunch. Pres. Obama is a smart guy, but he's got to step up his political judo, or we are going to have four more years of crazy Republicans, drifting slowly off the deep end. And keep in mind, it always seems like they are about to go over a cliff, but there's no cliff. There's just more xenophobia, witch hunts, boogeymen, heretics, and guns, guns, guns.
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Thursday, January 12, 2012
The Left is the Center
Brooks asked, "where are the liberals?" in the NY Times yesterday. He says "the percentage of Americans who call themselves liberals is either flat or in decline. There are now two conservatives in this country for every liberal. Over the past 40 years, liberalism has been astonishingly incapable at expanding its market share."
The answer is, people don't call themselves "liberal" anymore, because many of the issues that used to be "liberal" are now centrist, or are no longer issues at all. For example, racial integration of the military used to be a liberal issue. Today, you'd sound like a nut if you argued against racial integration of the military. You'd sound like a nut if you argued for it, too - it's settled. Similarly, the position that women should be allowed to serve in the military was, at one time, a liberal stance. Today, agreeing with that position is not considered liberal. It's at least centrist, and probably the mainstream conservative position as well.
Reproductive freedom was, at one time, a liberal issue. Today, you wouldn't self-identify as a liberal because you support, with reasonable restrictions, the right to get an abortion. Restricting the right to an abortion to the first trimester is a pretty conservative position these days. Today, 'reproductive freedom' refers, for the most part, to abortion. However, it also means 'condoms,' and the legalization of condoms was once a liberal issue. David Brooks wouldn't call you (and you wouldn't call yourself) a liberal based on your support for the continued legalization of condoms.
Social Security was a radical liberal idea. Twenty years ago, it was the third rail of politics. Today, you'll find signs in the hands of hard-core conservatives saying "hands off my social security!" The notion that you're a liberal in 2012 if you support the Social Security program is laughable.
Despite appearances, Gun Control, too, has shifted dramatically to the center. Yes, a person who supports the criminalization of all guns is a liberal. However, you can support reasonable restrictions on the sale or possession of heavy weapons and still be pretty conservative. A person who supports the restrictions of the Brady Act (such as background checks on purchasers handguns) may not be regarded as a conservative by the NRA, but he or she wouldn't self-identify as a liberal. 30 years ago, background checks were a very liberal idea.
I'm not exactly sure what positions a self-identified liberal would take today. Your hard-core liberals (the old socialist hippie with buttons on his hat, the girl with the ungoverned body hair, the dude who married a dude, etc.) are still out there, and they have positions. Gay rights has moved dramatically towards the center, but is still a liberal issue. Animal rights is still clearly the province of the left wing. Lately, I haven't heard too many people arguing that the workers should seize control of the means of production, but I'm sure they are out there, too.
In any event, I think the answer to the question, "Where are the Liberals" is "in the Center." So central, in fact, that they don't even call themselves liberal anymore. All that's left on the left are issues that were once on the far extremes of the movement. Now, if you say you are a liberal, you are really saying you support those ideas. If you don't, you won't call yourself a liberal anymore.
I am not taking a side, just talking. To myself, really. Some conservative ideas - free trade, welfare reform, law and order, aren't conservative anymore because they've become the center. Where those types of conservatives are today will be my next post.
Also, the elephant in the room is, of course, the distribution of wealth. I think that's a little too much for one blog post, but we'll get there.
The answer is, people don't call themselves "liberal" anymore, because many of the issues that used to be "liberal" are now centrist, or are no longer issues at all. For example, racial integration of the military used to be a liberal issue. Today, you'd sound like a nut if you argued against racial integration of the military. You'd sound like a nut if you argued for it, too - it's settled. Similarly, the position that women should be allowed to serve in the military was, at one time, a liberal stance. Today, agreeing with that position is not considered liberal. It's at least centrist, and probably the mainstream conservative position as well.
Reproductive freedom was, at one time, a liberal issue. Today, you wouldn't self-identify as a liberal because you support, with reasonable restrictions, the right to get an abortion. Restricting the right to an abortion to the first trimester is a pretty conservative position these days. Today, 'reproductive freedom' refers, for the most part, to abortion. However, it also means 'condoms,' and the legalization of condoms was once a liberal issue. David Brooks wouldn't call you (and you wouldn't call yourself) a liberal based on your support for the continued legalization of condoms.
Social Security was a radical liberal idea. Twenty years ago, it was the third rail of politics. Today, you'll find signs in the hands of hard-core conservatives saying "hands off my social security!" The notion that you're a liberal in 2012 if you support the Social Security program is laughable.
Despite appearances, Gun Control, too, has shifted dramatically to the center. Yes, a person who supports the criminalization of all guns is a liberal. However, you can support reasonable restrictions on the sale or possession of heavy weapons and still be pretty conservative. A person who supports the restrictions of the Brady Act (such as background checks on purchasers handguns) may not be regarded as a conservative by the NRA, but he or she wouldn't self-identify as a liberal. 30 years ago, background checks were a very liberal idea.
I'm not exactly sure what positions a self-identified liberal would take today. Your hard-core liberals (the old socialist hippie with buttons on his hat, the girl with the ungoverned body hair, the dude who married a dude, etc.) are still out there, and they have positions. Gay rights has moved dramatically towards the center, but is still a liberal issue. Animal rights is still clearly the province of the left wing. Lately, I haven't heard too many people arguing that the workers should seize control of the means of production, but I'm sure they are out there, too.
In any event, I think the answer to the question, "Where are the Liberals" is "in the Center." So central, in fact, that they don't even call themselves liberal anymore. All that's left on the left are issues that were once on the far extremes of the movement. Now, if you say you are a liberal, you are really saying you support those ideas. If you don't, you won't call yourself a liberal anymore.
I am not taking a side, just talking. To myself, really. Some conservative ideas - free trade, welfare reform, law and order, aren't conservative anymore because they've become the center. Where those types of conservatives are today will be my next post.
Also, the elephant in the room is, of course, the distribution of wealth. I think that's a little too much for one blog post, but we'll get there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)