Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

June 5, 2006

FAILURE DOESN'T RALLY THE BASE....The conventional wisdom at this point insists that Bush and the congressional GOP are touting the anti-gay constitutional amendment to rally the base. Grassroots activists are frustrated about Republicans' disregard for the religious right agenda, excessive spending, inaction on immigration, etc., and, while everyone knows the amendment isn't going to pass, a vote is supposed to make the activist base feel better.

As The Note put it, "If banning same sex marriage and flag burning and repealing the estate tax doesn't gin up the conservative base of the Republican Party, what will?" But that's the part of all of this that just doesn't work for me. Why, exactly, would the GOP base feel motivated for the midterm elections after an abject failure?

A year and a half ago, the GOP base thought their time had come. They had played a key role in electing Bush and big Republican majorities in both chambers, and they were finally ready to cross a few items off their wish list. Nearly 18 months later, they have very little to show for it.

So why is it, exactly, that these same far-right activists will be thrilled by votes that don't go their way? The Note, in this sense, has everything backwards -- the argument is the GOP will gin up the conservative base with votes that fail to ban same-sex marriage, fail to ban flag burning, and probably fail to repeal the estate tax.

If I'm a conservative who's feeling discouraged, and considering staying home this November, why would I feel excited about a powerful Republican machine that can't deliver on any of these agenda items? Grover Norquist told the LA Times, "Every time you have that conversation it reminds [voters] of what team they're on."

But is that enough? Do grassroots members of Focus on the Family really tell themselves, "I'm going to work extra hard this fall to help Republicans because they lost on all the key culture war votes this year"?

It seems just as likely that the opposite will occur. The conservative movement went all out to get to where they are right now, they still can't deliver on a far-right social agenda, and there's limited evidence that GOP leaders care.

The flip side of the argument, of course, is that these votes will motivate conservative activists in states with competitive races and remind them that Democrats are on a different page. Perhaps. But the GOP base is crazy, not stupid. Pandering can be an effective strategy, but pandering-while-failing, when your side controls every branch of government, strikes me as a recipe for more frustration, not enthusiasm.

Steve Benen 5:13 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (138)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Also, they can't be blind to the fact that the conservatives they elect have a habit of refusing to be seen in public with their leaders while they send mixed messages on their desire to pass conservative legislation.

I'm willing to bet that the right-wingers have noticed that Republican commitment to getting rid of the estate tax (which benefits a tiny number of extremely wealthy families like the Wal-Mart clan) is greater than their commitment to breaking down the state/church barriers.

It's one thing to try and fail. It's another to half-ass it and fail.

Posted by: theorajones on June 5, 2006 at 5:21 PM | PERMALINK

Why, exactly, would the GOP base feel motivated for the midterm elections after an abject failure?

I don't want to be rude, but just where the hell have you been? Failure in the Drug War = politically successful. Failure banning abortion = politically successful. Failure banning flag-burning = politically successful. Failure to stop illegal immigration = politically successful. Why? Because the problem, real or imagined, is an outrage they can use.

If the right succeeded in any of these things, they'd have to find new ways to scare the shit out of the trailer park.
.

Posted by: Grand Moff Texan on June 5, 2006 at 5:24 PM | PERMALINK

Is there any chance at all that this "base" could read a book or something, learn something of the world, maybe grow up a little?

Or perhaps just realize that their time in the sun was a fluke and, no matter how noisy and pissed-off they are, will always be a minority?

Posted by: exasperanto on June 5, 2006 at 5:24 PM | PERMALINK

But is that enough? Do grassroots members of Focus on the Family really tell themselves, "I'm going to work extra hard this fall to help Republicans because they lost on all the key culture war votes this year"?

I'm not sure I'm ready yet to misunderestimate the Repub-base's ability to overlook events on the ground in favor of not having to abandon dogma. Seeing as how I've made that mistake so many times in the past.

Posted by: cyntax on June 5, 2006 at 5:25 PM | PERMALINK

"Is there any chance at all...
Posted by: exasperanto on June 5, 2006 at 5:24 PM"

No.

And that's not just snark. If YOU literally believed you were doing God's will on Earth, would YOU change your mind just because of some temporary setbacks?

Posted by: smartalek on June 5, 2006 at 5:27 PM | PERMALINK

Do grassroots members of Focus on the Family really tell themselves, "I'm going to work extra hard this fall to help Republicans because they lost on all the key culture war votes this year"?

No, Focus on the Family gins up grassroots members by telling them that the all-powerful liberals kept God's People from doing the right thing ... again.

Not only do the little idiots buy it ... again, but they buy it even with the "liberals" don't control much of anything.

Genius. Or rather, compared to the drooling ignorance it exploits, it looks like genius.
.

Posted by: Grand Moff Texan on June 5, 2006 at 5:27 PM | PERMALINK

Dude, they've been pandering-and-failing for years. Decades. It's always worked so far. What's changed?

Posted by: Realish on June 5, 2006 at 5:28 PM | PERMALINK

If the right succeeded in any of these things, they'd have to find new ways to scare the shit out of the trailer park.

Posted by: Grand Moff Texan

Bingo! And lawd knows Mr. Rove may end up a little too distracted in the near future (Fitzmas!) to think up some new wedge issues.

Posted by: cyntax on June 5, 2006 at 5:31 PM | PERMALINK

What you're missing, Steve, is this step: "We failed -because of the liberal media! And those damn stonewalling liberals in the Congress who derail important legislation to save your personal marriage! They're so crafty they can undermine American while in the minority! We have to completely obliterate them before we can take back the USA!"

It's not the failure that motivates the base: it's the blame.

Posted by: gussie on June 5, 2006 at 5:43 PM | PERMALINK

Grand Moff Texan may be onto something. After all, one of the big reasons the Dems don't have any platform is that they were so successful in the '70s and '80s, implementing women's rights, environmental protection, affirmative action, and so on. Republicans don't want to achieve too much, too soon.

Posted by: wahoofive on June 5, 2006 at 5:45 PM | PERMALINK

Hmm, it's true that they've been pandering-and-failing for a while. And it's also true that the kulturkampf only has to be fought, not won.

But even if the mouth-breathers are a little stupid, and not just crazy, everybody's patience has limits. They've stayed home before, when the Repug leadership hasn't brought home the Holy Bacon. And this time around, the Smirking Chimp has been pretty upfront that, when the chips are down, he's working for the Boardroom and not the Sanctuary.

Also, the trailer parks pay for high gas just like everybody else. And they have, or know, a lot of people in the Reserves, who have been shipped off to Iraq to fight for ... well, it isn't really clear, since Magog hasn't taken over CBS yet.

So I'm not convinced it's either/or. I think there's a range, and if there's a range then there's a tipping point. And I do get the sense that we're near that point.

Posted by: bleh on June 5, 2006 at 5:47 PM | PERMALINK

Must agree with everyone here who warns not to underestimate the power of paranoia, feelings of persecution and a need to blame. As someone here--think it was Alek Hidell--put it brilliantly the other day, these folks need to tend their sense of outrage over a low flame at all times so it can be ready to burst into a conflagration at a moment's notice. Without fear and loathing, they have nothing holding them together.

Posted by: shortstop on June 5, 2006 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin:

What you miss, I think, is the mindset of the harcore fundevangelical base that hang on Dobson's every word. This is a subset of "values voters" and even of Bush's base -- but it's noted because it behaves reliably as a bloc -- at least as solid a constituency as urban blacks are for the Democrats.

Grand Moff and cyntax get it -- it's more about doing the *cough* Lord's work than being successful in politics -- which they intensely distrust. At best, they have an ambivalent relationship to secular power even when they have ostensibly stacked the institutions of power.

Look at a guy like Ralph Reed. His association with Abramoff has put his race for GA lt. governor in serious jeopardy. As much as that Brylcreemed, Dick Clark-lookin' suit has done for religious-right causes over his life, the base feels flaccid about him because of the tainted aura of America's favorite lobbyist.

I agree that it's questionable how motivated these guys will be this year. The question is -- do they feel like their partisans are doing all they can and being constrained by the larger society -- or have their partisans begun to sell out and become corrupted by power a la Reed?

It's an open question at this moment, to be sure ... But I'd say that much of Democratic hopes this year rest with a substantial number of them staying away from the GOP -- and that's going to mean staying home for most of them rather than going for third parties ...

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on June 5, 2006 at 5:52 PM | PERMALINK

The point is that this failure will be bad, but less bad than continuing to talk about Immigration, Iraq and fuel prices. Less bad = good in a zero sum environment.

'The Base' will be demoralized by the failure but they will also get to fume in hatred as gay rights advocates argue on behalf of the democratic position on the cable news shows. That is better (from Roves point of view) than having them fume in hatred as migrants rights advocates defending the presidents plan.

Posted by: jburnout on June 5, 2006 at 5:55 PM | PERMALINK

What scares me about the Republican base, and their ablity to ignore what is patently in their best economic interests, is something that Steve gets at in his previous post about religiosity and Texas: these people never seem to worry about being on God's side because they're so sure that God is on their side. How do you argue rationally against that sort of hubris? Other than to note pride goeth before...

Posted by: cyntax on June 5, 2006 at 5:58 PM | PERMALINK

Well, whatever happens, as a Californian, it's the Busby screwup that's hitting the radio today that's really got me concerned about Democratic chances. Man, I really wanted one win for a change.

Posted by: KC on June 5, 2006 at 6:00 PM | PERMALINK

'The Base' will be demoralized by the failure but they will also get to fume in hatred as gay rights advocates argue on behalf of the democratic position on the cable news shows. That is better (from Roves point of view) than having them fume in hatred as migrants rights advocates defending the presidents plan.

A really good point. This may, in the end, not do as much as hoped to tend the flame of the base's paranoia and anger. But it'll necessarily do some of that, and more importantly, it'll meanwhile keep them from talking about the dazzling failures of the administration in all other areas.

Posted by: shortstop on June 5, 2006 at 6:02 PM | PERMALINK

The conservative movement went all out to get to where they are right now, they still can't deliver on a far-right social agenda, and there's limited evidence that GOP leaders care.

Careful... don't forget the Supreme Court and its fresh batch of loons...

Posted by: koreyel on June 5, 2006 at 6:08 PM | PERMALINK

One would think that the true believers would have toppled to the truth by now. You'd think they would just give up and stay home. But to the true believer, however bad Bush may be, he is infinitely preferable than any Democrat. Where Democrat = Liberal = terrorist = anyone to the left of John McCain. Failure is a test of character: The bible is full of scary anecdotes about what happens those who break faith with GOD's commands and encouraging anecdotes for those who remain resolute in the face of all temptation.

When GWB insists on "staying the course" in Iraq, he is just proving that he is doing God's work. It's a vicious paradox--the worse things go, the more the believer believes that this is the right thing to do. Ya just gotta have faith.

So if Bush is unable to get his agenda through, it isn't because the GOP leaders don't care. The explanation is the enemy must be very powerful indeed. Democrats must be driven from the face of the earth so the new paradise, the true America, can be realized.

Posted by: PTate in MN on June 5, 2006 at 6:08 PM | PERMALINK

I think the true-blue wingnuts make up only a minority (but a loud and public majority) of the total population of the Wingnut Nation, and that a lot of the religious conservatives that wandered into the GOP coalition in the late 1970s, and who provide it with a manpower and fundraising base are go-along-to-get-along types who can be demobilized if they are frustrated enough. They're not going to publically disassociate themselves from the GOP or their leadership, or switch over to the Dems - they'll just dial down their support and put their money and energy into less frustrating endeavors (their families, hobbies, careers, churches, personal development, etc.) like they did before Reagan and Falwell and Robertson swept them up into political activism. The diehards will keep on blockading abortion clinics and patrolling the Mexican border in their homemade uniforms, but increasing numbers of the rank-and-file will slip away and do something else with their time and energy and votes.

So an anti-flagburning rally will only draw 600 people instead of 1000, an instant book by some winger radio host will only move 8000 copies instead of the expected 15000, and a direct-mail fundraising campaign will only raise $1.3 million instead of the expect $1.8 million. They won't listen to winger radio in the droves they used to, they won't volunteer for GOTV operations like they used to, they won't regale their coworkers with the day's latest liberal outrage like they used to, and they won't send checks to the RNC like they used to. The GOP will have to work harder to mobilize their base, and they'll have less to show for it.*

It won't seem like anything's changed - Limbaugh and Fox News and Dobson and Malkin will continue their shtick, probably ramping it up a notch or two - but the returns are going to diminish for the GOP as the less-dedicated portion of their base gets discouraged and wanders off.

* A great side-effect of this is the feedback loop where the harder the GOP has to work to energize their base, the more they turn off unaligned/moderate/independent/swing voters. Bush was able to run in 2000 as a multiculti, Spanglish-reciting "Compassionate Conservative" (and pick up a lot of votes in the center) because the party base believed he would do the right thing once in office. Now, in 2006, he's forced to run on a "faggots and wetbacks are destroying this great nation" platform, which might rally the base (or not, as the original posting points out) but harms their ability to form larger coalitions. For example, I'm quite giddy at what the rabid conservative anti-Latino sentiment will do for the Democratic party and the Latino vote in the long term (having seen it at work in Pete Wilson's California).

Posted by: FMguru on June 5, 2006 at 6:20 PM | PERMALINK

Is the estate tax repeal really going to fail? I thought a bunch of moderate Dems were coming over to the GOP side on this one. Can somebody count the votes for me on this one?

Don't get me wrong, I hope it does fail, but your comments on this run counter to what I've heard.

Posted by: b on June 5, 2006 at 6:20 PM | PERMALINK

The flip side of the argument, of course, is that these votes will motivate conservative activists in states with competitive races and remind them that Democrats are on a different page.

What different page is that? At least the Democrats are honest. The Democrats TELL the wingnuts, that they are wingnuts, and they don't represent the values this nation was founded on.

The Republicans LIE to them, and pander to the wingnuts, and then sell their rights to giant faceless multinational corporations in exchange for campaign contributions, and outright bribes. Conservative voters are like Charlie Brown, Lucy keeps pulling that football out of the way at the last second, and November after November, they keep running for it.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on June 5, 2006 at 6:23 PM | PERMALINK

Grand Moff Texan has it right:

No, Focus on the Family gins up grassroots members by telling them that the all-powerful liberals kept God's People from doing the right thing ... again.

Never underestimate the rhetorical power of invoking the mysterious force of "the liberal media" and "obstructionist Democrats in Congress."

Yes, both are utter canards -- but most voters don't pay enough attention to see the falsity of either claim.

Posted by: The Confidence Man on June 5, 2006 at 6:25 PM | PERMALINK

"A year and a half ago, the GOP base thought they're time had come."

Yo, Steve, you mean "their time had come". See, our side pays better attention to detail.

Meanwhile, hasn't anyone else noticed that Ralph Reed is a killer fruit? All those late nights with Terry Dolan, planning to take other people's liberties away...

Posted by: Kenji on June 5, 2006 at 6:28 PM | PERMALINK

I think the danger here for Republicans is that their 'base' will decide that the problem is not with the issues, nor with the Party, but with the party's leadership. For them, having the Republicans as a party spend 2 to 6 years in the political wilderness may be seen as a good way to convince the party to purge themselves of the wishy-washy and get REAL religion.

A lot of these Dominionists don't really think of themselves as Republicans, after all. The Republican party is just the vehicle to push things in their 'right' direction. If what's needed first is a better vehicle, then that's the next item on the agenda.

Posted by: NBarnes on June 5, 2006 at 6:29 PM | PERMALINK
The conventional wisdom at this point insists that Bush and the congressional GOP are touting the anti-gay constitutional amendment to rally the base.

I think that CW is close to the truth, but wrong, or at least mislead them; its to distract media attention from issues that are more damaging, and to remind the Religious Right base why Democrats would be worse and mobilize them that way. Its not to rally them around the FMA itself, its to establish by implication that should Democrats win, it wouldn't be a matter of anti-gay measures failing, but of pro-gay measures succeeding.

If I'm a conservative who's feeling discouraged, and considering staying home this November, why would I feel excited about a powerful Republican machine that can't deliver on any of these agenda items?

Because if, even in the minority, the Evil Nefarious Liberals can stop the Republicans from making "positive" changes on these "key issues", its pretty clear how "bad" things will be if the Evil Nefarious Liberals get a majority -- then they'll be able to mandate gay marriages and abortions for everyone, and take all your money when you die, too.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 5, 2006 at 6:30 PM | PERMALINK

Steve, sorry, I disagree. I think you're STILL locked into rational thinking ... precisely the kind of thinking that has little application when it comes to the far right hordes. It leads you to missing fundamental truths about the conservative beast we face.

Near the end of your posting you say, "... the GOP base is crazy, not stupid." Wrong. They're stupid. They really ARE stupid. Lots of them. Most of them. I've known a bunch of them, I grew up with some, and when it comes to politics most of them have all the intelligence of a box of hair.

That's why it does not matter that the GOP controls House, Senate, and White House. It does not matter that they've got all that power. The rightwing talking point will be, "We tried to do these things you want done, like a ban on same-sex marriage, BUT THE DAMNED COMMMIE PINKO LIBERALS TURNED ON THEIR MASSIVE HATE MACHINE AND LIE MACHINE. Aided by lies from the liberal media, they defeated us." It matters not one little bit if every single word of that song-and-dance is complete fantasy. It's the Big Lie Principle in action, and so far it's served them very, very well.

Look, I write direct mail for a living (for progressive causes, to be sure). Believe me, this is EXACTLY how they'll play it, and it will work to some extent or another. The only question is will it work enough. Sooner or later, it won't be enough ... but without a crystal ball -- something I certainly don't have -- there's no telling if it will be this election, or November 2016 before it falls short.

Posted by: Roger Keeling on June 5, 2006 at 6:34 PM | PERMALINK

"A year and a half ago, the GOP base thought 4they're time had come."

Their time DID come.

You see, all the faithful were "raptured" up to heaven in 1992, right after the election. (Clinton, of course, was the anti-christ).

Of course, Satan had them all replaced by zombie duplicates posessed by demons. The actions of the Republican Party, since that time, can be explained perfectly when one knows the truth.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on June 5, 2006 at 6:37 PM | PERMALINK

But the GOP base is crazy, not stupid. Pandering can be an effective strategy, but pandering-while-failing, when your side controls every branch of government, strikes me as a recipe for more frustration, not enthusiasm.

oh yeah, stevie, the gop base is sooo much crazier than the leftist nutballs who are largely the dems' base.

that said, they'll be at least as motivated by claims that the dems thwarted their agenda as the dem base is motivated by fantasies like fla2000 or ohio2004.

Posted by: Brian on June 5, 2006 at 6:37 PM | PERMALINK

After reading the posts of the offensive wingnuts who have no other arguments other than to call anyone juvenile names who doesn't agree with them--AND after six years of watching my country fall apart with the Rs at the helm--wild horses couldn't keep my and everyone I know away from the polls. Rove and Norquist are going to have to give away candy and cigarettes to get their minions to the polls, but boy is this "leftist nutball" (betcha you wouldn't call me that to my face w/o retribution) motivated.

Posted by: a_retrogrouch on June 5, 2006 at 6:43 PM | PERMALINK

I'm with Grand Moff Texan. Failure just feeds into their persecution complex, makes em circle the wagons. That is rallying the base to them. Worked in 04'.

Posted by: Fred on June 5, 2006 at 6:44 PM | PERMALINK

After reading the posts of the offensive wingnuts who have no other arguments other than to call anyone juvenile names who doesn't agree with them...

are you actually reading this thread? as in most cases, it's the libs who dominate silly name calling.

Posted by: Brian on June 5, 2006 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK

On Values: Bush's secret bisexual Affair exposed!

Folks, The woman who can confirm this story is now running for Gov. of NV. here: mcconnellforgovernor.com for Leola McConnell. Yes, SHE WAS THERE. As an eye witness!!! Randi Rhodes broke this today on her Air America Show. With the debate on the massively hypocritical 'Marriage Amendment' to our Constitution, we need this nuclear hypocrisy more widely known! Cheers, VJ, ga. The sordid details: [http://bushssecretlifein84.tripod.com/]

This was with the then Mayor of Knoxville, TN., Victor Ashe, now the Amb. to Poland. It pays to know some Bushs intimately!!

Posted by: VJ on June 5, 2006 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK

Poor Brian, he still has to clap loudly for Dear Decider.

You need to clap Louder! Tinkerbell won't die after all!

Posted by: RC on June 5, 2006 at 6:57 PM | PERMALINK

As long as there is one pinko leftist liberal democrat terrorist lover left in this country who wants to kill and eat babies, and funnel hundreds of billions of dollars to the welfare queens, we will keep fighting for our right to make America a Holy Nation of God. Even if it means burning liberals at the stake.

It's what the Puritans who built this country would have wanted.

Posted by: American Fuck on June 5, 2006 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

poor rc, he's too stupid to read upthread.

Posted by: Brian on June 5, 2006 at 7:03 PM | PERMALINK

I think you are misreading the Republican base. Sure, the social conservatives are dissapointed that their agenda has not been enacted, but the fiscal conservatives are pissed off at the drunken sailor budgets. But what will hold both in the fold is the war. Most of these voters firmly believe that the liberal media lost the Viet Nam war, not the troops. They are concerned that it is happening again. Some kind of October surprise in Iraq, Iran or Afganistan is more likely to bring out the faithful than the FMA.

Posted by: Tassled Loafered Leech on June 5, 2006 at 7:04 PM | PERMALINK

The more pessimistic commenters may be missing a part of Steve's argument: that it's different this time around, as this is the most power the modern GOP has ever had, and likely can have in the current political environment.

It's one thing to repeatedly fail and say to the base, "Hey, get us a few more seats, so we can do it next time!" That's a great GOTV strategy, if you're in the minority (or thin majority). But I don't see how that would work for this election. The most their base can hope for is to retain the majority status, and then see another 2 years of not getting what they want.

Posted by: PapaJijo on June 5, 2006 at 7:07 PM | PERMALINK

That's right Brian!

Tell these liberal lame-asses that no matter what happens to the effort to save America from the abomination that is gay marriage, those of us on the Right that represent traditional American values will not stop fighting until every last member of The Party of Death is destroyed utterly!

Posted by: American Fuck on June 5, 2006 at 7:09 PM | PERMALINK

The whole point is to demonstrate that, contrary to appearances, they do NOT YET control all of the levers of government -- that there are still obstructionists who need to be ousted (from congress, the courts, and everywhere else). Thus demonstrating an inability to achieve these ends can be thought to mobilize the base.

Posted by: focus on June 5, 2006 at 7:17 PM | PERMALINK

That's right Brian!

Tell these liberal lame-asses that no matter what happens to the effort to save America from the abomination that is gay marriage, those of us on the Right that represent traditional American values will not stop fighting until every last member of The Party of Death is destroyed utterly!

actually, moron, i favor gay marriage. the states should decide for themselves. i'm just a sucker for that whole "crucibles of democracy" thing.

i must admit that the liberals amuse me greatly. they bitch about mean spirited conservatives and then far outdo said conservatives in hate filled rhetoric.

once again, look upthread or in most any thread around here.

Posted by: Brian on June 5, 2006 at 7:18 PM | PERMALINK

Any reasonable Democrat ( I hope there are some such humans left) who wants to understnd why his party loses election after election should just try to study the anti-religious and anti-American comments made here.

Posted by: American Hawk on June 5, 2006 at 7:22 PM | PERMALINK

The problem for the Republican Party isn't the failure of these amendments as such - that won't necessarily discourage a base that's used to defeats on social issues. The problem is the fact that a lot of conservatives are seeing through the gay marriage/flag burning amendments as an election year ploy.

It's hard to be enthusiastic about that.

Posted by: Rake Stately on June 5, 2006 at 7:31 PM | PERMALINK

Any reasonable Democrat ( I hope there are some such humans left) who wants to understnd why his party loses election after election should just try to study the anti-religious and anti-American comments made here.
Posted by: American Hawk on June 5, 2006 at 7:22 PM | PERMALINK

Gee A-H, I don't understand.

Nobody on this blog is running for office.

How can the statements they make cause Democrats to lose elections, huh? Inquiring minds want to know!

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on June 5, 2006 at 7:39 PM | PERMALINK

Kevins strawman is meaningless. Few conservatives give a 2nd thought to flag burning. We don't it but we're hardly losing any sleep over it. Many think those people burning flags do far more harm than good to their cause and thus are a political asset. At a Phillies - Dodgers game recently the broadcasters talked about one of their favorite Dodger moments and it was when Rick Monday ran over to a group of morons trying to light a flag on fire on the field. Monday walked over and took the flag. A fairly good player with a long career he's more famous for that incident than anything he did as a player. Of course the story is even better when you can watch the video tape which probably has been run 5,000 times.

Flagburning reminds everyone of what assh*les the post-68 libs are.

Repealing the death tax is a more important issue and matters a great deal. As long as the effort is made the GOP gains. Each Senator and congressmen up for re-election who votes against ending the tax will be smeared as a tax and spend liberal. That's a nice edge.

The marriage amendment is less important but does the same thing for the GOP. It's less important because a large number of conservatives think marriage and abortion should be state issues. Clinton stood strong against gay marriage be passing the defense against marriage act making sure no state has to recognize the marriages of another state. The red states don't want gay marriage and they're passing laws to prevent them.

As far as disappointment with Bush Kevin doesn't understand the causes. Spending is at the top of the list as is weakness on immigration. Very near and dear to Conservative hearts is the Judiciary and GWB has been stellar. John Roberts might be the finest Presidential appointment in 3 decades. He's proven to be a very conservative and outstanding chief justice who might deliver > 3 decades of conservative values. Sam Alito, who might hit 3 decades as well seems to be just as conservative.

These two were great picks. Last week Kennedy wrote an important 5-4 opinion denying the Federal work force absurd 1st amendment protections never intended for federal employees and just today the court announced they will hear two important affirmative action cases. This time next year Affirmative Action will be ended.

GWB also just recently added Bret Kavanaugh to replace Sam Alito on the critical D.C circuit to keep it's more conservative flavor. Plans are in the works for a small army of very conservative nominations to the federal bench before the election to remind conservatives of just how important these elections can be.

Conservatives understand Kerry or any other Democrat would further liberalize the courts and that's a horror.

But the GOP always has one ace up it's sleeve. The Dems can safely sit back and attack now but we all know at some point they're going to actually have to get behind an agenda and campaign. With 22 Democratic Senators running for President that's going to be fun to watch. With Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Teddy Kennedy and Harry Reid so visible it might not be that hard to energize the base.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 7:48 PM | PERMALINK

What's missing from this discussion is deciphering what the gatekeepers to the Republican base will decide this fall. The Republicans benefit from the stupidity of a huge number of voters, but they're not the primary motivators that get them to the polls.

The gatekeepers -- the Dobsons, Falwells, Robertsons and such -- are the ones who will decide whether to motivate their followers. And they are decidedly not stupid. Crazy, but not stupid.

And they may be tired of being the Christian Charlie Browns who get fooled again and again when Republican Lucy pulls the football away.

Posted by: Greg VA on June 5, 2006 at 7:54 PM | PERMALINK

Repealing the death tax is a more important issue and matters a great deal. As long as the effort is made the GOP gains.Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 7:48 PM | PERMALINK

So basically, you're agreeing with Kevin.

It doesn't matter if they actually DELIVER the conservative base what they want, as long as they can scam gullible conservative fools (oops - was that redundant?) long enough to get into office, so they can continue to hand over the public treasury to their corporate johns-er, donors.

The problem is (and Kevin's point) that some conservatives are starting to get wise to the scam. Hence, Bush's low ratings after hitching his horse to the Hate Wagon (immigration, gay rights - what's next?)

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on June 5, 2006 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINK
Kevins strawman is meaningless.

Kevin who?

Plus, nowhere have you described a "strawman".

Posted by: cmdicely on June 5, 2006 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINK

AH:Any reasonable Democrat ( I hope there are some such humans left) who wants to understnd why his party loses election after election should just try to study the anti-religious and anti-American comments made here.

How are you defining "reasonable?"

I think you're right that there is anti-fundamentalist and anti-evagelical verbage on display here, but that can as easily be described as anti-bigotry verbage as it can anti-religious. You are using a very wide brush when you say these sentiments are anti-relgion and anti-American.

No one is arguing against religion per se, but against the application of a specific set of religious interpretations as a law for an entire country. That seems to be to be pro seperation of church and state, not anti-religious.

As far as whether any of the rhetoric here is anti-American, perhaps you can explain why discriminating against one group is American.

I can only conclude that your definition of "reasonable Democrat" is someone who accepts your framing of the debate without question, so I'll happily accede to being termed "unreasonable."

Posted by: cyntax on June 5, 2006 at 8:02 PM | PERMALINK

Excuse me, but who else is the "far right" gonna vote for? Certainly not a Democrat.

Posted by: Ranger Jay on June 5, 2006 at 8:02 PM | PERMALINK

I agree that it's questionable how motivated these guys will be this year. The question is -- do they feel like their partisans are doing all they can and being constrained by the larger society -- or have their partisans begun to sell out and become corrupted by power a la Reed?

Conservatives will not spend 3 minutes worrying about Ralph Reed or the corruption you 'seem' to think is there. If by corruption you mean become an inside the beltway type, forgetting why your were sent to DC in the 1st place, and spending like a pig, you are quite correct. If you mean contact with abrahoff you are wrong.

The single biggest problem for conservatives with this President and congress is they are just as bad as the spending pigs they replaced. There is a small group that would be willing to risk losing the house in order to send a message to all other republicans to return to their roots and stay there when we get the house back.

It's interesting that Newt is trying a comeback. He's a great example of what conservatives will do if a politician makes promises and forgets them. The PA state house just had it's most dramatic primary elections in 3 decades with long time republics turned out and replaced by rookies understanding voters want less government and less taxes.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 8:03 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,

forgot kevin was off this week. Ok Steve, happy?

The strawman is the one put out there by the Note. That the flag burning amendment, gay sex, and death tax are ALL that drives the GOP. Flag burning isn't even on the radar and I thought it was Hilliary Clinton pushing it anyway.

Steve makes a number of false assumptions thinking they're fact. The 18 months of nothing to show tops the list. GWB judiciary picks have been stellar. This is the best supreme court of our lifetimes. GWB has also has a substantial effect on the lower courts with a much better performance than Reagan. He's not only added authentic consevatives but star legal minds. Bret Kavanaugh at age 42 will be a Supreme Court candidate for the next 4 Presidential terms as will Edith Jones, Janice rodgers Brown, Priscilla Owens and another dozen Bush appointees.

Conservative are also very happy with the 2003 tax cuts setting off the strongest GDP growth in 20 years and the recent extension of several of those cuts designed to promote more investment. We had the best energy legislation ever and we've got a rapidly evolving ethanol program that will be efficient because it's primarily market driven. We don't have the kind of heavy-handed price controls and allocation's we'd be sure to have under kerry.

In addition Conservative know Kerry would try to abandon Iraq making it wrse for our troops and security as well as led off his term with an apology tour of Europe. He's also be negotiating the Korea and Iran getting played for a sap just like Slick willie did.

Being at war it's not possible to say the last 18 months have been great but conservatives understand they're a damn sight better under GWB than they'd be under kerry. We know we need an adult in charge not someone following polls and fretting about how popular they are in France.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 8:24 PM | PERMALINK

Excuse me, but who else is the "far right" gonna vote for? Certainly not a Democrat.
Posted by: Ranger Jay on June 5, 2006 at 8:02 PM | PERMALINK

Maybe Buchanan will run again? Or maybe they'll throw away all pretense and vote for Hitler as a write-in.

The single biggest problem for conservatives with this President and congress is they are just as bad as the spending pigs they replaced. Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 8:03 PM | PERMALINK

I don't know about that. I don't seem to recall any Democrats handing out $21 Million secret-clearance contracts to a limo company whose owner was a felon, whose limos were getting reposessed, shuttling hookers to and from poker games at the Watergate hotel. That's $21 Million in taxpayer dollars. For hookers. Abusing our national security apparatus. For hookers.

You don't think Abramoff and those Republicans that were associated with him weren't corrupt? Then your moral compass is definately pointed in the wrong direction. These fuckers are in jail, where they belong. And more are on the way.

This crop of Republicans is FAR worse than the Democrats they replaced. And they're not even good at covering it up. Anyone contemplating voting Republican this year ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on June 5, 2006 at 8:30 PM | PERMALINK

Then your moral compass is definately pointed in the wrong direction.

Point of Information: can a moral compass be pointed in the wrong direction if it doesn't exist at all?

Posted by: POI on June 5, 2006 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

We know we need an adult in charge

Further proof of your complete idiocy. And how many times did you mention Kerry? Newsflash to idiot conservatives nationwide...Kerry LOST. Your boy is running the show, so please try and remember that. Bush is the one fucking things up left and right, not Kerry, mmkay sweetie? Do you think you can remember that?

As per usual with most uptight blowhards, you'll be obsessed with Kerry for the next ten years, like most of you losers still are with Clinton.

Posted by: Mode1 on June 5, 2006 at 8:38 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, the single biggest problem is that the current Republican majorities and Bush got themselves elected in no small part to paying lip service to a theory of government which is so ridiculously stupid that it only makes sense on talk radio.

Rdw should not feel bad though, because this is only the flip side of the single biggest problem faced by post-60's Democrats, which is that there are some social problems and inequalities that even an entity as large as the Federal Government of the United States cannot solve. Moreover, attempts to solve them gets you labled as a "free spending liberal pig" for 40 years.

Posted by: hank on June 5, 2006 at 8:45 PM | PERMALINK

"Any reasonable Democrat ( I hope there are some such humans left) who wants to understnd why his party loses election after election should just try to study the anti-religious and anti-American comments made here."

How about just the demeaning and arrogant ones, like these--

"which benefits a tiny number of extremely wealthy families like the Wal-Mart clan"

"they'd have to find new ways to scare the shit out of the trailer park"

"Is there any chance at all that this "base" could read a book or something, learn something of the world, maybe grow up a little?

"Not only do the little idiots buy it"

I used to read this site every day. This is the first thing I have read here in more than 2 months, and my decision not to come here anymore is reaffirmed. You folks are in the business of convincing the convinced and converting the converted, while offending most everybody else. That is not how you win elections.

Posted by: Dr. Dan on June 5, 2006 at 8:53 PM | PERMALINK

rdw made the best comment: GWB also just recently added Bret Kavanaugh to replace Sam Alito on the critical D.C circuit to keep it's more conservative flavor. Plans are in the works for a small army of very conservative nominations to the federal bench before the election to remind conservatives of just how important these elections can be.

There are many issues, and the Republicans have been successful in achieving some goals, but not all of them. Highlighting some of the failures will energize the base as long as the successes are also mentioned. Those three justices were the rewards that the base got for their big turnout in 2004, and they show that a big turnout is capable of getting more good results in the future.

Unfulfilled aspirations might demoralize some people, but among the Republicans they will have an energizing effect.

Posted by: republicrat on June 5, 2006 at 8:53 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: I'm sorry about liberals' unkind comments on this thread. You sound hurt. Are you gonna be okay?

Posted by: Pat on June 5, 2006 at 8:59 PM | PERMALINK

As per usual with most uptight blowhards, you'll be obsessed with Kerry for the next ten years, like most of you losers still are with Clinton.

Actually I'm not uptight at all. I am not at all obsessed with Kerry nor with Gore but I do enjoy mentioning them as much as possible. Are there better examples of liberal ineptitude? Gotta love Al's comeback. Please God let him be the comeback kid. Do they come any better? A C-student at Yale who fail at two post graduate study programs but still he's an intellectual.

Did you see his comments to Arianna Huffington at Cannes last week? He just informed us he spent the summer of his 15th birthday in France studing the existentialists, in FRENCH! Daddt raised him to be a dick and succeeded brilliantly. Too bad he still only managed to pull C's in French class. One has to admire the man thought. His official biography said he spent his 15th birthday on the family farm pulling mule teams. But hey, this is Al, inventor of the internet. If anyone can be in France studing Camus and in Tennessee pulling mule teams at the same time it's Albert Gore. The world biggest dick.

That's saying something when you share the planet with the guy who voted for it before he voted against it and spent Xmas in Cambodia in 1968 listening to President Nixon before Nixon was even President. That's just pure talent.

I'm not obsessed. I just enjoy humor and parody. Those two are clowns.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 9:03 PM | PERMALINK

pat,

I sound hurt? How so? My team owns the White House, Senate, House of Representatives and Supreme court. Why would I be hurt?

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 9:07 PM | PERMALINK

I have to agree with republicrat ... the wingnut base sees the successes, and they realize that their positions are extreme, and shared by only a small (but vocal) minority in this country. therefore, they need to keep coming out to overturn the independant voters, with whom they share little in either values or politics.

Posted by: Nads on June 5, 2006 at 9:16 PM | PERMALINK

Still touting those same old false stories and lies, rdw? Tsk, tsk. You've already been previously told that much of what you have written is completely and totally false, including the Al Gore stories, the Kerry stories, the economic growth lie, and so on. Hilarious stuff, though -- so completely divorced from reality that it's fascinating to watch. Amazing that someone can be so completely ignorant.

Oh well...do feel free to join us out here in the real world anytime. Maybe someday when you've grown up. TTFN.

Posted by: PaulB on June 5, 2006 at 9:23 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: Sorry, I confused you with Brian, who up above was sniffling about liberal insults. All you RNC frat boys look the same to me. Apologies.

As for "your team," I'm sure glad to hear they are in control and you aren't hurt. But, about the country ...

Posted by: Pat on June 5, 2006 at 9:24 PM | PERMALINK

cyntax

Checkout the 7:54 post by Greg for some elitist nonsense. Liberals always give a greatly exaggerated level of importance to those on the religious right assuming the control of Republicans. The condescention is fabulous. No one likes elitists. That's why liberal elites can't get elected. That's why the MSM loses influence every day. Kerry tried to win and the 1st thing he did was ban the term liberal from his bio. The only smart decision he made.

Clinton and Gore absolutely avoided any suggestion they were libs as did Jimmy Carter. It's that elitist thing.

By all means never forget you're the smartest person in the room and you belong to the bestest, smartests, most noble party in the history of man and make sure you tell everyone every chance. People love voting for their surperiors.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 9:28 PM | PERMALINK

it's Albert Gore. The world biggest dick

I don't know about "world's biggest" but I'll bet it's at least twice as long as that puny thing you're sporting.

Please give my condolences to the missus.

And remember - always recycle.

Posted by: Albert "Magnum" Gore on June 5, 2006 at 9:32 PM | PERMALINK

PaulB,

Actually all of the stories proving Al Gore is a dick are true. Anyone who might brag about mommy and daddy sending them off to spend their 15th summer in France studing Camus in French is a dick. Hardly new news but the man is relentless. He seeks to prove it all over again every day and almost always succeeds.

That he kind of forgot he already told us he spent that 15th summer in Tennessee plowing the family farm is just another Gorism. Al never lets us down.

As to Kerry his Xmas in Cambodia is just one of those perfect stories. He told us about it many times and with great passion each time. It was as he explained a turning point in his life. The memory was seared, seared in him. Well why wounld't it be. Damn, to be spending Xmas Eve in a war zone a gazillion miles from home in 1968 and listening to President Nixon tell the world he wasn't in Cambodia.

Who could forget something like that? No wonder the memory was seared, seared in him.

He told that story many times over 20 years. Wouldn't you think someone, anyone, would tell the simple bastard Nixon wasn't President in 1968?

It is beyond cool that Al Gore and John Kerry are sophisticated intellectuals. It's even better the dumb bastard in the White House had better marks at Yale than the both of them. He's president and they're not because he never pretended to be more than he is. Americans can smell pretentious assh*les a mile away. You do know how to pick them.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 9:43 PM | PERMALINK

" 'mericans can smell pretentious assh*les a mile away."

Guess that's why the chimpy's approval rating is in the low '30s.

heh.

Posted by: Joel on June 5, 2006 at 10:01 PM | PERMALINK

But, about the country ...

We're doing fine Pat. War sucks but you have to do what you have to do. America has always been fortunate to have it's best and brightest in charge duing times of need. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc.

If you're looking to get depressed, and what liberal isn't, read Bruce Bawers' While Europe Slept. Not something I'd buy (I'm a Reagan optimist) and I thought I was already sufficiently pessimistic on Europe but wow! Are they screwed.

It's all but hopeless. Those poor bastards are still without a clue. In some cases there's some recognition the Islamic minorities may not be as tolerant but they're gonna remain uber-PC because they're so sophisticated they'll aways be able to reason with their neighbors and keep the peace. So what if they set off a few hundred car bombs, slice a few throats. Misunderstandings happen in every family. Europeans are far more tolerant of other cultures and will be able to show any culture the virtues of tolerance and live and let live.

Not like those cowboy Americans.

They're so screwed.

You had to love the coverage of the majority of Canada's newspapers on the 17 arrests of Islamic militants. Of course they would never call them Islamic militants. That's judgemental and might be perceived as an offense. Can't have that!

After the London bombing the BBC's initial reports referred to terrorists atrocities. Oh the rough language. They immediately corrected the possible insult and instead referred to daylight bombings.

Those people are crazy. The canadian and European libs I mean. The bombers and their planners were to a man on the dole. They were getting a series of checks fomr the government. Many had never worked a day in their entire life in London and had been there for more than a decade. British citizens, British Educated, fed, clothed, shelted, etc. The brits paid them to blow them up. The brits are STILL paying thir families.

It isn't bad enought they have a really pissed off, violent minority in their midsts with a very workable plan to take over but they've managed to piss off the only people who can save them. We'll never send troops to Europe again.

If looking to France is your idea of the ideal liberal state start looking for another example.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 10:05 PM | PERMALINK

...you're looking to get depressed, and what liberal isn't, read Bruce Bawers' While Europe Slept. Not something I'd buy (I'm a Reagan optimist) and I thought I was already sufficiently pessimistic on Europe but wow! Are they screwed...

I'd recommend "Why the 21st Century belongs to Europe". It's an interesting read.

Still, if you were already aware that the EU's economy is bigger than the US economy by quite a few billion dollars, as well as the fact that Europe is NOT deep in debt to its main strategic rival (China) then you might find it not so eye opening.

Posted by: floopmeister on June 5, 2006 at 10:09 PM | PERMALINK

Almost sad how little respect the Republican leadership has for the people that vote for them.

Posted by: Fred F. on June 5, 2006 at 10:09 PM | PERMALINK

"Still, if you were already aware that the EU's economy is bigger than the US economy by quite a few billion dollars, as well as the fact that Europe is NOT deep in debt to its main strategic rival (China) then you might find it not so eye opening."

Heh, indeedy.

Posted by: Joel on June 5, 2006 at 10:11 PM | PERMALINK

Those people are crazy. The canadian and European libs I mean. The bombers and their planners were to a man on the dole.

Wrong. Off the top of my head I can tell you that the oldest was working as a school teacher.

They were getting a series of checks fomr the government. Many had never worked a day in their entire life in London and had been there for more than a decade.

Wrong again.

I'm sorry, but is this where I'm not supposed to use mean language about your ignorance?

British citizens, British Educated, fed, clothed, shelted, etc. The brits paid them to blow them up. The brits are STILL paying thir families.

Slow down your typing - your spelling's getting incoherent and I'm still wiping spittle off my monitor.

Posted by: floopmeister on June 5, 2006 at 10:12 PM | PERMALINK

Joel,

George is a lot of things but pretentious isn't one of them. Rasmussen has a slight rebound going and he's at 41%. He'll get back above 45% in time for the election and that means the base is ready.

Un-noticed but George has made several significiant appointments and they've been very good. A few have been under the radar. He's done a nice job rotating talent to develop the bench. A lot of the next generation republicans have had different jobs and will be well prepared for more responsibility in the future. There's a lot more going on than you know.

If I'm not mistaken his polls were mid 30's when he passed the last tax cuts, the Bret Kavanaugh nomination, the order to send the guard to the border, the bill for a security fence, etc. He's not listening to Reid on Iraq, the economy, GW or anything else for that matter. He keeps on laughing when the press or Joe Biden tries to fire Rummy, as does Rummy. Doesn't seem the polls are hurting anything.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 10:16 PM | PERMALINK

In some cases there's some recognition the Islamic minorities may not be as tolerant but they're gonna remain uber-PC because they're so sophisticated they'll aways be able to reason with their neighbors and keep the peace. So what if they set off a few hundred car bombs, slice a few throats. Misunderstandings happen in every family. Europeans are far more tolerant of other cultures and will be able to show any culture the virtues of tolerance and live and let live.

Not like those cowboy Americans.

Wow. Nice insecurity complex you've got there.

I'll bet you don't drink Evian water anymore, either.

That'll show those civilised and sophisticated Europeans they can't look down their noses at you!

Posted by: floopmeister on June 5, 2006 at 10:19 PM | PERMALINK

"Rasmussen has a slight rebound going . . ."

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Funniest post yet, rdw. Thanks! I love it!

Posted by: Joel on June 5, 2006 at 10:22 PM | PERMALINK

Rasmussen has a slight rebound going and he's at 41%. He'll get back above 45% in time for the election and that means the base is ready.

Yep, keep clapping boyo.

He's done a nice job rotating talent to develop the bench.

Yep, those asses are polishing that bench to a purty shine.

A lot of the next generation republicans have had different jobs and will be well prepared for more responsibility in the future.

Yeah, because the Heritage Foundation is such good training for government positions.

There's a lot more going on than you know.

Oooohhh. Is this like the da Vinci Code?

Posted by: floopmeister on June 5, 2006 at 10:23 PM | PERMALINK

Get as well as you can, Ogged.

Posted by: Mike on June 5, 2006 at 10:26 PM | PERMALINK

You mean this *rebound*?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/5/14/17508/5378

heh.

Posted by: Joel on June 5, 2006 at 10:26 PM | PERMALINK

Anyway, been nice laughing at you rdw.

I'm off to lunch.

Posted by: floopmeister on June 5, 2006 at 10:26 PM | PERMALINK

Still, if you were already aware that the EU's economy is bigger than the US economy by quite a few billion dollars, as well as the fact that Europe is NOT deep in debt to its main strategic rival (China) then you might find it not so eye opening.

Except it isn't and it's also the slowest growing region on the planet not in Africa. Growth in Per capita income in France, Germany, Italy and now the UK is lagging most of the rest of the world. They've dropped out of the top 10 and will be out of the top 20 soon enough. They have virtually no diplomatic influnce (as we see with iran toying with them), virtually no military influence (they were helpless against Milosovich) and diminishing economic power. They are bribed as often as they can bribe as we saw in the Oil for Palace scandal in Iraq when Saddam bought and paid for them.

It looks are though the car-b-ques have started up in France again and the Brits are looking for a dirty bomb the terror cell they just arrested has 'lost'. Birthrates in Italy and Spain are below 1.2 and falling everywhere else. No Western European nation has a birthrate near replacement levels.

If the 21st century is to belong to Europe it's only because their goal in life has always been to pray 5x's a day.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 10:30 PM | PERMALINK

Tried to buy any euros lately, rdw?

Didn't think so.

heh.

Posted by: Joel on June 5, 2006 at 10:33 PM | PERMALINK

If the 21st century is to belong to Europe it's only because their goal in life has always been to pray 5x's a day.
Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 10:30 PM | PERMALINK

Let me guess, your strategy is to out-breed them?
Sounds about right, coming from a fucker such as yourself.

Posted by: osama_been_forgotten on June 5, 2006 at 10:38 PM | PERMALINK

That is not how you win elections.

Yeah, like any of us posting here are Democratic strategists or politicians. Thanks for the lecture Dr Thin-skinned Dan, now go back to your Fauxhole where all the news is good for your side and the skies are not cloudy all day.

Posted by: Irony Man on June 5, 2006 at 10:44 PM | PERMALINK

I'd recommend "Why the 21st Century belongs to Europe". It's an interesting read.

Do you mean, Why Europe will run the 21st century by mark leonard?

I read a synopsis and it's bizarre. Like most Europeans he think they've invented peace. The evidence being they haven't been at war since 1945. Stalin immediately recognized Europes soft power was a force he could not possibly deal with. The American Marines, Army and air forces were a piece of cake. That soft power just scared the crap out of him. And Kruschev, Bresnev, etc.

He also thinks the soft power they hold is what is attracting theirnew members to join. It has nothing to do wiht the fact they suffered under soviet designed socialism with huge defense costs while Western europe was build up by american designed and funded capitalism and protected by the American defense umbrella.

This is all fantasy but it will make the next decade interesting as we see how impressed the rest of the world is with all of this soft power. I'm sure their Islamic minorites are impressed. I bet the Chinese and Indians are woking on a plan to join the EU as we speak.

Onew question though, as we get closer to 2030, what will they do for people?

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 10:52 PM | PERMALINK

I'm lovin' it! Bashin'homos and passing a flag burning amendment are about as relevant as dinosaur repellent. If the Repukes run Newton Leroy Gingrich for prez in 2008, they won't be able to get enough ballots to wipe Denny Hastert's fat ass with...

Posted by: Fred Flintrock on June 5, 2006 at 11:02 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: Except it isn't...

Except it is. For 2005, GDP PPP:
- IMF: EU a tiny bit larger than US
- CIA Factbook: US a tiny bit larger than EU
- World Bank: EU slightly larger than US

For 2005, GDP nominal: EU is notably larger than the US by anyone's measure.

Posted by: has407 on June 5, 2006 at 11:10 PM | PERMALINK

'Tell these liberal lame-asses that no matter what happens to the effort to save America from the abomination that is gay marriage, those of us on the Right that represent traditional American values will not stop fighting until every last member of The Party of Death is destroyed utterly!'
--American F*ckwad

Yeah, you talk real tough, you fuckin' sissy. I challenge you to a bare knuckle fist fight, you coward. When my 250 lbs of muscly hamhocks knock every one of your rotten teeth down your pimply throat, I'll show you what the Party of Death really means!

Conservatives are wimps - George Will, Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh, George W. Bush. Shit. Weak-kneed cowardly pussies - every one of them...

Posted by: Fred Flintrock on June 5, 2006 at 11:10 PM | PERMALINK

This is nothing more then a distraction and all those media outlets including bloggers give it credibility by talking about it. The fact is the majority of voters are fed up with both parties and will vote helter skelter across all party lines unfortunately leaving the same people in power. The democrats have one chance of pulling together and letting people know they are willing to change things. They must at all costs defeat dumbya's Iraq emergency funding bill coming up next on the legislative agenda. They have the power of the purse (which is quite fitting for that pack of nancy boys) and if they fail to use it now they will only be supporting this administrations march to fascism. They will say they don't support the troops but sending our boys in on a pack of lies is treason not supporting the troops. If they don't expect third parties to be the tie breaking votes after November.

Posted by: vampire77666 on June 5, 2006 at 11:27 PM | PERMALINK

Still, if you were already aware that the EU's economy is bigger than the US economy by quite a few billion dollars,

Except it isn't.

has407, You have me confused. You confirm my point with the IMF, CIA and the world bank data. Then you state they're all wrong without citing any source.

BTW: The comparison of the USA with the EU, as if the EU were a functioning political union, is wrong. The EU at this point is only an economic union and not a full union. Eastern Europe has dramatically different tax policies and rates and different levels of regulation and still very different cultures. Many EU nations are in Iraq and many are not. Many EU nations have very poor relations with other members. Chirac's amazingly condescending remarks to Poland and several others are still an open sore. There isn't a constitution and may never be one given the turnover of the leadership in Germany, Italy and Spain and the political weakness of France and the UK.

The longer the next step for further integration takes the less likely it can succeed. The economies of the East are growing 2x's to 3x's as quickly and it many countries significant relative population changes are starting to show. The Brit don't seem to have any appetite to adapt the Euro or draw closer ties.

The EU could easily unravel if/when fst growing states likle Poland catch up and decide they're better outside than inside.

Posted by: rdw on June 5, 2006 at 11:29 PM | PERMALINK

There could be one liberal in the entire United States, and the Republicans would still blame her for their inability to pass any of the Far Right's wish list items.

Aw heck, there could be NO liberals and they'd still blame them. Since when does a threat have to actually exist for the Republicans to shift the blame?

Posted by: moderleft on June 5, 2006 at 11:46 PM | PERMALINK

The Republican base has Homo-Erotic dreams.

No one can control their dreams.

This frightens them. The "marriage amendment" will galvanize them to vote to overcome their fears. Very Pavlovian.

Goebbels would be proud of Rove.

Posted by: deejaays on June 5, 2006 at 11:48 PM | PERMALINK

By all means never forget you're the smartest person in the room and you belong to the bestest, smartests, most noble party in the history of man and make sure you tell everyone every chance. People love voting for their surperiors.

If being an elitist means not being the dumbest motherfucker in the room, then call me an elitist.

Posted by: someOtherClown on June 6, 2006 at 12:19 AM | PERMALINK

Mary Cheney was on Wolf Blitzer's show today opposing any amendment banning same-sex marriages on the grounds that it writes discrimination into the Constitution.

She made a lot of sense, comparing the bombast around the issue with the hysterics that arose during the movement to legalize "interracial" marriage.

The hysteria over that issue is almost completely gone now, and she suggested that as the same-sex marriage issue is a generational issue that the furor over this issue too shall soon pass as younger voters come into the fore.

Posted by: trex on June 6, 2006 at 12:32 AM | PERMALINK

rdw: You have me confused. You confirm my point...

No, I simply presented three sources of measures of GDP for 2005, which do not confirm your point, but rather suggest that the EU and US GDP are within a hair of each other, with the EU appearing to edge out the US; the data is easy to locate online.

As for what it means, whether the data is meaningful or comparable, or what the implications might be, you obviously have all the answers pre-digested.

Posted by: has407 on June 6, 2006 at 1:13 AM | PERMALINK

Interesting point on Instapundit: We must be winning the war on terror, because the Dems have stopped whining about it.

Posted by: Frequency Kenneth on June 6, 2006 at 1:13 AM | PERMALINK

Cheney: ...do you really think an amendment that gets every Dem and RINO to vote for same-sex marriage will NOT rally the base?

That anyone could believe a vote against the amendment is a vote for same-sex marriage, or makes anyone who votes against it the enemy--regardless of their other qualifications as either Republican or Democrat--is bizarre.

That the GOP appears to be promoting that position seems more like fratricide, with marginal gains at enormous cost, rather than "rallying the base".

Posted by: has407 on June 6, 2006 at 1:15 AM | PERMALINK

Correction to previous post "marginal gains" should read "potentially marginal gains".

Posted by: has407 on June 6, 2006 at 1:16 AM | PERMALINK

That the GOP appears to be promoting that position seems more like fratricide, with marginal gains at enormous cost, rather than "rallying the base".

I agree. While allowing the FMA to be defeated might create a backlash to rally some of the base in the short term, believe it will lead to an overreach that will ultimately undermine the social conservatives on this issue.

The historical precedent for this is the failed federal anti-miscegenation amendment of the early twentieth century that led to many states passing their own laws banning mixed marriages. While a victory for segregationists in the short term, in the long term passing more laws that further defined a group of people as second-class citizens simply helped build the moral outrage that ultimately led to the Civil Rights movement and more freedom and integration for blacks than most people had thought possible.

I believe a similar reaction could take place among many gays if the government takes further steps to limit their civil rights.

Mary Cheney also said that her uber-conservative father is also against the FMA. If Dick Cheney can be against consolidation of federal power in this matter, anyone can.

Posted by: trex on June 6, 2006 at 1:25 AM | PERMALINK

Too bad homosexuals can curb their sexual behavior and people of different races cannot choose a different race.

Huh?

Translation, anyone?

Posted by: floopmeister on June 6, 2006 at 1:38 AM | PERMALINK

Interesting point on Instapundit: We must be winning the war on terror, because the Dems have stopped whining about it.

They only way America would be winning the war on terror is if Americans were less frightened.

Are you less frightened, Kenneth?

Posted by: floopmeister on June 6, 2006 at 1:41 AM | PERMALINK

"Daddt raised him to be a dick and succeeded brilliantly. Too bad he still only managed to pull C's in French class. One has to admire the man thought."

Maybe you should admire the "man thought" a little bit more -- and do your sneering about Al Gore's education in recognizable English.

Posted by: Kenji on June 6, 2006 at 1:48 AM | PERMALINK

Translation, anyone?

Got me. Anti-miscegenation laws were passed to prevent blacks from the activity of marrying whites. Some of the main arguments were that mixed marriages were unnatural, simply the result of perverse sexual desire -- and that allowing mixed-marriages would destroy marriage (and the White "race") forever.

Essentially the same arguments against same-sex unions today.

Posted by: trex on June 6, 2006 at 2:00 AM | PERMALINK

No Cheney, I don't get it.

You are equating an state, 'being Black', with another state, 'Being Homosexual'. They are both states of existence, right?

Because if homosexuality is purely an activity ("homosexuals can change their sexual behavior") then the problem has nothing to do with homosexuals at all, does it? It's the sin, not the sinner, and all that crap.

Who cares if 'people who feel the urge to engage in homosexual acts' get married then, as long as they're not engaging in those homosexual acts, right?

Why would it be wrong having homosexuals (sorry - there's no such state of Being - I mean, people who have the urge to engage in acts of homsexuality) in the military if such people don't actually exist? Who cares if people with these 'urges' are in the military, if it's simply a case of not acting on them?

All that exists is the sin of homosexuality, right? Homosexuals, as a category of human being, don't actually exist.

So why are you so scared of them?

BTW, don't yank anyone's chain with your guff about the sainted memory of MLK. It doesn't convince anyone.

Posted by: floopmeister on June 6, 2006 at 2:01 AM | PERMALINK
"I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice," she said. "But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'" "I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people," she said.

Coretta Scott King, March 31, 1998.

Posted by: trex on June 6, 2006 at 2:10 AM | PERMALINK
Too bad homosexuals can curb their sexual behavior and people of different races cannot choose a different race.

People who want to have sex with people of a different race can curb those desires at least as easily as those who want to have sex with people of the same sex. Your "argument" (actually, an assertion that, even if true, would be at best tangential) is idiotic.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 6, 2006 at 2:17 AM | PERMALINK

cmdicely: I believe Cheney's 'arguing' not that people can't curb their desires to have sex with people of different races, but that they can't choose to Be a different race.

Not that it's any less idiotic.

Posted by: floopmeister on June 6, 2006 at 2:20 AM | PERMALINK

I will see your E.U., and raise you one Canada ($1,130,208,000,000) and Mexico ($768,437,000,000) combined with the U.S. to kick E.U. butt. After we get that out of the way - back on topic - do you really think an amendment that gets every Dem and RINO to vote for same-sex marriage will NOT rally the base?

Voting against FMA isn't even going to be practical to spin as voting "for same-sex marriage".

Posted by: cmdicely on June 6, 2006 at 2:21 AM | PERMALINK

Coretta Scott King weighs in on the issue with eloquence once more:

We have a lot more work to do in our common struggle against bigotry and discrimination. I say common struggle because I believe very strongly that all forms of bigotry and discrimination are equally wrong and should be opposed by right-thinking Americans everywhere. Freedom from discrimination based on sexual orientation is surely a fundamental human right in any great democracy, as much as freedom from racial, religious, gender, or ethnic discrimination.

She certainly carried the torch of her husband's great work forward with dignity and grace.

Posted by: trex on June 6, 2006 at 2:28 AM | PERMALINK

Ah, so a murderer is a murderer due ,i>to actions. Murderers are not born, right? And you are saying that homsexuality is the same - it is not an identity, but an activity.

So why can't people who are homosexual serve in the military, or raise children, if it's an activity rather than an existential state? All you have to do is ban homosexual sex - hell, the minute people stop having homosoexual sex they are, by definition, no longer homosexual, right?

No virgin, by this reasoning, would ever be homosexual.

And yet the Religious Right is never calling for a ban on the particular activity - but for a ban on the identity.

It's illogical.

Posted by: floopmeister on June 6, 2006 at 2:36 AM | PERMALINK

Why is marriage a special right?

Posted by: floopmeister on June 6, 2006 at 2:52 AM | PERMALINK

Why is marriage a special right?

Yes, even the (conservative) Catholic church recognizes that marriage is a sacrament that two consenting adults bestow upon one another, with the priest acting only as witness and blessing the union. No third party confers what only two people can give to each other.

The right to love another person is intrinsic and fundamental, as is the right to give yourself to that person in marriage when you come of age. Wise men in the past have rightly described truths like these as being "self-evident."

Posted by: trex on June 6, 2006 at 3:16 AM | PERMALINK

' 'Being Homosexual' is just a state of existence like "Being a Murderer" is just a state of existence.' -- Cheney

Pretty incendiary statement -- especially coming from a guy who shoots his friends in the face.

Posted by: Kenji on June 6, 2006 at 3:28 AM | PERMALINK

But the GOP base is crazy, not stupid.

Steve, respectfully it's foolish to assume crazy people won't do stupid things. Separating the two by euphemism is naive.

If my experience with evangelicals and other rabid rights wingers is any clue, they'll do stupid things far and wide, despite being quite intelligent, by dint of being crazy. Ignore this at your peril.

Posted by: F'in Librul on June 6, 2006 at 3:35 AM | PERMALINK

和田玉起重机加盟餐饮加盟大金中央空调无水洗车北戴河旅游北戴河
网站建设上海网站建设网页设计上海网页设计
注册公司注册上海公司上海公司注册公司注册
上海公司注册注册上海公司公司注册注册公司
google优化google排名上海google优化上海google排名网站优化
地下金属探测器金属探测器变声器隐形耳机
上海翻译日语翻译上海上海翻译标书翻译波兰语翻译西班牙语翻译说明书翻译陪同翻译
上海网站建设上海网站制作上海网页设计
采暖地暖采暖地暖
大众搬场上海搬场公司上海搬家公司上海打折机票上海特价机票silicone hose
上海门禁挖掘机二手挖掘机上海保洁上海清洁
流水线输送机订房上海厂房出租上海仓库出租
工业皮带工业链条联轴器直线导轨
二手车收购上海二手车高压均质机均质机无水洗车
双色球福彩3D搬场上海搬家上海搬场搬家礼品网礼品网
双色球示波器频谱分析仪二手仪器调节阀气动球阀气动蝶阀电磁阀
私家侦探私人侦探私家侦探私人侦探礼品公司上海翻译公司手机游戏下载视频会议
上海租房租房Stone SculptureStone Carving高压均质机细胞破碎机均质机
窃听器手机窃听器监听器手机监听器免烧砖机磁性材料
广告摄影上海广告摄影上海
门禁监控综合布线
浦东搬场浦东搬家上海婚庆上海婚庆公司
航空障碍灯障碍灯
上海博莱特压缩机有限公司博莱特

Posted by: yag on June 6, 2006 at 4:50 AM | PERMALINK

yag nailed it!

Posted by: Thlayli on June 6, 2006 at 6:24 AM | PERMALINK

Perhaps you underestimate the degree to which right-wingers derive satisfaction from being victims.

Posted by: Nancy Irving on June 6, 2006 at 6:26 AM | PERMALINK

It is an unconscious obsession by the religious nuts, to die with a flag on their coffin before they give in to their homosexual desires.

Posted by: Matt on June 6, 2006 at 7:48 AM | PERMALINK

Perhaps you underestimate the degree to which right-wingers derive satisfaction from being victims.

I think we all properly estimate the degree to which right-wingers derive satisfaction from fancying themselves as victims. Being victims? Since when?

Posted by: Irony Man on June 6, 2006 at 10:05 AM | PERMALINK

You'll have to forgive Charlie, er, Cheney...he's been getting shit upon, having his clock cleaned, and changing handles on this blog for years...the fact that he would choose as his handle the name of the deranged vice-president says a lot about him...

Posted by: An Interested Party on June 6, 2006 at 10:07 AM | PERMALINK

''Being Homosexual' is just a state of existence like "Being a Murderer"

Yeah, just ask Jeff Gannon.

Posted by: Irony Man on June 6, 2006 at 10:17 AM | PERMALINK

The usual flop sweat from the usual weak wits, and not a substantive challAnge in the bunch.

The right has backed itself into Crackerstan. Their "flags and fags" strategy is aimed at this shrinking base, not at the rest of America. This tells me they're only trying to contain the damage.
.

Posted by: Grand Moff Texan on June 6, 2006 at 10:59 AM | PERMALINK

No, I simply presented three sources of measures of GDP for 2005, which do not confirm your point, but rather suggest that the EU and US GDP are within a hair of each other, with the EU appearing to edge out the US; the data is easy to locate online.

Yes it is easy.

So why did Joel state the following?

Still, if you were already aware that the EU's economy is bigger than the US economy by quite a few billion dollars,

MY response was: Except it isn't. Meaning the EU's economy ISN'T bigger by quite a few billion dollars.

It looks as though you and I agree.

BTW: That edge is a temporary condition that will probably reverse in 2006 and continue to reverse for the EU in the coming decades. The growth rates of the larger econmies are less than 2% which is less than 50% USA levels. Worse is per capita income is more than 30% less and the gap is growing rapidly.

Western Europe is screwed. Their stagnant economies are compounded by explosing welfare state liabilities and rapidly aging populations. Each year the challenge becomes more daunting.

Posted by: rdw on June 6, 2006 at 11:45 AM | PERMALINK

Maybe you should admire the "man thought" a little bit more -- and do your sneering about Al Gore's education in recognizable English.

I could improve on my typing but admiring Al Gore as a man isn't going to happen. He is a total fraud. I do admire his ability to play the base for saps. It is amazing he can get people to see him as an intellectual. Pleeeeeeeease!

Posted by: rdw on June 6, 2006 at 11:51 AM | PERMALINK

rdw: I could improve on my typing but admiring Al Gore as a man isn't going to happen.

That's because he is everything you are not: a person who served his country honorably, a person of intellect, a person of conscience, a person of class, a person of compassion, a person of civility, a person of integrity, a person who got more popular votes than Bush 43, a moral person, a competent person, and an honest person.

You, on the other hand, lie and deceive as often as you breathe, have no intellect, no conscience, and no honor or integrity.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 6, 2006 at 12:21 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney: P.S. floopmeister 'Being Homosexual' is just a state of existence like "Being a Murderer" is just a state of existence.

Actually, Cheney, "Being a Murderer" is a state of existence just like "Being a Conservative" is a state of existence.

On the other hand, "Being a Homosexual" is a state of existence just like "Being a Heterosexual" is a state of existence.

Now, if you think "Being a Heterosexual" is a state of existence just like "Being a Murderer" is a state of existence, then you might actually believe your statement to be true.

You'd be wrong, but at least you'd be consistent.

I've found you to be neither in the past, nor particularly honest either.

However, I suspect this is simply more of your intellectual drivel compounded by your immoral hatred of your fellow human beings (except those still in the womb - at least according to your definition of human being) driven by a mendacious nature.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 6, 2006 at 1:04 PM | PERMALINK

I've found you to be neither in the past . . .

That is, neither correct nor consistent.

Posted by: AFG on June 6, 2006 at 1:06 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: Liberals always give a greatly exaggerated level of importance to those on the religious right assuming the control of Republicans. The condescention is fabulous. No one likes elitists. That's why liberal elites can't get elected...

By all means never forget you're the smartest person in the room and you belong to the bestest, smartests, most noble party in the history of man and make sure you tell everyone every chance. People love voting for their surperiors.

Hmm... well if liberals give too much credence to the religious right controlling the Republican party, than who exactly is this constitutional amendment banning gay marriage supposed to be for? Whose interests does this constitutional ammendment serve if not the religious right? I mean since this issue didn't make into the open-ended portion of this poll, I don't think a ban on gay marriage is a priority for anyone but the religious right. Is it a priority for you? Do you think it's worth ammending the Constitution?

It's worth noting that in that CNN poll more people mentioned George Bush as a specifc problem facing this country than mentioned gay marriage; gay marriage didn't even register as a topic on its own. So if a constitutional ban on gay marriage isn't pandering to the religious right, than we should consider some sort of constitutional ban on George Bush since more people appear to be concerned with that.

As to your snark, I'll remember my "superiority" as long as you fess up to to your party's demagoguery.

"What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?" Open-ended.




%
War in Iraq 28
Economy/Jobs 15
Immigration 12
Gas/Heating oil crisis 6
Terrorism (general) 5
Health care 4
Defense/Military 3
President Bush 3
Other 20
Unsure 4


Posted by: cyntax on June 6, 2006 at 1:08 PM | PERMALINK

Mr Benben, I think youve forgotten about the supreme court. Thats what's most important to the relgious right. They already got two picks on it with more to come, they hope. That makes them very happy no matter what they say in public. Just wait till this new court starts overturning and making decisions, thats when they get their payoff.

Posted by: Jonesy on June 6, 2006 at 1:08 PM | PERMALINK

"I could improve on my typing but admiring Al Gore as a man isn't going to happen. He is a total fraud."


Hahahahahaha! Some people can be so funny in their irony...that this statement would come from someone who supports the current supposed cowboy in the White House is so rich...

Posted by: An Interested Party on June 6, 2006 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINK

boils down to this: as their leader, the current incarnation of the GOP has a dry drunk who never addressed his character defects. doomed to repeat his mistakes. the GOP/far right needs a 12-step program. honest inventory and making amends. stuff like that. else, it's the trash heap of history.

Posted by: rael on June 6, 2006 at 1:36 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: By all means never forget you're the smartest person in the room and you belong to the bestest, smartests, most noble party in the history of man and make sure you tell everyone every chance.

That's what the GOP leadership thinks of itself, as do their supporters like you, rdw.

You are always telling us how much smarter Bush, you, and conservatives are.

So, by all means keep it up.

If as you say people hate those who act like their superiors, then they will be rejecting the GOP sooner rather than later.

No one has been more arrogant in American politics or more vocal about their own superiority (moral, economic, spiritual, psychological, and social) than the neocons, their right-wing religious fanatic allies, and supporters like you.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 6, 2006 at 3:47 PM | PERMALINK

No one has been more arrogant in American politics or more vocal about their own superiority (moral, economic, spiritual, psychological, and social) than the neocons, their right-wing religious fanatic allies, and supporters like you.

Wow, that rings hollow. I think even the loony libbies realize that the left has cornered the market on elitism.

rdw was dead on - that's why you keep losing elections.

Posted by: sportsfan79 on June 6, 2006 at 5:02 PM | PERMALINK

cyntax,

You make my point about gays not being a critical issue. There is broad consensus among conservatives however gay marriage is wrong even if there should not be a federal ban. It makes some sense to get this out there now so all of those running for office can take a position and take it out as a national issue before active campaigning starts.

Once the vote is over it becomes a local issue. If a Red State Democrat voted against it I'm sure they'll have ample opportunity to defend themselves. They will of course be attacked.

They will also be able to defend themselves regarding the death tax, immigration, judges, support for the troops, etc. It's called politics.

You should try a constitutional ban on GWB. UNfortunately your party doesn't have the balls. Nancy forced Conyers to walk backwards from impeachment. Not than anyone believes that
but she was smart to do so. The GOP would be thrilled if the twits on the left make impeachment an issue

Posted by: rdw on June 6, 2006 at 7:26 PM | PERMALINK

AGF,

Sorry, liberals own the term elitism. You've earned it.

Posted by: rdw on June 6, 2006 at 7:27 PM | PERMALINK

rdw: You make my point about gays not being a critical issue. There is broad consensus among conservatives however gay marriage is wrong even if there should not be a federal ban. It makes some sense to get this out there now so all of those running for office can take a position and take it out as a national issue before active campaigning starts.

Once the vote is over it becomes a local issue. If a Red State Democrat voted against it I'm sure they'll have ample opportunity to defend themselves. They will of course be attacked.

So let me just repeat this back to you so I know I have it straight: You are OK with pretending to try and change the Constitution on a "non-critical" issue that doesn't even rate in the national polls so that there can then be a local referendum on how a given Democrat voted on a bill that the GOP never expected to pass? If it's so all-fired important to conservatives at the local level, why not just let it continue to be decided at the local level? Let states like California and Massachusetts go one own way and let Idaho go another.

For that matter, why is the government in the marriage business anyway? That seems like something between the couple, their community and their church. Why not defuse the issue by keeping the government in the business of civil unions and leave joining people together under their chosen God to the religion that best serves that couple?

Posted by: cyntax on June 6, 2006 at 8:04 PM | PERMALINK

If it's so all-fired important to conservatives at the local level, why not just let it continue to be decided at the local level? Let states like California and Massachusetts go one own way and let Idaho go another

It will be decided at the local level. The federal bill does two things. It's puts politicians on record. After they vote one way they can't spin it another. Obviously Rove decided they can make a number of congressmen & senators take positions they don't want to take and gives their opponent an edge.

This is politics 101. It's been going on since before grandpop and grandmom made your mommy and it happens all the time. It does not matter what I think. I'd have preferred they didn't bring it up.

The 2nd thing it does is provide better protections for the states so they cannot be forced to recognize marriages performed in another state but which would be illegal in their state. Gays can rush to Boston and get married but they're only married in Boston.

The govt has always been in the marriage business. They legislate many aspects including age and prior family relationship as well as the number of spouses and the ending of marriage and allocation of assets.

Posted by: rdw on June 7, 2006 at 10:58 AM | PERMALINK

If it's so all-fired important to conservatives at the local level, why not just let it continue to be decided at the local level? Let states like California and Massachusetts go one own way and let Idaho go another

It will be decided at the local level. The federal bill does two things. It's puts politicians on record. After they vote one way they can't spin it another. Obviously Rove decided they can make a number of congressmen & senators take positions they don't want to take and gives their opponent an edge.

This is politics 101. It's been going on since before grandpop and grandmom made your mommy and it happens all the time. It does not matter what I think. I'd have preferred they didn't bring it up.

The 2nd thing it does is provide better protections for the states so they cannot be forced to recognize marriages performed in another state but which would be illegal in their state. Gays can rush to Boston and get married but they're only married in Boston.

The govt has always been in the marriage business. They legislate many aspects including age and prior family relationship as well as the number of spouses and the ending of marriage and allocation of assets.

Posted by: rdw on June 7, 2006 at 12:02 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly