Nowhere, I Hope!!!!!!
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigU_uXQL-EniIUUpBws-IesFyA0-GugaaurCQgj5JkPZ5is-6TYXmFoggJK-MjRE6etM7nDI4xS46h2w7rzsz77rDgs1BcegZuHuPy1BWuYNWTLogqjcaSVmmPOIOgglOcZ51p/s400/fox+tea+party.jpg)
"Republicans need to figure out what it means to be a Republican and a conservative in a post-Bush era," said Dennis Goldford, a political scientist at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa.
By Ed Stoddard - Analysis
DALLAS (Reuters) - The Texas governor ponders secession from the United States, anti-tax "tea parties" are held and some states snub federal economic "stimulus" funds.
The U.S. Republican Party's conservative base is fired up and taking aim at the old target of "big government" as its opposition hardens to the agenda of President Barack Obama and a U.S. Congress controlled by his fellow Democrats.
But some analysts say the Republicans, after setbacks in the 2006 congressional elections and the 2008 presidential election, risk turning off more voters than they attract if they embrace the kind of populism on display lately.
The Republican Party and the conservative movement are at a crossroads as they search for a winning formula after George W. Bush left office in January as a deeply unpopular president.
"Republicans need to figure out what it means to be a Republican and a conservative in a post-Bush era," said Dennis Goldford, a political scientist at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa.
And the political base -- largely white, male, Southern, evangelical Christian and rural -- appears to be shrinking.
Analysts also say the Republican Party has no heavyweight stars in Congress at the moment, and both the party and the conservative movement lack a unifying leader.
Those in the spotlight -- Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, the party's 2008 vice presidential candidate; Texas Governor Rick Perry, who spoke of secession; and radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh -- appear unlikely to be able to broaden the Republican base.
"It is the most polarizing figures who are getting the media play right now," said Michael Lindsay, a political sociologist at Rice University in Houston.
DALLAS (Reuters) - The Texas governor ponders secession from the United States, anti-tax "tea parties" are held and some states snub federal economic "stimulus" funds.
The U.S. Republican Party's conservative base is fired up and taking aim at the old target of "big government" as its opposition hardens to the agenda of President Barack Obama and a U.S. Congress controlled by his fellow Democrats.
But some analysts say the Republicans, after setbacks in the 2006 congressional elections and the 2008 presidential election, risk turning off more voters than they attract if they embrace the kind of populism on display lately.
The Republican Party and the conservative movement are at a crossroads as they search for a winning formula after George W. Bush left office in January as a deeply unpopular president.
"Republicans need to figure out what it means to be a Republican and a conservative in a post-Bush era," said Dennis Goldford, a political scientist at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa.
And the political base -- largely white, male, Southern, evangelical Christian and rural -- appears to be shrinking.
Analysts also say the Republican Party has no heavyweight stars in Congress at the moment, and both the party and the conservative movement lack a unifying leader.
Those in the spotlight -- Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, the party's 2008 vice presidential candidate; Texas Governor Rick Perry, who spoke of secession; and radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh -- appear unlikely to be able to broaden the Republican base.
"It is the most polarizing figures who are getting the media play right now," said Michael Lindsay, a political sociologist at Rice University in Houston.
Fox Attacks Obama FAIR AND BALANCED
Debate
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLDn-zO9dCKIoA1JBOMnFAiOSJELPsSqW1OUHAFtZpd1m3xU3poVX0dCIvCXAEb4ruCIG4uHPsNkU4QrpqQ4L5HJmRw3Kh6pmMyWnnHNjnCoxlMsybkjBAx01PyEOLawFWCpsF/s400/ROVE-large.jpg)
(updated below)
Bush-defending opponents of investigations and prosecutions think they've discovered a trump card: the claim that Democratic leaders such as Nancy Pelosi, Jay Rockefeller and Jane Harman were briefed on the torture programs and assented to them. The core assumption here -- shared by most establishment pundits -- is that the call for criminal investigations is nothing more than a partisan-driven desire to harm Republicans and Bush officials ("retribution"), and if they can show that some Democratic officials might be swept up in the inquiry, then, they assume, that will motivate investigation proponents to think twice.
Those who make that argument are clearly projecting. They view everything in partisan and political terms -- it's why virtually all media discussions are about what David Gregory calls "the politics of the torture debate" rather than the substantive issues surrounding these serious crimes -- and they are thus incapable of understanding that not everyone is burdened by the same sad affliction that plagues them.
Most people who have spent the last several years (rather than the last several weeks) vehemently objecting to the Bush administration's rampant criminality have been well aware of, and quite vocal about, the pervasive complicity of many key Democrats in this criminality. Just to cite two examples, here is my December, 2007 post entitled "Democratic complicity in Bush's torture regime", and here is another from July, 2008, arguing that Democrats have blocked investigations into Bush crimes because of how it would implicate them; quoting The New Yorker's Jane Mayer as saying that "many of those who might ordinarily be counted on to lead the charge are themselves compromised"; and quoting Jonathan Turley as saying (on Keith Olbermann's program) that "the Democrats have been silently trying to kill any effort to hold anyone accountable because that list could very well include some of their own members."
The reality is exactly the opposite (as usual) of what is being depicted in our media discussions. The call for criminal investigations of torture and other forms of government criminality is the most apolitical and non-partisan argument one can make. The ones who are trying to politicize the justice system and exploit the rule of law for partisan gain are those who are arguing against criminal investigations. John Cole explained this point perfectly yesterday:
At some point they are going to figure out that for most of us, we don’t care if the person has a (R) or (D) behind their name when they were instituting a policy of torture. That is what is so depressing (to me, at least) about the Ari Fleischer’s and the Thiessen’s of the world. They honestly seem to think this is nothing more than a partisan witch-hunt, the same old Washington gotcha politics. It isn’t.When you torture people, you have crossed a really clear line. Innocent people are dead. Lives have been ruined. Our international reputation has been destroyed. Yes, the Bush administration will get most of the blame, but that is because they were in charge and they did this, not because of what party they happen to belong to. If Jane Harman and Nancy Pelosi knew about this and ok’d it, they are just as culpable. LinkHere
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home