New England Moderates' In-Tolerance
Justin Katz
I'm actually surprised that Froma Harrop would be this myopic (no permalink available):
"Cocky whacko," is what former Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee called Sarah Palin yesterday during a speech in Washington. And Cocky Whacko is the general opinion around New England, even among Republicans and Republicans-turned-Independents like Chafee. We know that the Alaskan governor is beloved by the conservative base, but the reactions around here prompt the suggestion that Republican strategists get out of the office more often.
New England used to be the Republican heartland. In 1936, only two states chose Kansan Alf Landon over sometimes-New Englander Franklin Roosevelt. They were Vermont and Maine. And even to this day, there remain popular Yankee Republicans, notably the Maine senators, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. But other than these and a few other holdouts from other regions, the Grand Old Party of fiscal conservatism and social moderation seems dead and getting deader.
Perhaps the national Republican party has moved to the right of (or, more accurately, hasn't moved as rapidly to the left as) a constituency that was significant in New England, but do the likes of Harrop even have the objective empathy to consider whether their own intolerance drives away us New Englanders to their right? Perhaps such "moderates" should strive to become better able to work with us — rather than thumbing their noses at us cocky wackos.
Holy Cow! And Harrop says that others should get out of the office more often? THis dope really thinks the rest of the country shares her warped morality. Perhaps she could answer why the country has suddenly shifted into McCain/Palin mode, if so few share their views. Sorry sweetie, you are wrong.
It is too funny to hear this left-wing pig tell everyone how they think - not how they should think - but how they do think.
Too bad the ProJo couldn't have saved money by getting rid of her, because she is one dumb liberal (w)itch.
In the 2006 race I wrote in "George H. Bush" in the Senate race between "Linc" and Sheldon Whitebread ... in honor of "Linc's" same move during the prior Presidential race.
Brown can have him. Perhaps he'll single-handedly raise Brown's U.S. News & World Report college comparison rank ... not!
>>Perhaps the national Republican party has moved to the right of (or, more accurately, hasn't moved as rapidly to the left as) a constituency that was significant in New England ...
Bingo.
Democrats of 1940-1965 or so would not recognize today's Democrat Party.
Indeed they'd recoil from the current party that extols illegitimacy, locks people into poverty, dooms children to diminished futures by putting teachers unions first, requires that its candidates support infanticide (abortion), and preaches defeatism and longs for the humiliation and military defeat of the United States of America.
Today's Democrat Party more closely resembles the Communist Party USA of 1940-65 than it does its former self.
We move from talking about lipstick on porcines, to talking about a dipstick on YouTube.
I'm not going to dignify former Senator Chafee's vile and childish attempts to get some attention and to once again, if only briefly, try to attain any level of relevance to anybody. He's yesterday's news. Good riddens.
Someone asked me this afternoon (because I guess Dan Yorke brought it up on his show today) why the RIGOP hasn't said anything publicly about Chafee's remarks, which were presumably meant to garner a response. Best I can tell, no one really still involved in the party cares about him or what he "thinks" anymore, if they ever really did. They tolerated his idiosyncrasies because he was an incumbent and came from a respected local family. Fortunately, we've all moved on, and we only wish he would, too (far, far, away preferably). There's definitely a lot of buyer's remorse regarding 2006.
Obviously, he was never a real friend to McCain ... Obama can have him all to himself, because he is an embarrassment (Should we call on Barack Obama to repudiate Lincoln Chafee, or just ignore him entirely?).
As for Froma, no real news there. She might try getting out of the office once and a while herself, and talk to people outside of the Ivy League.
"Indeed they'd recoil from the current party that extols illegitimacy, locks people into poverty, dooms children to diminished futures by putting teachers unions first, requires that its candidates support infanticide (abortion), and preaches defeatism and longs for the humiliation and military defeat of the United States of America.
Today's Democrat Party more closely resembles the Communist Party USA of 1940-65 than it does its former self."
Exactly. The only difference is now they call themselves "progressives".
Justin,
No matter how you put the move, to the Right or to the Left, the Republican Party has moved away from the people of New England.
By the way, your use of "we" in your last two sentences was incorrect. I point this out only to say that you used the subjective case when you should have used the objective. It doesn't surprise me that you have problems with the use of the objective.
OldTimeLefty
Always a sign of a first-rate gentleman to make grand statements out of grammatical slips — especially in as immediate and informal a medium as blogging.
True to form, sir.
> "Cocky" is in the eye of the beholder.
> "Wacko", however, is based upon completely false information, as Marc, Andrew and Newsweek have demonstrated:
- Palin did not ban or even attempt to ban any books.
- She does not support abstinance only programs; she believes abstinance should be taught as part of sex education.
- She does not believe creationism should be taught instead of evolution; she just thinks it also shouldn't be banned as a discussion topic in the classroom.
In short, she is a run-of-the-mill non-New England Republican. If that's a problem, great; let's discuss it.
But whether it's Obama being a secret cell Muslim or Palin being a conservative freak, there's no point in dialoguing if it will be based upon hysterical lies.
[The rumors about Biden being a verbal loose cannon, however, have turned out to be sound.]
The thought of Palin being just a heartbeat away from the presidency is downright bone chilling. Is the 2008 pres. campaign for real or am I having a very bad dream? Obama's approach to foreign policy makes more sense to me than the trigger-happy Republican duo. Our military is already fighting on 2 fronts and McCain would have us get involved in Georgia, Iran, maybe Russia, to hear him talk. News flash John McCain: Our nation is flat broke and our armed forces are depleted and exhausted. And the USA cannot afford to be the Big Boss of the Whole World anymore. Any comment on this right-wingers? And are you or any relatives already in the military? If not, when to you plan to enlist?
I don’t consider myself a right-winger but I suspect that I’d meet your criteria of one. To this moderate, the thought of Obama being president is also very scary yet somewhat softened by the reality that the Presidency of this country has limited power despite having the largest microphone. Obama’s approach to foreign policy would lead to bigger threats to the security and safety of our citizens. Our nation is in a deficit – and has been for a very long time. The president has little, if any power to change that. Our armed forces are stretched out thin due to our involvement in multiple areas. If a major crime wave hits a city and the police are stretched too thin, the leaders do not respond by ignoring other crimes. But the truth is that the USA cannot NOT afford to be both a political and economic leader in the World. What is at stake is more significant than you know. McCain said it best when he said that what is going on in Iraq is not a liberal/conservative issue. Succeeding there and defeating evil is necessary for the safety of all people, including our own citizens. I do know people in the military and they are proud of what they are doing. They were not drafted, they volunteered to serve their country.
Our nation is in a deficit – and has been for a very long time.
Actually, msteven, not such a very long time, the length of the 43rd presidency to be exact. The hated, mush despised Bill Clinton left "W" a surplus in 2001.
Not exactly true observer. The government's surplus/deficit amount isn't quite as simple as a simple balance sheet. It is also related to interest rates and economic predictions over time. The Clinton era did not erase the deficit and leave "W" as surplus of money in any real terms. But even if you think that, consider the fact the Congress, which ultimately controls spending and income policy, was majority Republicans for the last six (and the most economic successful) years of his administration.
The whole Palin situation would be funny if it weren't so sad.
Plain in introduced. The left spreads lies about Palin. Other members of the left then believe the misinformation and then try to label her as a "wacko".
When Palin was first introduced, I thought that she might not be conservative ENOUGH for the right-wing.
The biggest critcisms about Palin from her existing political opponents in Alaska were:
-that she increased government expenditures and spent money on a local sports complex and a park.
-she redecorated her mayoral office more than once in the years that she was mayor.
-she fired people who worked for her.
-she refused to endorse her mother-in-law who is a Democrat when her mother-in-law ran for office.
-she opposed gay marriage, but vetoed a bill that would deny benefits to same-sex couples.
-she lowered taxes on business but allegedly increased increased taxes on Wasilla residents.
-she called a librarian after some parents complained about books that were in the library, but never actually attempted to ban aaything.
-she didn't work together with the Murkowski administration (found to be corrupt) and the legislative leadership in Alaska.
So would someone tell me, how can anyone consider her to be "wacko" or out of the mainstream?
I suppose the next tactic will be for the left to portray her as a right-winger outside of the mainstream, but in reality Palin's record is one of postive pragmatic conservatism.
Very strange.
Click here for the new Anchor Rising & Ocean State Current page
About Community Crier
About Engaged Citizen
Holy Cow! And Harrop says that others should get out of the office more often? THis dope really thinks the rest of the country shares her warped morality. Perhaps she could answer why the country has suddenly shifted into McCain/Palin mode, if so few share their views. Sorry sweetie, you are wrong.
Posted by: Mike Cappelli at September 11, 2008 1:28 PMIt is too funny to hear this left-wing pig tell everyone how they think - not how they should think - but how they do think.
Too bad the ProJo couldn't have saved money by getting rid of her, because she is one dumb liberal (w)itch.
In the 2006 race I wrote in "George H. Bush" in the Senate race between "Linc" and Sheldon Whitebread ... in honor of "Linc's" same move during the prior Presidential race.
Brown can have him. Perhaps he'll single-handedly raise Brown's U.S. News & World Report college comparison rank ... not!
>>Perhaps the national Republican party has moved to the right of (or, more accurately, hasn't moved as rapidly to the left as) a constituency that was significant in New England ...
Bingo.
Democrats of 1940-1965 or so would not recognize today's Democrat Party.
Indeed they'd recoil from the current party that extols illegitimacy, locks people into poverty, dooms children to diminished futures by putting teachers unions first, requires that its candidates support infanticide (abortion), and preaches defeatism and longs for the humiliation and military defeat of the United States of America.
Today's Democrat Party more closely resembles the Communist Party USA of 1940-65 than it does its former self.
Posted by: Tom W at September 11, 2008 1:36 PMWe move from talking about lipstick on porcines, to talking about a dipstick on YouTube.
I'm not going to dignify former Senator Chafee's vile and childish attempts to get some attention and to once again, if only briefly, try to attain any level of relevance to anybody. He's yesterday's news. Good riddens.
Someone asked me this afternoon (because I guess Dan Yorke brought it up on his show today) why the RIGOP hasn't said anything publicly about Chafee's remarks, which were presumably meant to garner a response. Best I can tell, no one really still involved in the party cares about him or what he "thinks" anymore, if they ever really did. They tolerated his idiosyncrasies because he was an incumbent and came from a respected local family. Fortunately, we've all moved on, and we only wish he would, too (far, far, away preferably). There's definitely a lot of buyer's remorse regarding 2006.
Obviously, he was never a real friend to McCain ... Obama can have him all to himself, because he is an embarrassment (Should we call on Barack Obama to repudiate Lincoln Chafee, or just ignore him entirely?).
As for Froma, no real news there. She might try getting out of the office once and a while herself, and talk to people outside of the Ivy League.
Posted by: Will at September 11, 2008 5:18 PM"Indeed they'd recoil from the current party that extols illegitimacy, locks people into poverty, dooms children to diminished futures by putting teachers unions first, requires that its candidates support infanticide (abortion), and preaches defeatism and longs for the humiliation and military defeat of the United States of America.
Today's Democrat Party more closely resembles the Communist Party USA of 1940-65 than it does its former self."
Exactly. The only difference is now they call themselves "progressives".
Posted by: Mike at September 11, 2008 7:00 PMJustin,
No matter how you put the move, to the Right or to the Left, the Republican Party has moved away from the people of New England.
By the way, your use of "we" in your last two sentences was incorrect. I point this out only to say that you used the subjective case when you should have used the objective. It doesn't surprise me that you have problems with the use of the objective.
Posted by: OldTimeLefty at September 11, 2008 7:32 PMOldTimeLefty
Always a sign of a first-rate gentleman to make grand statements out of grammatical slips — especially in as immediate and informal a medium as blogging.
True to form, sir.
Posted by: Justin Katz at September 11, 2008 7:46 PM> "Cocky" is in the eye of the beholder.
> "Wacko", however, is based upon completely false information, as Marc, Andrew and Newsweek have demonstrated:
- Palin did not ban or even attempt to ban any books.
- She does not support abstinance only programs; she believes abstinance should be taught as part of sex education.
- She does not believe creationism should be taught instead of evolution; she just thinks it also shouldn't be banned as a discussion topic in the classroom.
In short, she is a run-of-the-mill non-New England Republican. If that's a problem, great; let's discuss it.
But whether it's Obama being a secret cell Muslim or Palin being a conservative freak, there's no point in dialoguing if it will be based upon hysterical lies.
[The rumors about Biden being a verbal loose cannon, however, have turned out to be sound.]
Posted by: Monique at September 12, 2008 7:57 AMThe thought of Palin being just a heartbeat away from the presidency is downright bone chilling. Is the 2008 pres. campaign for real or am I having a very bad dream? Obama's approach to foreign policy makes more sense to me than the trigger-happy Republican duo. Our military is already fighting on 2 fronts and McCain would have us get involved in Georgia, Iran, maybe Russia, to hear him talk. News flash John McCain: Our nation is flat broke and our armed forces are depleted and exhausted. And the USA cannot afford to be the Big Boss of the Whole World anymore. Any comment on this right-wingers? And are you or any relatives already in the military? If not, when to you plan to enlist?
Posted by: Lauren at September 12, 2008 12:53 PMI don’t consider myself a right-winger but I suspect that I’d meet your criteria of one. To this moderate, the thought of Obama being president is also very scary yet somewhat softened by the reality that the Presidency of this country has limited power despite having the largest microphone. Obama’s approach to foreign policy would lead to bigger threats to the security and safety of our citizens. Our nation is in a deficit – and has been for a very long time. The president has little, if any power to change that. Our armed forces are stretched out thin due to our involvement in multiple areas. If a major crime wave hits a city and the police are stretched too thin, the leaders do not respond by ignoring other crimes. But the truth is that the USA cannot NOT afford to be both a political and economic leader in the World. What is at stake is more significant than you know. McCain said it best when he said that what is going on in Iraq is not a liberal/conservative issue. Succeeding there and defeating evil is necessary for the safety of all people, including our own citizens. I do know people in the military and they are proud of what they are doing. They were not drafted, they volunteered to serve their country.
Posted by: msteven at September 12, 2008 5:02 PMOur nation is in a deficit – and has been for a very long time.
Posted by: observer at September 12, 2008 6:30 PMActually, msteven, not such a very long time, the length of the 43rd presidency to be exact. The hated, mush despised Bill Clinton left "W" a surplus in 2001.
Not exactly true observer. The government's surplus/deficit amount isn't quite as simple as a simple balance sheet. It is also related to interest rates and economic predictions over time. The Clinton era did not erase the deficit and leave "W" as surplus of money in any real terms. But even if you think that, consider the fact the Congress, which ultimately controls spending and income policy, was majority Republicans for the last six (and the most economic successful) years of his administration.
Posted by: msteven at September 12, 2008 7:01 PMThe whole Palin situation would be funny if it weren't so sad.
Plain in introduced. The left spreads lies about Palin. Other members of the left then believe the misinformation and then try to label her as a "wacko".
When Palin was first introduced, I thought that she might not be conservative ENOUGH for the right-wing.
The biggest critcisms about Palin from her existing political opponents in Alaska were:
-that she increased government expenditures and spent money on a local sports complex and a park.
-she redecorated her mayoral office more than once in the years that she was mayor.
-she fired people who worked for her.
-she refused to endorse her mother-in-law who is a Democrat when her mother-in-law ran for office.
-she opposed gay marriage, but vetoed a bill that would deny benefits to same-sex couples.
-she lowered taxes on business but allegedly increased increased taxes on Wasilla residents.
-she called a librarian after some parents complained about books that were in the library, but never actually attempted to ban aaything.
-she didn't work together with the Murkowski administration (found to be corrupt) and the legislative leadership in Alaska.
So would someone tell me, how can anyone consider her to be "wacko" or out of the mainstream?
I suppose the next tactic will be for the left to portray her as a right-winger outside of the mainstream, but in reality Palin's record is one of postive pragmatic conservatism.
Very strange.
Posted by: Anthony at September 13, 2008 12:39 AM