That Anti-Republican Feeling
An interesting call to the Dan Yorke Show as I was nearing home on my commute. The caller started out complaining about the corrupt, one-party political system in Rhode Island and then suggested that he simply couldn’t vote for Republicans because, while he’s fiscally conservative, he’s socially liberal. He included opposition to the welfare state in his fiscal conservatism (erroneously, in my opinion). So, when Dan asked about social issues, he came up with abortion and same-sex marriage.
Dan got the caller to agree that abortion is a national issue, not a state issue, and asked (paraphrasing), “You’re not putting same-sex marriage above the economic collapse of the state, are you?”
At that point, the caller switched to, “Well, Republicans can’t govern.” He said they’re typically a rubber stamp. Assuming we’re able to tease out the Rhode Island context, the caller thereby illustrated two of the attitudes that have helped to doom this state.
The first is the need for saviors, whether in the form of a person or a party. Having such a small minority is not going to be conducive to expert performance from Republicans. They do what they can, no doubt, but sometimes the going along thing can seem like a fair trade for some small pittance of success. To turn things around, one must vote Republicans into office so that (1) what they do carries the minimal weight of, well, mattering, and (2) people who might be reluctant to spend valuable time on a futile effort will increasingly see public office as worthwhile.
The second attitude, under which the first arguably falls, has been bred by decades of manipulation in movies, art, education, media, magazines, and so on that voting Republican is just a bad thing to do. Special interests have gotten a lot of return on that particular investment. The impression of too many Rhode Islanders that good people have to vote for Democrats has certainly helped unions and the welfare industry, and we’re seeing the consequences, nationally, when the Democrats cash that chip in.
“Social issues,” in other words, can be cover for intellectual laziness and moral cowardice. It’s nice and vague and allows the voter to give in to the fully flourished seed of propaganda… without having to hurt the brain trying to dig up a plausible reason.
I have heard the same attitudes expressed by many. They have been Democrats for so long, they cannot conceive of voting for a Republican. Their answer to the current problem is “better Democrats”.
I tend to agree that better Democrats are required. Is that “reaching across the aisle”?
Did Dan Yorke tell the caller that he is an idiot, or a moron, or tell the caller that he is “dumb as a post” as he does on a daily basis?
Lets face it Yorke is RUDE. He does have great Call Screeners, when he tells an obvious lie (about once an hour) rarely do callers who have a good argument get through (unless they lie to Yorke’s call screeners) and if they get through, Yorke screams at them “GET OFF MY LINE YOU JERK” “GET OFF MY LINE YOU MORON,GET OFF MY LINE IDIOT, CLICK. Then he chastises his call screeners for letting the caller through.
Jeff
Be well all
Jeff, Dan handled that particular caller very politely. But that caller wasn’t calling Dan on any of his arrogant options.
I agree with you. Sometimes Yorke seems to like to spice up the show by putting petty things into a frame of outrageousness. If you call BS on him (if you even get through), he loses it.
I think his show loses a lot of its clout when he does that. But it’s his show; so I just switch over to Hannity.
Did Dan Yorke tell the caller that he is an idiot, or a moron, or tell the caller that he is “dumb as a post” as he does on a daily basis?
Lets face it Yorke is RUDE. He does have great Call Screeners, when he tells an obvious lie (about once an hour) rarely do callers who have a good argument get through (unless they lie to Yorke’s call screeners) and if they get through, Yorke screams at them “GET OFF MY LINE YOU JERK” “GET OFF MY LINE YOU MORON,GET OFF MY LINE IDIOT, CLICK. Then he chastises his call screeners for letting the caller through.
Jeff
Be well all
Yeah, this was an eye-opening exchange. The gentleman fully acknowledged that the state is a mess. He even understood who is responsible. But he refuses to act on this knowledge to stop them.
Not sure if you caught Capital TV on 26 Jan. Rather laughable. The Senate had Irons, Montalbano and Alves as “honored guests”! Piava-Weed kept calling them “honorable. Yeah right!
What I found totally disingenuous was the wording of the Senate Resolution honoring Alves. It mentioned his service as Chair of the Senate Finance Committee and how he was instrumental in “…crafting Budgets that were realistic and responsive…” to the taxpayers of the state.
Did I miss something here? Wasn’t he one of the architects of the Budgets that routinely used one time infusions of funds, e.g. Tobacco $$, to plug the deficits. Isn’t that why we find ourselves in such desperate financial straits today?
Another indication that the General Assembly has totally lost touch on reality!
This is reason enough why they should change the State motto to “Hopeless”…
Most people in this country self-identify as fiscally conservative and socially liberal. When people have to constantly choose between what they consider two evils (the socially authoritarian R’s or the economically authoritarian D’s), they either become utterly confused and vote for familiarity like this caller, or they become discouraged and stop participating in the system altogether, both of which support the corrupt status quo.
“Piava-Weed kept calling them “honorable. Yeah right!”
Whenever I hear the term “honorable” applied to a politican, I think of “we pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor”.
Why are Governors still “your excellency”? Even the President is Mr. President.
Capitol TV?You mean sycophant tv,right?Why are taxpayers compelled to fund this garbage?It’s a sinecure for a failed talk show host and professional toady who helps politicians self-promote with our money.And we’re broke.