It’s an old wingnut trope to contrast “Americans” - the wingnuts and the politicians they support - with “liberals” and other hate-objects. The latest blast from Richard Viguerie talks about how “Americans” are angry with - wait for it - Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, John Boehner, and Karl Rove.
Of course, I’m delighted to watch Rove get a taste of his own medicine. But I’m even more delighted to see the infighting. “When thieves fall out, honest men get their due.” At some point, we can hope that the whole “he’s not really American” attack will start to lose its force.
What’s really super-duper delicious is to see Fox News in the crosshairs. Of course it’s right that Fox’s use of partisan political ops as ”news analysts” makes gibberish of its claim to fairness, let alone balance. But of course Viguerie and Malkin never would have called them on it had Rove not been operating against their candidate.
If this keeps up, last might may turn out to have cost the Republicans more than a Senate seat. Maybe, just maybe, we’re about to see the narrative turn around.
My hope is that official Republicans will become as obsessed with punching CAHs (clean abstinent hardliners) as official Democrats are with punching DFHs. The painful memory of 1972 and the sense that Democrats can’t afford to be too far to the left of Attila the hun if they want to win elections has, in my mind, done about as much damage to the USA as the Republicans. If Republicans react the same way, then they should be social democrats by 2040 (by 2002 Democrats were way to the right of Richard Nixon on many issues).
I plan to wave as they zip past looking for the semi socialist center.
Professor Mark Kleiman continues to reveal his weakness for childish puns which is unbecoming for someone with Ph.D. from Harvard. This one is particularly bad and let me explain the reason. I will speak slowly and enunciate so that even members of the academic elite can follow along:
Jihadis: behead people and threaten cartoonists with death
“Teahadis:” attend rallies in Washington DC, town hall meetings in “fly-over country” and vote for candidates that Professor Kleiman dislikes
Professor Kleiman, can you understand the difference between the two groups?
(I bet this comment gets censored. Let’s see if Professor Kleiman is loyal to the principle of open debate within the bounds of civility.)
It’s interesting that Viguerie keeps referring to “Americans” when he really means Republican voters. The recent primary elections obviously reflect a degree of anger on the part of a portion of the Republican Party. Whether that translates into victories in the general election in November remains to be seen. However, clearly, Viguerie’s vision only encompasses those he considers to be the only real “Americans”-political conservatives. This dismissal of moderates, progressive/liberals and Democrats in general from the legitimate body politic is of a piece with the view of the Palinists that liberals, the “elite”, urban dwellers etc. aren’t part of the “real America”.