Skip

Justin Webb explores the state of the right in the US
March 1, 2012 12:31 PM   Subscribe


 
It was said of Barry Goldwater – who lost so badly for the party in 1964 – that the votes actually took 16 years to be counted and in the end, with Reagan in 1980, Goldwater won.
It's called shifting the Overton window. This year the Republicans are trying to see if they can fit their bloated carcasses through the damn thing yet or if they need to keep pushing.
posted by charred husk at 12:59 PM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]


Took about a minute for AEI's Henry Olsen to tell the first BIG LIE:
"But there’s not really a wing of the Republican Party, as there was in the 1970s, that actively favoured the expansion of government."
Of course, anyone whose brain is not welded shut knows that the Department of Homeland Security represents the largest expansion of government and of the powers of government in history, and the Military Budget has never been bigger. And the almost universally agreed-upon stance of the Republican Party is that they want more of that, much much more.
posted by oneswellfoop at 1:26 PM on March 1, 2012 [14 favorites]


Such fucking propagandistic hogwash. Interview, but don't really question the claims. Standard "reporting"...
posted by symbioid at 1:43 PM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]


Justin bloody Webb, the Republican Party's very own BBC mole, too thick and vain to know when he's being played, leading cause of radios being thrown at walls in Radio 4 listeners' homes.

Not going to listen, you can't make me.
posted by MartinWisse at 1:45 PM on March 1, 2012 [2 favorites]


oneswellfoop:

Well... I don't think that's a lie, exactly. The Republicans really do seem quite unified in demanding a smaller government. Actually putting it into practice is a whole nother matter. The people who get power quickly realize that shrinking government is both hard and, when you break it down, pretty unpopular. On the other hand, it seems to be a pretty good way to get elected, agitating for smaller government but never actually doing anything about it. That way they can keep beating the same drum forever.
posted by alexei at 2:26 PM on March 1, 2012


"agitating for smaller government but never actually doing anything about it. That way they can keep beating the same drum forever."

How is that not simple, unabashed dishonesty? Pure lying?

I will concede that they wish to cut down on some parts of government. The ones intended to HELP people. But in terms of more surveillance, more police, more prisons, more military, more wars, that is what they want, and, based on the announced plans of most of the current Presidential candidates, they want MORE than every dollar 'saved' on helping people to go toward controlling or just plain killing people. The people supporting these politicians may have genuinely different agendas, but that's what they are voting for.
posted by oneswellfoop at 2:47 PM on March 1, 2012 [5 favorites]


Repugs want government so small you have to worry about which law you're breaking if you pull out.
posted by telstar at 3:07 PM on March 1, 2012 [1 favorite]


They just want to make the bathtub big enough to drown all of the poor, minorities and other undesirables in it.
posted by double block and bleed at 3:30 PM on March 1, 2012


Webb thinks it makes sense to talk about the tea party here but not even mention the occupy movement? The same movement which led to 1%/99% questions being put in Republican debates and which has helped to snatch Mitt Romney's easy coronation from his hands?
posted by imperium at 4:25 PM on March 1, 2012


The program was not supposed to be an analysis of all US politics or even of the merits of Republican policies.

It's more asking: "What's happening with the Republicans? Are they as disunited as they seem, or quite united? Are they going to implode? What really are their biggest problems?"

And the overall theme seems to be they've got some pretty damn big problems, and not the ones that might get most attention in the 24-hour news cycle world.

The radio series it comes from, Analysis, looks into one topic a week. One week it might be about Occupy, another week about school policies in the UK, another week about contingency planning for what happens if Greece drops out of the Euro. Sometimes it's about things like what complexity theorists have to say about politics, or whether in Africa bad elections are an improvement on no elections.

It's not meant to be some kind of "lets cover everything about economics and politics in half an hour" show.

I guess it's also possible that some people here aren't able to pick up the little British tones of voice that tell you "I'm now quoting someone and expressing skepticism about what they said".
posted by philipy at 6:35 PM on March 1, 2012 [3 favorites]


I also enjoyed the episode 'Capitalists against the Super Rich' from a few weeks back (also on that page). Most insightful -- I was thinking about making a post about that myself.
posted by NailsTheCat at 7:47 PM on March 1, 2012


It's not that, philipy - it's that the majority of people who are speaking about it are the right-wingers (and ok, maybe that one dude was an "ex" right winger -- and Fukuyama is no longer a neo-con, so I guess he isn't either)... There's no credible critique or "analysis" outside of the self-referential view from the people who have pushed the party in this direction and now we're supposed to say "oh, yeah! *that's* what's wrong! Clearly you ideologues understand because you've been sooooooo immersed in it for so long, that...????"

That's the issue. If you aren't outside the framework, it looks all nice and shit, but if you ARE outside the framework, you clearly see the framing going on.

Sure there were some questioning moments, but the overall framing and deference to the very people who make the modern Republican Party what it is, is really just pathetic, especially for a program that calls itself "analysis".
posted by symbioid at 9:18 PM on March 1, 2012


The Republicans really do seem quite unified in demanding a smaller government. Actually putting it into practice is a whole nother matter. The people who get power quickly realize that shrinking government is both hard and, when you break it down, pretty unpopular.

Yes, if you didn't vote for The PATRIOT Act, want to shrink the military, would like to see the TSA go away you can't get any love from the Republican Party or support from end-the-war Democrats either.

Mote, eye, planks and all that.
posted by rough ashlar at 4:46 AM on March 2, 2012


Sure there were some questioning moments, but the overall framing and deference to the very people who make the modern Republican Party what it is, is really just pathetic, especially for a program that calls itself "analysis".

I think they needed to speak to people who were at least a little reflective, rather than just people who would parrot the party line or who are completely obfuscatory and dishonest. At least with someone like Fukuyama, you get the sense that he has thought about the point of view he is expressing - I might not agree with it, but it isn't completely empty PR puff. And they do have Thomas Frank on, who has a very stark take on the Republican party and its followers and certainly one that is outside their "framework".

Ultimately, I think if you want to know why people do what they do and what they are going to do next, you should probably ask them. And if you have decided to ask them, it makes sense to ask the ones who will actually give you an answer with some content. And I say that as someone who could not be more opposed to the twisted and degenerate ideology that seems to have infected the modern Republican party.
posted by lucien_reeve at 5:09 AM on March 2, 2012 [2 favorites]


« Older Super cute super deformed super heros   |   "Hey, I'll call you." Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post