Will Repubicans ever be able to distance themselves from the nutcases in their party?

The fundamentals and extremists are the publicly vocal core thinkers in the Republican Party. They effectively feed on people’s fears and prejudices. The message is anti-intellectual and hostile, coarsening the culture. The Republicans have used conservative talk radio and television to fundamentally change social values and ultimately the philosophy of government. The best way to dismantle the perceived welfare state is to capitalize on bigotry. Destroy affirmative action by labeling women Femi-Nazis and blacks lazy. Use religion as a veil to de-fund social programs and control the vote.

There really isn’t a left anymore. Liberals/progressives have been so degraded and misrepresented in right-wing media that they are now considered an oddity, outside mainstream thought. The Republicans set the rules, so indignation towards a group like MoveOn.org is disingenuous.

James Watt comes to mind.

Sec of the Interior under Reagan.

Among many things he thought that the Beach Boys would draw an underisrable element if they played on the Mall on the 4th of July.

He is basically anti-environment.

I noticed your editing job - thanks for that. :wink:

Since you’re in a researching mood, perhaps you can provide some cites?

Certainly James Watt was controversial - and you will recall that he was asked to leave the Cabinet.

Doesn’t seem very radical to me. Hell, I wouldn’t want the Beach Boys playing either…though it’s more about how their music always set my teeth on edge than because they would draw an undesirable element. :wink:

I’d need to see a cite on that one, but taken at face value wouldn’t that balance out the eco-nutballs on the left wing side?

-XT

OK, how about this.
Speaking in Wyoming to a sell-out dinner organised earlier this year by the Green River Cattlemen’s Association, Watts declaimed that: ‘If the troubles from environmentalists cannot be solved in the jury box or at the ballot box, perhaps the cartridge box should be used.’

Shoot envrionmentalists. Is that wacko enough for you?

Actually, I was more thinking of whackos in Bush’s cabinet, rather than Reagan’s, but OK.

John Ashcroft.

Sounds like he was making a joke to me but I concede that it’s only funny depending on where you sit…and which end of the gun you are looking down. :wink:

-XT

Your article noted that some people have disassociated themselves from him. I’m sure many more don’t even really know everything about the guy. You are the one making it seems like he’s so well accepted and that he and Obama were anything more than passing acquaintances.

This is basically the Ted Kennedy issue. If decades have passed since your transgressions, I think most rational people can try to put that aside (depending on the circumstances). You can’t permanently ostracize everyone who has ever committed a violent crime.

Second, Obama has never sought out this guy’s endorsement, nor has he accepted it. In fact, as the article mentions, he has denounced the guy’s actions. I would have no problem with McCain if he did the same things if the situation were reversed.

I understand there will always be some crazies under the tent. The problem is that the GOP actively seeks out the crazies, panders to them, praises their actions and behavior, and asks for their support and money. Do you see Obama asking for support from any crazy lefty nutjobs? McCain even hired the guy who spread rumors about his own daughter. It is clear he has no problem dealing with scumbags just to get elected.

We should all be a little concerned Ayers is free and unrepentant. However, nobody who matters really cares about Ayers, nor does he have any real power. Nobody is asking for his opinions, or seeking his approval. Most importantly, nobody who matters is validating his actions, or praising him. McCain is doing all of that with people who are arguably as despicable.

Not really what I would call a foaming-mouth loony. He’s a bit fundamentalist for my taste, and his beliefs I find a bit weird, but he doesn’t strike me as a whacko.

Back to content-free “joking” deflections, I see. You were doing so well for so long, too.

-Joe

I guess I don’t understand this. Why do the pundits keep saying that the Republican nominee for U.S. President has to win over evangelicals? At this point, what are they going to do if McCain refuses to have anything to do with them? Are they going to vote for Obama? Or Clinton? Or Nader? Are they going to vote en masse for someone who can steal enough votes that McCain can’t win?

I know that, just as every athlete wants every point he can score, every candidate wants every vote he can get. But if the main candidates simply ignored the lunatic fringe, wouldn’t that fringe fade back into the shadows from whence it came? Is there math that shows that McCain needs the evangelicals to win against Obama?

shrug Sounds to me like it was supposed to be a (not very funny) joke. YMMV. Humor is, as always, in the eye of the beholder. Even if he was making a joke that doesn’t mean he isn’t wacked in any case.

-XT

I think it will be hard for McCain to win without the religious fundamentalist vote. It is especially important for McCain to get the religious right if he loses Independents to Obama. The Republicans have been courting the fundamentalists for years and depend on those votes, which is exactly why McCain happily took Hagee’s endorsement. The Republicans will continue to placate the religious right in exchange for a dependable voting block.

It is interesting to watch the dynamics within the Republican Party right now because there does seem to be a struggle between social fundamentalists and moderate fiscal conservatives. It looks like the moderate fiscal conservatives win for now.

Same reason the Dem’s court the loony left. They found that out in 2000 when Dearth Nader took a certain percentage of the vote in a different direction…much to the detriment of not only the country but Al Gore.

Both sides need to have a firm grasp of their fringe elements before they go after the center. Personally I think McCain is NOT going to get the full support of the Tighty Righties™ (to steal a term from 'luci) in this election…while I think the loony left is going to flock to Obama in droves. Which will probably translate into victory for Obama in November.

-XT

The republican party is driven by Rove,Wolfowitz,Cheney,Kristol and a few other neocons. The y could never win an election with people who want to gather the wealth of the world into a limited number of hands. So they push issues they really do not care about. Last election it was gay marriage. They did nothing after winning .They just wanted to get those who hate gays to vote for them.
The driving force of the republican party is a group of nutcases who want to remodel the world.

Well, I guess it is how you define loony left. I suppose if environmentalists, consumer advocates, and healthcare reformists are the loony left, then hopefully they can carry this election.

More like listing the number of people Ted Bundy killed, and adding as an afterthought that he was sometimes late returning library books.

And it’s full of quotes from people who are, frankly, overreacting.

What is one persons main stream view is another persons fringe. It’s amusing to me to see so many of you beat your breasts about raving right wingers while hand waving the loons on the left wing as pretty much main stream. HIGHLY amusing…

-XT

Here’s a hint: They are NOT considered the fringe if they share beliefs with a majority of the American people.