Forums >Off the Beaten Path>Why Is the Republican Field So Extreme?
#artbydmcbride
Back to the OP, I guess I am kind of surprised that in fifteen pages no one has mentioned their extreme (and disturbing) attitude towards people that are gay. It goes beyond the marriage debate. Perry has compared gays to alcoholics. Bachmann's husband is trying to "fix" homosexuals as if they are broken. It is beyond disturbing. I don't understand how they get a second of air time when they are essentially spewing hate speech. If George Wallace was to appear in this day and age, no one would tolerate him, and yet we stand by and tolerate these people because their intolerant views are supposed to reflect their Christian beliefs? Well, scripture was used to defend the idea that interracial marriage was unacceptable, too. It doesn't make it ok. The worst part is, I laugh these people off as a bunch of unelectable whack-jobs, and then I hop on a plane. My travels in hiking and trail running take me to some really rural, backwater places. The things I overhear scare the hell out of me. I now worry these people are electable. When I travel I meet loads of people that don't believe in global warming (no matter the cause), won't even ponder if evolution is possible, and openly talk about "faggots" (sorry), and how they are child molesters, want special rights, are trying to recruit their children, and have an agenda. Nobody blinks at these claims. I don't even try to argue. It is all I can to to not stand there with my mouth hanging open. What do you do when some 300 lb fatass who smells like he hasn't showered for a week and is in old crappy stained shirt tells you he'll kick the ass of any gay guys because he doesn't want them hitting on and bothering him in a bar? Do you laugh or cry? These tea party gatherings have gotten huge. The reminder that for a lot of the country these people aren't extreme really, really worries me.
Back to the OP, I guess I am kind of surprised that in fifteen pages no one has mentioned their extreme (and disturbing) attitude towards people that are gay. It goes beyond the marriage debate. Perry has compared gays to alcoholics. Bachmann's husband is trying to "fix" homosexuals as if they are broken. It is beyond disturbing. I don't understand how they get a second of air time when they are essentially spewing hate speech. If George Wallace was to appear in this day and age, no one would tolerate him, and yet we stand by and tolerate these people because their intolerant views are supposed to reflect their Christian beliefs? Well, scripture was used to defend the idea that interracial marriage was unacceptable, too. It doesn't make it ok.
The worst part is, I laugh these people off as a bunch of unelectable whack-jobs, and then I hop on a plane. My travels in hiking and trail running take me to some really rural, backwater places. The things I overhear scare the hell out of me. I now worry these people are electable. When I travel I meet loads of people that don't believe in global warming (no matter the cause), won't even ponder if evolution is possible, and openly talk about "faggots" (sorry), and how they are child molesters, want special rights, are trying to recruit their children, and have an agenda. Nobody blinks at these claims. I don't even try to argue. It is all I can to to not stand there with my mouth hanging open. What do you do when some 300 lb fatass who smells like he hasn't showered for a week and is in old crappy stained shirt tells you he'll kick the ass of any gay guys because he doesn't want them hitting on and bothering him in a bar? Do you laugh or cry?
These tea party gatherings have gotten huge. The reminder that for a lot of the country these people aren't extreme really, really worries me.
Post of the Year!
Runners run
Sounds like you need an encouraging word.
Short-term.
Long-term (see generational data) of course reflecting broader generational change.
But you’re right; some of this is scary. Economic downturns produce nasty politics that often target scapegoats. Nothing new about that. IMO, Obama helped bring this on by being an utter failure in recognizing the extent of economically-based fear and anger, and failing to use that public pressure to help advance a meaningful economic agenda. It’s a failure of leadership that, if the Republicans can avoid a circular firing squad and don’t overplay their hand (with an out-of-the-mainstream candidate), will produce a one-term presidency. “I’m not Bush” isn’t going to cut it this time around and he’s done precious little in three years to help mobilize the folks who ought to be his base. Bailed out Wall Street with no accountability, expanded the war in Afghanistan, retained Guantanamo, abandoned labor on EFCA, spent his political capital on a lame compromise health care plan with something that everyone can hate, supported letting gay people serve in the military but can’t seem to make up his mind on whether they can marry, etc, etc, etc. Is anyone pumped up about re-electing Obama? Meanwhile, lots of folks are in the "anyone but Obama" category. If he does win, he may well be the only two-term “At least I’m not the other guy” president.
Be safe. Be kind.
Ostrich runner
As an overweight smelly lout that once offended you with careless speech on your travels, I can't disagree with those impressions. It seems that the answer to the OP is simply that the extreme approach wins. There are many reasons why it is that way--from gerrymandering to convenience. I mean, how Rick Perry can accept 6.4 billion in bailout money on the same day he starts a petition called "No Government Bailouts" and have his constituents believe he has declined government funds takes a certain kind of special. The one candidate that believes in science is a long shot. I know lots of moderate Republicans, but they don't control the party. Mitch Daniels, the IN gov, was one of the moderates run out initially as a contender, and he immediately took a right turn to get more attention. The better question than why the field is so extreme is why extremism is a requisite for attention.
http://www.runningahead.com/groups/Indy/forum
Menace to Sobriety
The better question than why the field is so extreme is why extremism is a requisite for attention.
Because crazy sells. The camera always points at the guy in the Klan hood or the assless chaps screaming at the top of their lungs, not the normal looking person calmly speaking common sense.
Janie, today I quit my job. And then I told my boss to go f*** himself, and then I blackmailed him for almost sixty thousand dollars. Pass the asparagus.
Because crazy sells. The camera always points at the guy in the Klan hood or the assless chaps screaming at the top of their lungs, not the normally looking person calmly speaking common sense.
I agree with this sentiment. Going back to my initial post, it is an unfortunate nature of primary elections that candidates have to really try to turn up the extremism in an effort to win the primary. After the primary, candidates tend to try to sway more moderate voters, because they become the key to winning the overall election. At least, that has been the method in the past. In more recent years, the tactics have swung far into the realm of using fear as a motivator. And fear will breed more extremism.
Feeling the growl again
It is the extremes who are most energized and motivated to action. Someone in the middle pleases none of them. A lot of "We The People" in the middle are pretty cynical and apathetic at this point....so they go where the energy is.
Things are pretty polarized to the extremes now, in general. Bad times do that. At one point (very early on) I thought the Tea Party might be a good influence to add into the mix. Now I'd throw them soundly in WG's whack-job bucket.
"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand
I am spaniel - Crusher of Treadmills
My travels in hiking and trail running take me to some really rural, backwater places. The things I overhear scare the hell out of me. I now worry these people are electable. When I travel I meet loads of people that don't believe in global warming (no matter the cause), won't even ponder if evolution is possible, and openly talk about "faggots" (sorry), and how they are child molesters, want special rights, are trying to recruit their children, and have an agenda. Nobody blinks at these claims. I don't even try to argue. It is all I can to to not stand there with my mouth hanging open. What do you do when some 300 lb fatass who smells like he hasn't showered for a week and is in old crappy stained shirt tells you he'll kick the ass of any gay guys because he doesn't want them hitting on and bothering him in a bar? Do you laugh or cry?
Try growing up with that. Sometimes my wife (of another race) still thinks people are looking at her funny when we go back there.
Even though those people are the most vocal, and an outsider coming in would certainly hear that, those sorts of things did not accurately represent the majority opinion of the area. So I would not lose hope yet. (whether this applies to Appalachia I don't know). Just like everywhere else, it's those on the extremes who clamor the loudest.
In a hypothetical 2012 match-up, President Obama leads Texas Governor Rick Perry by a narrow 43% to 40% margin. He leads Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney by slightly larger amounts. Data released earlier showed the president up by just a single point over Congressman Ron Paul and up by double digits over former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Against a Generic Republican, President Obama trails by five.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/august_2011/65_trust_their_own_economic_judgment_over_obama_s
The original question may be validated in that paragraph from the linked article. In Rasmussen polls Obama trails a generic Republican by 5% but beats all the candidates once they have a name (and their own bagage). Interesting that Ron Paul puts up the best fight (for all practical purposes dead even with Obama) when he probably has very little chance to win his party nomination.
So the Republicans need to go find this generic Republican as opposed to last time when they tried geriatric Republican? Or maybe this just means we believe the negative too much.
None of them have debated him.
"If you have the fire, run..." -John Climacus
rectumdamnnearkilledem
The worst part is, I laugh these people off as a bunch of unelectable whack-jobs, and then I hop on a plane. My travels in hiking and trail running take me to some really rural, backwater places. The things I overhear scare the hell out of me. I now worry these people are electable. When I travel I meet loads of people that don't believe in global warming (no matter the cause), won't even ponder if evolution is possible, and openly talk about "faggots" (sorry), and how they are child molesters, want special rights, are trying to recruit their children, and have an agenda. Nobody blinks at these claims. I don't even try to argue. It is all I can to to not stand there with my mouth hanging open. What do you do when some 300 lb fatass who smells like he hasn't showered for a week and is in old crappy stained shirt tells you he'll kick the ass of any gay guys because he doesn't want them hitting on and bothering him in a bar? Do you laugh or cry? These tea party gatherings have gotten huge. The reminder that for a lot of the country these people aren't extreme really, really worries me.
The even more horrifying part is that these attitudes aren't even confined to the rural backwaters. There's a rather monied guy in the Holland, MI area who holds the same sorts of beliefs and is using his wealth to pressure voters. We can mock these whackadoos when they spout-off idiotic nonsense, but when they have major coin to spend to get bigots to the polls...it really is cause to be more than a little fearful of what could result.
Getting the wind knocked out of you is the only way to
remind your lungs how much they like the taste of air.
~ Sarah Kay
Ah, but how do we determine what is "idiotic nonsense"? And whose fearfulness should be a guide to determine what's worthwhile and what isn't?
However much I may vehemently disagree with another person's opinion, I am always keenly aware of that person's right to have it and express it. I am also aware of my right to express my dissenting arguments, and use similar methods and tools to win people over to my side.
Freedom is ugly at times, but the ugliness serves to highlight its beauty.
Good Bad & The Monkey
However much I may vehemently disagree with another person's opinion, I am always keenly aware of that person's right to have it and express it.
Yeah, I saw that flick too. Not bad.
America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You've got to want it bad, because it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil who is standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the 'land of the free'? Then the symbol of your country cannot just be a flag. The symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Now show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then you can stand up and sing about the 'land of the free.'"
I'm running somewhere tomorrow. It's going to be beautiful. I can't wait.
Poor baby
I don't think there really is ramping up of negative attitudes toward homosexuals. it's not like our society can point to a time in the past when America was more tolerant. There was a time when you would have found maybe 80% of people opposed to gay marriage and 90% of people who would not favor a gay couple adopting children. If those numbers are now 50% or 60% or whatever it's still a lot less than it used to be.
As far as making this an issue where there cannot be any productive conversations I think the left is as guilty as the right. The media is quick to make these big wedge issues in how they are reported. But on the left we are quick to villify the religious conservatives. Nobody even tries to understand each other. As soon as conservatives have a close family member (ie Gingrich, Cheney etc.) who has to suffer the fallout then their attitudes soften. As soon as we lefties think of our aunt Mable or Grandpa Joe who is intolerant of homosexuals our attitudes soften. But make it some stranger and we're ready to call them the devil for their beliefs.
MTA: to clarify, this was in regard to the WrigleyGirl/Zoom-Zoom messages.
Honest response, I don't know where that comes from.
But, in the way of personal anecdote, during a college class on American Government the instructor asked me what my stance was on flag burning. I told him that my stance was irrelevant, because I swore an oath to defend the Constitution, and that meant a person's right to expression through the burning of the flag. I am not approve of the expression or its sentiment, but my approval is immaterial to the matter.
This is not to be preachy, or get on a high horse, but a person's right to express himself, no matter how ugly, hurtful, hateful, is part of the bedrock of the US. I definitely don't agree with all that people think or say, and I'm certain that most disagree with much of what I say and think, but I enjoy the thought that we are all free to have those thoughts and statements.
I've got a fever...
Sounds just like your mom.
On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office. But you will wish that you'd spent more time running. Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.