Legalities
Life, Politics and the Law From ABC News Correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg
Jan Crawford Greenburg is a correspondent for ABC News' bureau in Washington DC. She covers politics, the Supreme Court and provides legal analysis for ABC News. She is a graduate of the University of Chicago's law school and is a member of the New York bar.
RECENT POSTS
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Rabies
October 10, 2008 8:18 AM
Our friend David Brooks, writing in today's New York Times, expands on his remarks earlier this week that Sarah Palin is a "fatal cancer" for the GOP. In a typically thoughtful piece, Brooks traces the history of conservatism, which began as a movement grounded in ideas.
That movement, he writes, has morphed into the modern Republican Party, which today amounts to a cacophony of divisive, anti-elitist rabble-rousing from politicians utterly devoid of sophisticated thinking and historical understanding.
Yep. It is that harsh--and Brooks isn't alone. In the past few days, conservative columnists and editorials boards are taking direct aim at McCain/Palin. If you compiled columns this week from David Frum, Kathleen Parker, Peggy Noonan and the editorial board of the National Review, here's what you'd get:
McCain is "self-destructing," careening from mistake to mistake (Frum) and engaging in reckless political pandering (National Review). He has unleashed a pit bull of a running mate, who is deliberately trafficking in dangerous demagoguery that is stirring frightening racial sentiments in some crowds (Parker). He is on a losing strain (Noonan).
As Noonan warns Republicans: "When your crowds go from 'I love you' to 'I hate the other guy,' you are in trouble."
And the emerging leader of this angry and adrift GOP? Brooks says no person better personifies today's Party than Palin the Pit Bull, whose lipstick is now completely obscured by foam:
"No American politician plays the class-warfare card as constantly as Palin," Brooks writes. "Nobody so relentlessly divides the world between the 'normal Joe Sixpack American' and the coastal elite.
"She is another step in the Republican change of personality. Once conservatives admired Churchill and Lincoln above all—men from wildly different backgrounds who prepared for leadership though constant reading, historical understanding and sophisticated thinking," Brooks continues. "Now those attributes bow down before the common touch."
But this shift has consequences, Brooks writes. Republicans have lost not only the support of the coastal elites, but the educated ones across the entire country. Entire professions of doctors, lawyers, tech executives and, get this, investment bankers, now donate by overwhelming margins to the Democratic Party. As Brooks says, it took talent for Republicans to lose the banking community.
That means, Brooks says, the party is "squeezed at both ends," losing the working class because it has failed to develop economic policies and losing the educated class by telling members "to go away."
That doesn't leave much middle ground--or many voters who will decide this election.
October 10, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (96)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
HP Boston: It's unbelievable isn't it? I hope I'm alive to see that these fools got what they wished for.
Posted by: bombem | Oct 10, 2008 9:51:21 AM
Barack Obama's membership in the Socialist Affiliate of the Democratic Socialists of America. On Wednesday, I went hunting for additional sources...
1996 Election Update From The Columbus Free Post
"The first NP member heads to Congress, as Danny Davis wins an overwhelming 85% victory yesterday (he got a higher percentage of the vote in that district than the President). NP member and State Senate candidate Barack Obama won uncontested. Interestingly, it appears that the local Democratic machine is trying to distance itself from our folks."
Link To Columbus Free Post Article
This revelation has left many people wondering how this could be since Obama ran under the Democratic Party banner during the 1996 Election. As a result, we want to shed insider light on how the New Party planned their takeover of the Democratic Party.
From The Happy Birthday Update Published By The New Party in 1997:
" the New Party would remain independent of the Democratic Party -- but without undermining the Democrats. The New Party's program for a new majority would, as Todd Gutlin puts it, center around an "old fashioned" concern for issues like living wages.
...the New Party's founders suggest, the left needs an organization that straddles the inside-outside fence. If the U.S. left is ever to make a meaningful decision on the third-party-vs.-Dems question, they propose, it must first take on the task of grassroots power-building.
Thus, most of the New Party's work has been in local politics, where its candidates need no party label -- just the activist energy it takes to win office. The party's strategy has been to build political organizations in a few targeted cities, working closely with labor and community organizations. Chapters run candidates only where they have a real chance of winning, combine campaign work with organizing and education, and refuse to spoil elections by stealing votes from the better of two major party candidates.
But to grow past the local level, something more is needed...
...Until major changes in the legal structure of the U.S. politics happen, we're stuck with a two-party system, and progressives -- if they want to win many elections -- will have to run, and vote, Democrat.
But without fusion, the New Party is not likely to have the capacity to swing higher level elections any time soon, inside or outside the Democratic Party. For now the New Party is nothing more -- and nothing less -- than a network of local labor-community political organizations. These organizations can, from time to time, move their political muscle and know-how into Democratic primaries to back progressive candidates for state legislature and even Congress, but do not have the size or clout to field their own candidates for the Senate, the Governor's office, or the White House."
Now you're beginning to understand how Obama, The New Party and ACORN have hijacked the Democratic Party.
Posted by: HP Boston | Oct 10, 2008 9:53:01 AM
Democratic Party never ran a HATE campaign!!! It have always been for the PEOPLE by the PEOPLE!!!
Republican Party has always instilled the KKK beliefs in their campaign!!!! Never about the PEOPLE but for BIG BUSINESS and WAR!!!
OBAMA/BIDEN08
Posted by: sisterdearest09 | Oct 10, 2008 9:56:33 AM
Republicans are a plague infesting and eating away America. With narrowness and demagoguery, ideology and provinciality they have devastated America. And what can you expect from a mind set of Sarah Palin and the likes? What else can result except chaos, corruption and destruction our country? Remember, George Bush wanted to “Privatize” social security? Just like George Bush, politicians like Sarah Palin are desperate and dangerous. We have seen this kind of damming politics infest our country since Ronald Reagan. Remember all the talk about “Small government and no regulations” “No taxes” This is all handy work of Republican strategists like Lynn Noffsinger, Lee Atwater, Karl Rove, who were bound on winning elections no matter what cost. Their slash-burn politics have brought us many a disasters. The Republican chickens have come home to roost!
Posted by: charleschaplin | Oct 10, 2008 10:03:21 AM
McCain and especially Palin are inciting people to riot and commit crimes and by standing on their podium, they are condoning this rabid behavior!! No matter what you think of Obama, name me one time he has stood on a podium and worked up a crowd to a feeding frenzy where they were yelling obscenities against McCain or Palin? You can't?? Then, case closed! Palin and McCain are DANGEROUS---they are not thinking of country first, but of self first and we don't need their brand of hate mongering. We need hope for the future and inspiration that as Americans, we can take back our country and get back on track!
Obama/Biden '08!!
Posted by: RC | Oct 10, 2008 10:32:49 AM
Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd = ACRON, Franny, Freddy = Corruption
Time to throw out all the democrats
Posted by: Jill | Oct 10, 2008 10:44:40 AM
Cindyct: Speak for your liberal self. My wife and practicing attorney daughter and there friends and a multitude of other women we know and respect are all in support of a real woman, Sarah Palin: You liberal fools are bringing down this country and don't even realize it. How do you think you'll look in a burkha?
Posted by: bombem | Oct 10, 2008 10:44:53 AM
David Brooks is a democrat pretending to be a republican who is pretending to be a democrat. Basically he is confused of his own identity
Posted by: vs | Oct 10, 2008 10:48:48 AM
charleschaplin: I FIND IT AMAZING. You were a comical joke many years ago and you still are.
Posted by: bombem | Oct 10, 2008 10:48:54 AM
A woman who incites crowds to anger? who brags about anti-intellectualism? Who doesn't speak up when her adoring crowd hurls racial epithets and calls for the death of the other candidate?
I'm volunteering for Obama canvassing, and even republicans are making a point of telling me how much they detest Palin.
Posted by: Val in Florida | Oct 10, 2008 10:50:28 AM
I've said it once, and I'll say it again. McCain made a BIG mistake in choosing Palin as his VP. He could have and should have chosen Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, or any number of talented, conservative, and experienced Republican women, but he didn't. McCain had the "experience" advantage over Obama, but he decided (albeit in a highly unsophisticated simplistic manner) that change was going to his mantra. Then he chose an inexperienced, parochial, and insular politian (and I have to admit that Palin is a talented politician when scripted) to run alongside him. When you are 72 years old, your pick of a VP is vitally important, and McCain was reckless where he should have been prudent. He had that mantra, and then he totally threw it away with the Palin pick. This shows me that despite his vast government experience, he has no wisdom, and equates (falsely) "boldness" with leadership, when what comes out of McCain's decisionmaking processes is recklessness. The GOP brand is dead. The party of Lincoln has been taken over by right-wing religious nuts, and as a result, they have diminished the talent pool for national politics and narrowed their electoral map substantially.
Posted by: Laura Brown | Oct 10, 2008 10:53:42 AM
Sarah Plain is inciting hate and violence with her outright lies. She should be silenced by her own campaign as she has officially lost the respect of millions of Americans. I shudder at the thought of Mrs. Palin's children watching their mother spreading hate on national television. I thought Govenor Palin was a christian woman?
Posted by: C Collins | Oct 10, 2008 12:57:35 PM
I could not agree with this more. Palin and McCain are playing a game so dangerous that the next step is inciting a riot. McCain knows better than this. At least she has an excuse because of her lack of a understanding of world outside of Wasilla and her obvious incompetence and lack of intelligence. But McCain has no excuse. He clearly knows better buy is choosing to win at any cost above serving his country with dignity and honor. I'm appalled at what's taking place and have lost all respect for John McCain.
Posted by: Suz in KS | Oct 10, 2008 12:58:36 PM
The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.
$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$540 billion: Annual U.S. Defense Budget
Posted by: maryna1 | Oct 10, 2008 12:59:26 PM
Sarah Palin is a dangerous woman....The AIP party which wants to secede from the United States told Palin to run as a republican in order to promote their own agendas. The head of this group donated money to her campaign for mayor and THEN, Palin tapped him to take her place on city council. The council rejected him as "too violent". Palin spoke at the AIP convention just a few months ago and Scott Palin is a member. These people ARE NOT who the profess to be!
Posted by: Intelligent voter | Oct 10, 2008 1:08:27 PM
Obama/Biden '08!
We need steady, thoughtful and rational leadership in these times. Obama provides steady leadership.
I believe in America, I believe in Obama!
Posted by: Ron | Oct 10, 2008 1:18:40 PM
Nobama has to explain his ties to Bill Ayers.
Posted by: women4 palin | Oct 10, 2008 1:25:15 PM
You know I appreciate this article and the columnist comments. It gives me hope! Yes, I support Obama and have for many months. But do I wish any harm to McCain or Palin, of course not. I don't support their views and never will, but this does not exalt me or make them less of a person. It just means we differ in opinion. You want to bring up his associate with Ayers,ok, Rezko, ok, but this hate mongering is not what descent, honorable, peaceful do. No candidate, no cause can change me that much, and I, let me say it again I will guarantee anybody in my presence who would degrade, make death treats, or any way use a derogatory racial or gender remark about Palin or McCain would be corrected by me. You wouldn't need the Secret Service, I can control what goes on in my presence.
Posted by: SD | Oct 10, 2008 1:30:31 PM
This morning I watched a clip from one of John McCain’s “town hall” campaign meetings. An angry Republican voter stood up, ranted about the Democratic control of Congress and asked John McCain, “How did we come to this?” I did not hear McCain’s answer, but I think 8 years of Rove-Hannity-O'Reilly-Rush divisiveness and hate has created a backlash of voters who remember America whole and united. Until Republicans move away from failed separatism, the party will continue to isolate itself down to religious extremists and the lower end of the IQ bell curve.
Posted by: Center One | Oct 10, 2008 1:32:29 PM
An excellent job of summing up what is wrong with the Republican Party today. I am 52 years old, a life-long Republican until 4 years ago - when I felt that I could no longer support a party devoid of ideas and hell bent on dividing this nation. The Republican Party of today is not the party of Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt and not even the party of Reagan.
Posted by: Rence | Oct 10, 2008 1:37:01 PM
Post a comment