Why can’t the Democrats just pass what they want to pass with their supermajority and stop whining incessantly about Birthers and mobs or whatever? The answer, I think, is that the whole “mob” meme is effective only insofar as it creates the impression that the GOP is the stumbling block to ObamaCare, which of course is an outright lie. It’s the Blue Dogs who are holding things up for fear of a backlash in their purplish districts if they vote for socialized medicine. Which brings us back to the astroturf smear: If the left’s so sure this is all a psy op by Republicans and that Joe Public’s gung ho to run health care into a collectivist ditch, then the Blue Dogs should call the GOP’s bluff and pass whatever Obama wants. Then, when they’re all reelected next year, the great conservative fraud will be proved and The One will have a great victory, no? Put up or shut up, kids.Word. Read the whole thing, of course.
Thursday, August 06, 2009
Home truth
Allahpundit at Hot Air nails it:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
You guys are absolutely right about the WH's whining about the astroturf smear. And calling it whining is being generous. The Conservatives have found an effective way to counter the Dems on health care, and playing victim doesn't make much sense when you hold such large majorities in both the House and Senate.
But you are completely wrong to equate the Birther nonsense to the astroturfing meme. It is the GOP that is whining on this one. The Astroturfing complaint is coming directly from the White House, but the WH has been completely silent in re the Birthers. And why shouldn't they be. You know the saying about what to do when your enemy is busy destroying himself. Honestly, Consrvatives complaining about the attention the Birthers are getting is akin to the guy who killed his parents asking for leniency because of his orphaned status...it's laughable. A considerable minority of the GOP base (I have seen figure ranging in the 30% to 40% range) say the Pres was foreign born, while an approximately equal number say they aren't sure. Meanwhile, almost every GOP office holder (there are a few notable exceptions) are either on board with this nonsense, or unwilling to comment. And for a very good reason: they can alienate 60% to 70% per cent of their base by refusing to join the flat earth society. And Liberals choosing to point this out are doing the same thing that Conservatives who are astroturfing the town halls are doing. They are practicing smart politics.
And Mark, kudos to you for standing up to the flat earther society.
Regards,
Rich
But you are completely wrong to equate the Birther nonsense to the astroturfing meme.
Who's the "you" in this instance, kemo sabe?
And Mark, kudos to you for standing up to the flat earther society.
So the "you" isn't me. Who is it, then?
Mark,
read Allahpundit's article, which you quoted:
"Why can’t the Democrats just pass what they want to pass with their supermajority and stop whining incessantly about Birthers and mobs or whatever?"
So while I applaude you for not joining the Birther Brigades, I am not cutting you, or at least, Allahpundit, any slack about complaining about the attention the Birthers are receiving. It's your Party, you take care of it. I am sure you understand the line I am drawing between the official actions of the WH, and your legitimate grousing over that, and the emerging meme of trying to blame liberals for the actions of Orly Taitz (Oily Taint?) and her numerous followers.
Rich
This isn't a comment about the healthcare plan, just the idea of astro-turfing in general.
Maybe the WH specifically should be above complaining about soundbites in the media; I can see how if it's the WH, it can be seen as whining. But in general, it's important to point out astro-turfing when it's happening (for SOMEBODY to do it), because the fact is, it's lie. CLASSIC Conservative media manipulation: "How do we get people to believe we are doing the opposite of what we are doing?! Give it the opposite name!"
And, it's shameless. So yeah, maybe the WH should let Democrats in the media handle it, but it seems to me that equating calling out astro-turfing to "whining" is like saying God is "whining" about people breaking the 9th Commandment! Voters deserve to know who is behind whatever "movement." On both sides.
Rich,
The birthers are silly. Let's play a thought experiment: suppose that their most fevered imagingings turned out to be true and that Obama wasn't born in the United States. By what mechanism would he be removed from office? I agree it's smart politics to make them seem more important than they are, but you and I both know they aren't any more important than the 9-11 Truthers were to your side of the aisle during the Bush years. I hate the broad brush, which is why I try to be very careful not to use it. And that's also why I don't appreciate it when you "aren't cutting me any slack" about it. Unless you want me to dog you about the Truthers. I can start doing that, in the interest of "not cutting you any slack." Not to put too fine a point on it, but there are a shitload of albatrosses that I can hang around your neck. I'd prefer not to do that, though.
Amanda,
You'll have to show me who is orchestrating the astroturfing on the Right. The big meme that was going around yesterday (courtesy of Rachel Maddow) has been utterly discredited.
I'm perfectly willing to stipulate that the insurance companies are interested parties in whatever is happening. Damned right they are. Do they have an absolute right to be part of the discussion? Damned right, again. I made up my own mind on these issues and I'm certain that you (and Rich) did, too.
And for both of you -- the more important point is involved in my earlier post, "Birth of the Kulak." What the hell is Obama thinking when he sends out a surrogate who requests that people rat out their friends and neighbors for communicating in ways that are "fishy?" Help me out, here -- how is that justifiable? I'm reasonably certain that you'll both agree that it isn't.
One other thing, Rich -- I had no idea who Orly Taitz was until you brought her up in this post. I had to Google her name to find out who she is. Sorry, she's just not on my radar screen.
Mark,
I agree with much of what you are saying, but in my defense, you brought the Birthers in to this, not me. And if you want to go there, I always thought the Truthers were crazies from both sides. Moreover, I can assure you there were never 10 Democratic legislators moving a motion to the floor of the House to get the Truthers their day in Congress, there was never a situation where Democratic Senators were afraid to speak ill of Truthers, and there was never a situation where 1 in 3 Democrats were completely down with the Truthers, and another third were leaning that way.
If you want to go after lefties, make fun of things you can really tie us to, that many Dems actually, incomprehensibly believe. Like the notion that Ted Kennedy is a good man, or that Carter was a good President.
Regards,
Rich
Rich,
I didn't "bring the birthers into it." I quoted Allahpundit, who uses the term as an aside the main point he (and by extension I) am making about this, which is this: the Democrats can pass health care today if they want to. They have a supermajority in the Senate and complete control of the House. The price they would pay is to make some of their Blue Dogs march into a bayonet and the Blue Dogs in question are choosing to protect their asses instead of passing this glorious reform that is so desperately needed, at least according to some people.
All the rest of this stuff is Kabuki theater. And you know that, of course. And I have no intention of tying you personally to any of the crap that I mentioned in my earlier comment on the thread. I don't play that way. I'm just asking that you respect that here.
And as for the reason I don't play that way, I probably need to make one other distinction. When it comes to politics, I'm a conservative (with libertarian tendencies on many issues) first, and a partisan second. If a better, viable alternative to the Republican Party existed, I'd support it. As it happens, there isn't one and there probably will not be one in my lifetime. I generally support Republican candidates for a simple reason: in almost every other instance, the Democrat on offer in the election is far worse.
The Dems are doubling down on their bet that Americans aren't paying close attention. Because if Americans are paying attention they will notice the Democrats engaging in an awful lot of questionable practices while trying to distract everyone with rather preposterous lies about their opponents. That's politics! If they're right, then they get their agenda through. If they're wrong, they squander an immense amount of power. I'm kind of surprised that they're willing to bet so high on this.
Post a Comment