Do we need to worry about conservative whites rioting?
------
Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.
If you think Milbank’s story is bad, just watch the video of the event. I’ve never seen anything even remotely like this before…and I’m OLD!
Behold the face of The Base:
This is something I’m a little concerned about, especially given the level of rhetoric I heard last weekend from relatives I consider pretty typical for their red state (which isn’t even one of the psychotic-red states like Utah that went 70%+ for Bush in ‘04). I can only imagine what the real wingnuts are saying…
Oh, and don’t forget they have guns. And live in small towns where, as long as they’re white and don’t have a significant criminal record, they often get a pass from local authorities on things like “suspicious activity” .
Though I have to say I’m not so much worried about mass rioting, more like either pogroms or a militia comeback.
Do we need to worry about conservative whites rioting?
Posted by Jesse Taylor on 02:02 PM • (1) Comments • Permalink
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
After the OJ murder aquittal, Courtney Love asked “Where’s MY riot.”
If whites are gonna riot, can I loot Beverly-Brentwood? (MANOLOS FOR THE PEOPLE! WHAT DO WE WANT? JIMMY CHOOS! WHEN DO WE WANT THEM? NOW!)
Maybe - but there’s not enough of them - just the fringiest of the fringe at the moment - to do anything but push people even further onto Obama’s side.
The article made mention of how jarring it felt to have polka music playing to this kind of rally, how out of place it seemed; but I somehow feel like it might just be a little *too* appropriate… Munich beer hall music, anyone?
Sorry to go all Godwin so early in a thread, but that really is what this is about. If they can’t win straight out, they may look to violence. And as some others have said, that’s exactly the kind of intimidation they will profit by.
If Obama gets the win, every skinhead, neonazi, inbred, gun-nut, survivalist, disgrace to humanity with a copy of the Turner Diaries is gonna be gearing up.
After 8-years of relative quiescence, the extreme fascist rightwing is going to suddenly re-discover all that hate they had for Clinton and Reno, and kick it up a few more notches and aim it at The Black Man.
I don’t understand it at all. Barack and Michelle Obama really seem like cool people. But then I guess he doesn’t represent a threat to my worldview or my politics. The fact that he doesn’t share my skin color is probably the least important thing it’s possible to say about him.
They better have the Best Damn Secret Service Agents Evah on Obama’s detail. And there better be somebody watching the agents to make sure nobody sees a Red Queen…
I’m thinking it’ll be mostly vigilantism on a local scale. I would not be surprised if there was an increase in lynching and other racially motivated acts of terrorism.
Whoops! Sorry. I forgot that it isn’t terrorism unless the perpetrators have Arabic names.
Oh, the last thing I’m worried about right now is Obama being assassinated. It would have an incredibly unpredictable effect on the elections, especially if it could be even vaguely tied to right-wing elements or racism.
And if they wait till he’s been elected, it’ll be even worse. Because A) Obama would be positively deified, and B) they’d still have to deal with President Biden, who aside from skin color doesn’t seem to be any “better” for the wingnut fascist domestic terrorist element. Oh, and if they took out the both of them, well then hello, President Pelosi!
If Obama were assassinated, it would be by a lone nut, well after the election.
I’m much more worried about raids on the other side of the tracks.
Oh, and don’t forget they have guns. And live in small towns where, as long as they’re white and don’t have a significant criminal record, they often get a pass from local authorities on things like “suspicious activity” .
The Opoponax on 10/09 at 03:16 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The boyfriend of one of my coworkers just bought a new shotgun and a ton of shells - just in case Callifornia’s Prop. 8 passes (the “protect tradirional marriage” initiative) and militant gays go on a rampage.
My boss thinks that rampaging homosexuals would leave our neighborhood much nicer than it was BEFORE the riot.
This seems like as good a time as any to bring up this video.
I love this.
According to the latest numbers, Obama is beating McCain 50% to 42% in WEST VIRGINIA!
Wanna watch Freepers have a collective aneurysm? Click this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2101594/posts
(TMI Time: Their rage makes by nipples tingle…)
“The boyfriend of one of my coworkers just bought a new shotgun and a ton of shells - just in case Callifornia’s Prop. 8 passes”
Please, please, please folks, if you can see your way clear to contribute financially to one of the groups working to oppose Prop 8, now is the time. The anti-gay ads may well be working. California is SO important on this issue!
if white people rioting is anywhere near as funny as white people dancing, i am 100% o.k. with letting them riot their hearts out. (full disclosure, i’m whiter than casper)
They have guns. But they’re also fat & stupid. And soon, living in cars and on the street with the rest of us.
Please, please, please folks, if you can see your way clear to contribute financially to one of the groups working to oppose Prop 8, now is the time. The anti-gay ads may well be working. California is SO important on this issue!
Lymis on 10/09 at 03:55 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am going to be utterly poor until after the holidays, but I do go out on cool evenings and distribute “No ON 8” door hangers. I take my oldest girl, a nearly-blind, rickety-assed German Shepherd with me so I have excuse to stroll instead of power-walk my routes. (I’m probably violating the spirit of California’s Propostion 2 - the one that mandates humane treatment for animals…)
Can we stop with the “They have guns” already? This is America. Everyone has guns.
According to the latest numbers, Obama is beating McCain 50% to 42% in WEST VIRGINIA!
Unfortunately, those numbers are from an ARG poll. ARG’s polls are wildly erratic. I’ll wait for confirmation before believing that.
No, we don’t need to worry about it; the Consequence Management Response Force is at the ready in case anything like that happens.
Maybe that is what we need to worry about.
Turnabout’s fair play, right? Might actually clean up the s—-holes that D.C. Trenton, Newark and Detroit have become. And Wapsie, not all of us with guns are fat and stupid ... and Jess, not all white people can’t dance ... just self-defeating types like you. A lot of us have extraordinarily rhythmic reflexes (something else to note re: guns and their proper use, eh Wapsie?)
Can we stop with the “They have guns” already? This is America. Everyone has guns.
RobW on 10/09 at 04:20 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Everyone does have guns, but I still fear ignorant, paranoid conspiracy theorists with guns. (Think Dick Cheney…)
Can we stop with the “They have guns” already? This is America. Everyone has guns.
I don’t.
Unfortunately, those numbers are from an ARG poll. ARG’s polls are wildly erratic. I’ll wait for confirmation before believing that.
Jake Squid on 10/09 at 04:20 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Shhhhhhhhhhhhh! I don’t think it’s correct either, but I’m enjoying the Freeper response.)
Turnabout’s fair play, right? Might actually clean up the s—-holes that D.C. Trenton, Newark and Detroit have become
And why do I get the sense that that cleansing would be of the ethnic persuasion?
What a disgusting turd you are. I hope someone cleanses YOU.
Did Republican honkeys riot the last time a Democrat won? If I remember Florida correctly, yes, they certainly did. And that was for a candidate who’d been pushing himself as a compassionate guy, not someone who’d been pushing the base to ratchet up the crazy…
And Wapsie, not all of us with guns are fat and stupid ...
Really? Did you do South Beach or Atkins?
Shorter Sugar Ray Republican: “I am so gonna shoot a hole in my groin first time I try to pull this .44 outta my waistband.”
Sugar Ray, I never knew you were so willing to be outwardly racist instead of just thinly veiling it.
You actually make me throw up a little bit.
Shorter Sugar Ray Republican: “I am so gonna shoot a hole in my groin first time I try to pull this .44 outta my waistband.”
FMS I’d pay good money to see that.
And for what it’s worth, if he ever met me, SRR would probably judge me a horrid shot. Bein’ that I’m all tiny and a girl and a librul and can brew decent coffee and whatnot. And then I’d shoot his nuts off. It’d be great.
Plus I’m pale. He wouldn’t know I was on the wrong side until it was too late.
Well, What?
That makes two of us (tiny, librul, drink-brewing, pale girls) who could shoot him without his even knowing we were “in the know” about guns.
They already did in Florida when Gore won in 2000. It was the rioting that caused that simpering twit Anthony Kennedy to cast his lot with the majority in Bush v. Gore.
Sorry to go all Godwin so early in a thread, but that really is what this is about.
Oh, I don’t think you have to go that far from home...
I’ve got a $100 bet going with my roommate about this. He honestly thinks that is Obama loses, “The Brothers” are going to riot. I don’t get it. His reasoning goes that, well, there were riots after the OJ Simpson verdict… Did that even happen?
Sugar Ray, I politely disagree. I don’t think it’s possible to be, like you, a paranoid extreme racist, and not also be a fool.
Googling for “oj simpson riots” I came across this. I think the “must reads” sidebar is indicative of what and how these people think. Life isn’t fair, it’s hard to find a job, and the rich get richer: So let’s blame the brown people.
If whites are gonna riot, can I loot Beverly-Brentwood? (MANOLOS FOR THE PEOPLE! WHAT DO WE WANT? JIMMY CHOOS! WHEN DO WE WANT THEM? NOW!)
Hey, I probably won’t be able to make it down from Burbank in time for the riot—you know how the 405 is. Can you pick me up some Stuart Weitzmans? Size 7 narrow. Thanks!
I don’t have a gun right now, but my dad did buy me a WWI bayonet for home defense. I think I can take out a few Freepers.
Oh, the last thing I’m worried about right now is Obama being assassinated. It would have an incredibly unpredictable effect on the elections, especially if it could be even vaguely tied to right-wing elements or racism.
I reassured my sons that IF Obama was assassinated before the election, Hillary would be ready on day 1 to take the baton. She would clearly be entitled to do so.
That alone is an insurance policy with teh wingnuts.
“Turnabout’s fair play, right? Might actually clean up the s—-holes that D.C. Trenton, Newark and Detroit have become.”
Dude, that’s over the line.
Is there a human being in there somewhere, or are you just an unthinking, unfeeling Randbot?...
are you just an unthinking, unfeeling Randbot?…
You got the unthinking part right. But douchenozzles like SRR have plenty of feelings. It’s just that all of them are hate and penis-insecurity.
“I’ve got a $100 bet going with my roommate about this. He honestly thinks that is Obama loses, “The Brothers” are going to riot. I don’t get it. His reasoning goes that, well, there were riots after the OJ Simpson verdict… Did that even happen?”
...the rioting was after the Rodney King verdict letting off the police who beat the hell out of him. And while it was a really ugly way to deal with a bad situation, it’s all too easy to see why they did. They were flat out pissed. And I can’t blame them.
Daryl Gates, who was chief of the LAPD at the time, just seemed to bring out the best in people…
I reassured my sons that IF Obama was assassinated before the election, Hillary would be ready on day 1 to take the baton. She would clearly be entitled to do so.
Hmm. I have to wonder what Joe Biden might do in that situation.
The clever thing would be a Clinton/Biden ticket, with Joe milking it for gravitas and putting himself up as Clinton’s eventual successor. But he might be too old to see that as worth going for.
But it would be really really nice if you good folks didn’t off the black dude, okay?
“But it would be really really nice if you good folks didn’t off the black dude, okay?”
Hey! It ain’t us.
Ever seen American History X? That’s more the kind of people who would be so inclined…
maybe if we’re really lucky - we COULD lose the entire mullet haircut should this occurr.
I have never met a Republican that I liked. I have never been friends with one. None of the music, books, records or poems I like were created by Republicans.
In fact, everything that is wrong in my life was created or supported by Republicans or conservative thinking. Any attempt at bettering the world is resisted by their mindset too.
The truth is, the world doesn’t need any Republicans.
Maldoror, there are an awful lot of Republicans who are nice, decent, likable people. Believe it or not…
A lot of us have extraordinarily rhythmic reflexes (something else to note re: guns and their proper use, eh Wapsie?)
Leave it to a Freeper to equate rhythmic reflexes with shooting guns rather than “bow chikka wow wow”.
Big ups for posting the Clash video… I would have done that myself.
Hey! It ain’t us.
That’s an extremely generic you.
I can’t help thinking wistfully of the various alternate universe books which featured a “President King”...
Anecdotally, there is apparently a waiting list for AK-47s in Central PA. There is a minority (I hope) of Central Pennsylvanians arming themselves and stocking their cellars “just in case.”
Actually, this white girl CAN dance. Years of tap, ballet, ballroom and eastern dancing lessons.
On topic, I don’t know why anyone is surprised.
Let me be totally blunt: Fred Phelps and his ilk are just below the surface of 90% of humanity. Within living memory, a man like Obama would have been killed before the primaries got underway. And there are plenty who would like to bring those mmories back to life.
People call me alarmist when I say things like this. No, I’m an observer.
“Anecdotally, there is apparently a waiting list for AK-47s in Central PA. There is a minority (I hope) of Central Pennsylvanians arming themselves and stocking their cellars “just in case.””
... corresponding waiting list for DVDs of Red Dawn, or Birth of a Nation?...
I have never met a Republican that I liked. I have never been friends with one. None of the music, books, records or poems I like were created by Republicans.
OK… just remember to separate people’s personalities from their ideology somewhat. I find it improves living.
“... corresponding waiting list for DVDs of Red Dawn, or Birth of a Nation?…”
Um, yeah. I actually think so. It’s a weird state I live in.
I can’t help thinking wistfully of the various alternate universe books which featured a “President King”…
What, one in which Leslie King didn’t change his name after his mother’s remarriage?
Amen Pansy, amen.
I’m still not so sure which way we’re going to go in this race. Though if we do go red it’ll be for the first time in at least 16 years, and I’ll be pissed.
Also, polka music? The McCain campaign can step the fuck off my cultural heritage, thank you very much.
Luzzleanne-
Obama’s up between 10 and 15 points in most polls I’ve seen. I think turnout’s going to be spectacular in Philly, especially if it’s nice out, and I think all the Philly ‘burbs are going to go for Obama. I see a lot more Obama yard signs than McCain signs in the western suburb that I’m in - and that’s even with the ridiculous yard sign theft going on. Up in the northern suburbs, there’s more McCain signs, but I still think Obama will do well.
I think he’ll take PA. The people upset about the last 8 years outnumber the racist/conspiracy theorist/evangelical/wingnut contingent.
I hope.
I hope so too. The western part of the state’s been hit pretty hard by the last eight years, so I’m hoping enough people here see the light. On the upside, I know that a lot of people who didn’t want Obama as a candidate really, really dislike McCain. This area’s in the odd connundrum of having a lot of people over 60 who are both very racist and lifelong Democrats, but a lot of those people also like the appearance of calm reasonableness. I don’t think McCain’s random attacks, refusal to discuss the issues, choice of Palin, etc. are going to play well with them. I hope some of them get over the overt racism, but I think a lot of them may stay home. We’ll see.
As a (white) native of Washington D.C. I would just like to issue a sincere “Fuck the Fuck Off” to the racist asshole above who doesn’t deserve a name. Whatever shithole “heartland” town you come from can’t hold a fucking candle to the cultural dynamism of a vibrant city like D.C. I fucking lived there for over 24 years and I can assure you that whatever fucked up view you hold of the city is entirely mistaken and most likely based on your assumption that a city that’s majority black with a black mayor can’t possibly be pleasant.
Well, it is asshole.
Fuck I fucking hate trolls so goddamn much.
As a (white) native of Washington D.C. I would just like to issue a sincere “Fuck the Fuck Off” to the racist asshole above who doesn’t deserve a name. Whatever shithole “heartland” town you come from can’t hold a fucking candle to the cultural dynamism of a vibrant city like D.C.
Seconded, especially re: Newark.
Talk to some of the state Republicans around here and you’d think that Newark were still in the throes of race riots.
Here’s my two cents:
I think we should be allowed to V8-smack (hard) anyone who repeats the following stupid/long-since-debunked talking points:
- Obama’s middle name is Hussein, and you know what that means….
- Obama was educated in a madrasa
- Obama is an African or A-RAB
- Obama is the most liberal senator
- Obama was pals with Bill Ayers
- Tony Rezco bought Obama’s house for him
- Obama is an elitist
(feel free to add your own)
If Senator Obama wins, we conservatives will be disappointed, and we’ll be poorer for it, but we’ll keep plugging along, going to work, supporting our families, going to church, and working toward defeating Mr Obama in 2012.
We won’t like an Obama victory, but we’ll still survive.
If Senator Obama wins, we conservatives will be disappointed, and we’ll be poorer for it, but we’ll keep plugging along, going to work, supporting our families, going to church, and working toward defeating Mr Obama in 2012.
Dana, while I appreciate your good-intentioned attempt to put a calm, rational face on the two-party electoral system, unfortunately McCain, Palin, and their followers do not seem to have gotten them message and believe an Obama presidency would be the culmination of a Maoist coup, or a Marxist Islamofacist takeover resulting in a surrender to Osama bin Laden. I don’t know if all Republicans know each other or what, but you might want to tell your Republican friends what the conservative “plan” is for 2008-2012 in the event of an Obama victory, because I don’t think they’ve heard it yet, but seem to be getting ready to restart the militia movement.
If Senator Obama wins, we conservatives will be disappointed, and we’ll be poorer for it,
Because the record of Republican vs Democrat presidents is so much better?
Guess again, Dana.
I saw Kid Rock live in Norfolk back before the midget died of kidney failure. I care not for any aesthetic discussion of “I am the bullgod” but dammit, it’s fun.
//then he had to stop exploiting midgets, and started writing weak, cheesy pop songs full of bling references. or covering bad seventies near-covers.//
Maladror-
The next time you feel (understandably) compelled to dismiss conservatives and republicans completely, remember Salvador Dali. Dude fucking sided with Franco. Do I avert my eyes from the Persistence of Time out of pissant ideological reasons? No. There really are true believers- and in any society, far more than 99% of people are indifferent to begin with.
and we’ll be poorer for it
Whu…?
Please keep in mind that Sen. McCain (among many other republicans) voted FOR the $820,000,000 bailout package. And for the $10,000,000 per month Bush-II war.
Which included $120,000,000 worth of earmarks he’s so preciously fond of decrying.
Those mind-staggering sums throw both candidates’ economic plans out the frakkin’ window, IMHO.
No matter who wins the presidential election, SOMEBODY’S GOTTA PAY FOR THESE COMMITMENTS. And it won’t be a matter of ebul librul policies v. your o-so-precious church-going sanctimoniousness.
It’s just a fact.
* missed some parentheses there, around And for the $10,000,000 per month Bush-II war.
I actually kinda liked this part:
The crowd liked McCain, but loved Palin. “You’re a hottie!” a young man near the front called out to her.
“What does that have to do with anything?” she answered with a smile.
Damned sexist lib-ruls.
Teac, I hated the bailout package, but realized that it had to be done. And, unfortunately for your argument, Senator Obama supported it as well, as did the majority of Democrats.
Serious question: On Mr Obama’s website, his promise to cut taxes for the middle class, and that no family earning less than $250,000 a year will see their taxes increase, remains in place. Is there anyone here who believes that Mr Obama still intends to keep that promise?
Tyro: You can find the loudmouths in any party, and they get attention precisely because they are loudmouths. But the result of an Obama victory would be just what I said it would be among conservatives: we’d continue with our lives, start working to undermine the Democrats’ plans as best we could, and try to defeat the Democrats in the 2010 and 2012 elections.
The voters have a perfect right to choose whomever they wish. I believe that they would be making a huge mistake if they voted for Mr Obama, but that such would be a huge mistake does not mean that I don’t think the people have the right to make it.
Serious question: On Mr Obama’s website, his promise to cut taxes for the middle class, and that no family earning less than $250,000 a year will see their taxes increase, remains in place. Is there anyone here who believes that Mr Obama still intends to keep that promise?
I do.
Because I know about the L-Curve and know that the VAST majority of income in this country is given to the top 1% (actually, the top 0.25%) of the population, and though we do manage to tax them a little progressively (they are currently something like 30-40% of total taxes) we could at least double how much they pay and making oodles more available for roads / police / teachers / science / etc. without impacting the taxes of everyone else.
Also, I don’t vote for politicians based solely on whether my tax bill is likely to go up or down under their rule.
“Please keep in mind that Sen. McCain (among many other republicans) voted FOR the $820,000,000 bailout package. And for the $10,000,000 per month Bush-II war.”
It’s even worse, teac. You need to add 3 more zeros to each of those figures because they’re billions, not millions. And yes, they are mind-staggeringly big, only exceeded by the total debt, now over $10 trillion ($10,000,000,000,000+) and rising rapidly…
But it isn’t the fault of the Republibots who’ve run just about everything for the last 8-years, who want to limit the size of government, and reduce spending, balance the budget, and free the Invisible Hand of the Market to bring Universal Prosperity to all Mankind — it’s Clinton’s fault, Carter’s fault, Johnson’s fault, and Obama is so talented he’s already at fault for ruining the economy before he’s even elected…
we could at least double how much they pay and making oodles more available for roads / police / teachers / science / etc. without impacting the taxes of everyone else.
So, you don’t think rich people will (a) find tax shelters and (b) pass costs on to consumers?
Sharon,
What did they do in the 1950’s, when the maximum tax rate (under a Republican President!) was much, much higher—- and the economy was pretty good?
You can find the loudmouths in any party, and they get attention precisely because they are loudmouths. But the result of an Obama victory would be just what I said it would be among conservatives: we’d continue with our lives, start working to undermine the Democrats’ plans as best we could, and try to defeat the Democrats in the 2010 and 2012 elections.
Good thinking. Because you wouldn’t want to do anything so vile as to work in the spirit of bipartisanship to pass legislation and otherwise govern for the common welfare.
Better simply to brand the Democrats as enemies and undercut them at every opportunity.
Tyro: You can find the loudmouths in any party, and they get attention precisely because they are loudmouths.
Under the present circumstances, the “loudmouths” are having their delusions aided and abetted by the leaders of the Republican party at the moment. As I said, I appreciate the fact that you understand how the two-party system works (despite your rather brazen misunderstanding about what economic policies work for the country and which ones don’t), but we have stalwart members of the Republican establishment telling their followers that Obama is a Maoist Islamofascist terrorist. Now, personally, I’d like conservatives to do to the National Review and the Weekly Standard what the National Review did to the John Birch Society, but the Republicans don’t seem to be ready to do that, and are instead encouraging the most disturbed, most delusional members of their party. You might notice, a few months after the election, that your acceptance of an Obama presidency will get you pegged as a “liberal traitor” by your Republican friends and mass-e-mail-forwarders you associate with.
Tyro wrote:
You might notice, a few months after the election, that your acceptance of an Obama presidency will get you pegged as a “liberal traitor” by your Republican friends and mass-e-mail-forwarders you associate with.
Depends on what you mean by my “acceptance of an Obama presidency.” If it means that I’ll admit that yeah, Barack Obama is my president, too, just like I was forced to do with Bill Clinton, and like you should be doing now with George Bush, then yeah, I’ll accept it, because there will be no other reality-based choice.
But accepting the fact doesn’t mean supporting such an administration; I’ll be doing what little I can to undermine his worst policies and defeat him in 2012. That part Republicans understand; I’m not exactly alone in that.
If Senator Obama wins, we conservatives will be disappointed, and we’ll be poorer for it, but we’ll keep plugging along, going to work, supporting our families, going to church, and working toward defeating Mr Obama in 2012.
And of course, us liberals never go to work, never go to church, and we don’t support our families(welfare baby!).
Two things:
1 - It doesn’t matter what the polls say. It’s who gets to count the votes that matter. There WILL be voter purging, long lines in Democratic areas, and outright vote stealing attempted by the Republicans. Bring your camera phones or good old fashioned cameras to the polls and snap shots of anyone trying to violate voter’s rights. It is at the individual voter level that this election will be determined.
2 - If we can get past the Republican dirty tricks, remember that down-ticket races are even more important and less likely to be targeted for fraud. When you get to the polls, vote Democratic on all downticket races. This will mean that a President Obama will have people to work with in order to get this country back on track. The Republicans over the last 8 years have shown that they have no desire to work with Democrats. It is their way or nothing, and if a Dem proposes something they automatically resist it. Get rid of the problem—get rid of Republican obstructionists.
I’m more likely to believe in riots by liberals if another round of vote stealing as blatant as those in 2000 in Florida and 2004 in Ohio occur. I know it would set me off.
I’ll be doing what little I can to undermine his worst policies and defeat him in 2012. That part Republicans understand; I’m not exactly alone in that.
The question is whether you’ll be the one forwarding those “Obama is Marxist/Terrorist/Islamofascist” e-mails because it “serves the party” and will help undermine his presidency, or will you refrain. Those who refrain will be branded the “liberal traitors.” And then the question is who will you have on your side—the people like Andy McCarthy and Jonah Goldberg, convinced that Obama is a Maoist/Islamist sleeper agent. And then the question is why, if these are the establishment members of the Republican party, that you’re any different than they are.
“But accepting the fact doesn’t mean supporting such an administration; I’ll be doing what little I can to undermine his worst policies and defeat him in 2012. That part Republicans understand; I’m not exactly alone in that.”
Dana, what if he turns out to be a good president? Would still feel that way? Or would you be able to man-up and admit it (like John Cole did regarding Bush Jr.) if things don’t turn out the way you fear?...
Mr Ess: Unless he completely reverses his policies on some major issues, he can’t be a good president as far as I am concerned. If he is elected [shudder!] and appoints the kind of judges you and I both think he’d choose, he’d be a bad president. If he raises taxes on the middle class, which you and I both know he’ll do, despite his promises, he’ll be a bad president. If he tries to stifle freedom of speech with the idiotic “Fairness Doctrine,” he won’t be a good president.
The possibility exists that he’ll be a decent administrator and that his government will work reasonably efficiently; that part is unknowable unless he actually gets the job. If the deficit comes down due to reduced government spending, he’d be considered a good president, and I’d give him credit for that, but if the deficit comes down due to increased taxes, no, I won’t support that at all.
Unless he completely reverses his policies on some major issues, he can’t be a good president as far as I am concerned.
This is one of those situations where increased health and economic well-being of the American people and the US economy takes a back seat to your quasi-religious ideological hobbyhorses. The the government and economy was horrendously mismanaged by Bush doesn’t matter to you since, by “cutting taxes” and driving up the deficit (while Americans faced increased expensive in all other parts of their lives) he was, in your eyes, a “good president.”
You may find yourself in for some frustrating years, as the American people do better personally and economically with a president who does not adhere to your cult-like religious obsessions when it comes to budgetary policy. This may upset you, but you seem, mostly like a pretty calm guy, despite your stated goal to “undermine” Obama, even if his policies work well and help the American people. Your more unhinged colleagues may take the “Clinton route”—feel so angry that the president is “covering up his radical leanings” by being a successful, pragmatic president that they start to lash out with violent rhetoric and/or actions. This is a serious risk, and most dangerous of all is the fact that the GOP establishment seems to be encouraging this sort of thing.
If he raises taxes on the middle class, which you and I both know he’ll do, despite his promises, he’ll be a bad president.
And you believe this why? Because, thanks to the policies pushed by Bush and backed by McCain, there is no choice but to raise taxes or drown in red ink? Or do you believe it simply because McCain said so?
Someone has to pay for the bailout, for Bush’s war and disastrous trade policies, for eight years of give to the rich tax policy. My hope is that what Obama has said about reversing the Bush tax cuts on the upperclass is only the start. That we go back to 50’s style tax brackets for those who have plundered the economic wealth of this country over the last 8 years.
But taxing the middle class (and by that, I mean people who make less than a quarter of a mil per year)? There’s no evidence to suggest that Obama would push for something like that, other than fearful hate-all-taxes scare tactics by the right.
Tyro wrote:
Your more unhinged colleagues may take the “Clinton route”—feel so angry that the president is “covering up his radical leanings” by being a successful, pragmatic president that they start to lash out with violent rhetoric and/or actions.
Good heavens, just what violence was perpetrated against President Clinton during his two terms in office? No one took a shot at him, and we wicked Republicans didn’t raise a revolution and storm the White House. We did make an unfortunate attempt to remove him from office, via the constitutionally-mandated procedure, but even if we’d been successful in that, the new president would have been Al Gore.
We did mount a successful campaign to win the majority in Congress in 1994. 
As for violent “rhetoric,” don’t make me laugh. You’ve been a Pandagon reader long enough to have seen plenty of violent “rhetoric” aimed at the president of the United States, unless you are referring specifically to threats or pleas to assassinate the president, which didn’t happen here, or during the Clinton Administration, save by a few fringe whackos.
If Senator Obama wins, we conservatives will be disappointed, and we’ll be poorer for it, but we’ll keep plugging along, going to work, supporting our families, going to church, and working toward defeating Mr Obama in 2012.
It’s almost invariably my experience that many conservative men do not go to church—they send off their wives and children to do that. They may think it’s a “good thing” in the abstract, but they don’t personally participate in it. (Bush, for example, is not a churchgoer)
Plus, outside of writing a check for a few hundred dollars (maybe! most of them would consider it a waste of money), the loudest GOP men almost invariably never get off their ass to get involved politically. Their idea of “working to defeat Democrats” generally involves bitching at the dinner table using quotes they memorized from talk radio. To a large degree, this is a social-class issue: liberals glorify the street-canvasser and grass-roots fundraiser, but a GOP Chamber of Commerce type wouldn’t lower himself to knocking on doors of the neighbors. For them, it’s more about haranguing their employees to make sure they vote “the right way.”
So, Dana, spare us the high-minded rhetoric. I see where you’re coming from, but I don’t see it playing out in real life. I predict an Obama presidency will mean for conservatives a lot of bitching over the dinner, e-mail forwarding, and befuddlement at why the American people “don’t understand!” that a Marxist terrorist radical is in office, and very little churchgoing or working towards defeating. Unfortunately, it will also result in a lot of rhetorical encouragement, abetted by Republican officials and their editorialists, to those with somewhat dangerous tendencies who make the mistake of believing all of that crap.
Mr Modestus wrote:
And you believe this why? Because, thanks to the policies pushed by Bush and backed by McCain, there is no choice but to raise taxes or drown in red ink? Or do you believe it simply because McCain said so?
I believe it because I believe that Mr Obama has been deliberately lying all along about tax relief for the middle class. He says that, sure enough, but when he actually had a chance to vote on it, in March of this year, well after he put his tax relief pledge in public, he voted for three percentage point increases on the 25, 28 and 33% brackets, and a 4.6% increase on the 35% bracket.
The 25% bracket currently starts at $31,850 of taxable income for singles and $62,700 for married couples; that’s rather less than a quarter-million.
Add to that his proposals for new spending, of roughly $200 billion a year, along with his statement that he wouldn’t pull out of Iraq “precipitously,” and the math just doesn’t add up.
Tyro, as I guess you are aware, President Bush won his margin in 2004 from people who attend church regularly. It’s the ones who don’t attend more frequently than once a month where John Kerry got his votes.
Dana, what part of
Those mind-staggering sums throw both candidates’ economic plans out the frakkin’ window, IMHO.
was unclear to you?
It would be an interesting question for our hosts if they were to ask the opposite: what do they believe the reactions would be if John McCain pulls it out and wins?
MikeEss-
Doh! *blushes*
You’re right. Too many beers last night.
Good heavens, just what violence was perpetrated against President Clinton during his two terms in office?
September 1994: Crash at the White House
December, 1994: Several Gunshots Are Fired at the White House as the President and His Family Sleep
The Oklahoma City Bombing was regarding by the perpetrator as revenge against the US for Clinton’s handling of the Waco seige (begun, though, under Bush/14).
The bizarre conspiracy theories about the “Clinton Body Count” were passed around among right-wing activists as a means of fomenting hostility towards Clinton to the point where rank-and-file Republicans were talking about how Clinton was a “murderer” and such. Many people, unfortunately, took these things seriously. The rise of the militia movement gained much sympathy for “Class of 1994” radicals like Rep. Helen Chenoweth.
The Republicans have a history of encouraging their radicals, and this is what’s happening now… Palin, in particular, tends to take particular joy in whipping her crowds up into a hateful frenzy, and politicians who side with this crowd aren’t ones that I really want anywhere near the levers of government, The fact that these sorts of politicians are the ones whose temperments you seem to identify with and seem to think would be best to find in office lead me to believe that you, too, have temperment and judgment problems.
Your correct response is to react with disappointment with the McCain/Palin/activists’ behavior. An answer of, “look, the Republicans have exploited people’s insecurities in order to get enough votes for the tax cuts I want” is also acceptable. Denying the reality, however, strikes me as ignorant or dishonest.
what do they believe the reactions would be if John McCain pulls it out and wins?
A naive belief in the ultimate goodness of the American people and optimism that things will work out in the future, given Obama’s campaign messages to his supporters. It’s the McCain/Palin/National Review/Weekly Standard messages given to their supporters that worries me.
Tyro, as I guess you are aware, President Bush won his margin in 2004 from people who attend church regularly.
I did point out that Republican men have a sort of belief in the importance of attending church and having their families go to church, but their churchgoing habits—as exemplified by their national leaders and my personal experience—are greatly exaggerated. This isn’t anything personal—it’s just that, honestly, I find the rhetoric, particularly from men, to be a lot of talk. Sometimes there are good reasons for it and doesn’t reflect any problem with belief (lots of people, particularly small business owners, have to work weekends), but talking it up without follow-through is just not really, ahem, “change we can believe in.”
Guess that I wasn’t clear: I meant, what would the reaction be from my friends on the left if John McCain wins?
Tyro, on the Clinton threat thing, don’t forget Senator Jesse Helms (I believe) warning Clinton he shouldn’t visit military bases in NC out of fear for his life…
***
“what would the reaction be from my friends on the left if John McCain wins?”
If McCain wins legitimately (not appointed by SCOTUS), then we will have to deal with it.
Epic Fail for America would be another 4-years of Bush-style warring, spying, “unitary executive”, “Fourth Branch”, and horrible economics. And if he really appoints the judges he claims to like…I’d rather not think about it…
If he gets in and turns out okay, I’ll reevaluate my thinking about him. I’ll probably just blow my brains out afterward…
Good heavens, just what violence was perpetrated against President Clinton during his two terms in office? No one took a shot at him, and we wicked Republicans didn’t raise a revolution and storm the White House.
You mean other than the two assassination attempts? They may have been half-assed, but it’s pretty hard to argue that someone who fires 29 shots at a group standing in front of the White House was just forcefully expressing his political views.
You seem to forget how Republicans talked about how horrible Waco was until they incited someone to do something about it.
Be as high-minded as you please, but know that those 168 souls can be chalked up to all of the conservatives and Republicans who whipped up the rhetoric against Democrats after Waco. We’ve already had two incidents this year, though I’m sure you just can’t quite remember them, can you? No, no, all of those dead bodies don’t matter, do they, Dana? After all, we can’t draw a direct connection from, say, G. Gordon Liddy telling his listeners to shoot federal law enforcement agents in the head and Timothy McVeigh blowing up the federal building where those officers were worked. I guess it will have to remain a complete mystery why McVeigh would decide to kill ATF officers after months of hearing about the “jackbooted thugs” of the ATF on conservative talk radio.
What did they do in the 1950’s, when the maximum tax rate (under a Republican President!) was much, much higher—- and the economy was pretty good?
The rich will put their money places that will not result in federal taxation, such as (I believe) T-bills or bonds. They will not spend their money as freely buying luxury items, vacations, etc. They will put more money offshore. They will pay accountants lots of money to find as many tax shelters as possible to prevent the federal government from confiscating any more of their money than they can avoid.
Hauser’s Law states that federal tax revenues will always be about 19%, regardless of what tax rate is applied because, as tax rates go up, more people cheat on their taxes and/or work more aggressively to avoid paying more taxes. The difference is that when tax rates are relatively low, the rich don’t try to hide their money as much.
Everybody has an idea in his or her head as to what is their own “fair share.” Rich people are no different in this respect. The question becomes, at what point is taxation high enough? 30%? 50%? 90%? And given that the wealthiest 1% pay 26% of taxes already, why should they be obliged to pay even more?
Obama’s plan is unworkable because the bottom 40%—to whom Obama says he will “cut taxes”—pay no tax at all. You cannot cut taxes on people who don’t pay them What he will do is give them a “credit”, so they get money back even though they didn’t pay any taxes. We used to call this “welfare.”
If McCain wins legitimately (not appointed by SCOTUS), then we will have to deal with it.
No, you won’t. You’ll whine and complain that somehow, some way, the election was stolen. You’ll say it was voting machines. Or long lines. Or intimidation. Or closing times at polling places. You’ll go to psychologists to talk for hours about how depressed you are. Or to psychiatrists who will dispense drugs to deal with the delusions.
You won’t deal with it with anything close to maturity, yet you are all upset that some Republicans are yelling at political rallies. I don’t recall a Pandagon post condemning books or movies which fantasized about assassinating George W. Bush. Yet somehow, I’m supposed to think Rush Limbaugh is responsible for Timothy McVeigh.
We don’t call it white rioting in the US, we call it martial law and I would not be too surprised if the Republicans tried to impose it regardless of the election results next month