Don't we want the Repubicans to continue self-destructing? (4.00 / 1)

If so, shouldn't we be hoping for someone even more conservative and out of touch than their current leadership?  And for Newt to have as large a role as possible in the coming years?

---

by: Valatan @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 00:55:20 AM UTC

OTOH (4.00 / 1)

Perhaps a GOP Glasnost would bring moderate Republicans close enough to the DLC and New Dems, that they could form a new Corporate Neoliberal Party and let real Democrats fight for progressive causes again, and let Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin fight for repealing science (or whatever) again.  

---

by: md @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 01:10:11 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not what I want. (4.00 / 2)

I want a sensible opposition party in this country. I want the Republicans to move to left to force the Democrats further to the left to differentiate themselves. Ideally I'd like the majority of Democrats to my left politically and the majority of Republicans to my right, but with overlap.

We can't lose sight of the forest for the trees. We want partisan better Democrats because we think Democratic ideas are better for the country. That doesn't mean 1 party Democratic rule is our end goal. It means we need to implement progressive policies, prove they make people's lives better, and force Republicans to accept that reality.

This has worked well with Social Security and Medicare. As much as Republicans talk about the evils of "socialism" and "wealth redistribution" they will never win an election running against Social Security and Medicare. They may attack them in other ways, but a frontal assault would be electoral suicide. That is how we win. By implementing popular progressive policies that force Republicans to the left issue by issue. That is why they are so afraid of universal health care.

---

by: Jawis @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 01:16:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I want a complete republican self-destricution (4.00 / 1)

and a democratic split to ensue, so that we get a center-right Libertarian-type party and a center left party from the remnants of the democrats.  Perhaps with a regional social conservative party in the South.

That's almost more likely than the republicans evolving into a sensible opposition.  And we'd have a nice era of good feelings to fix the country.

---

by: Valatan @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 01:26:52 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm in favor of Republicans becoming somewhat less insane (0.00 / 0)

You wouldn't realize, if you were going only by mainstream American media--not Fox News, but the big three networks, CNN, even PBS, NPR, the New York Times--that the Republicans have become dominated by their own far right during the Bush Administration.  The mainstream press goes to such great lengths to be "evenhanded" and present the Republican point of view as "reasonable" that it's easy to lose sight of what an extremist party the GOP has become.

The Bush administration did a brilliant job of uniting the various factions that make up the Republican Party's coalition.  Neocons, corporate tycoons and religious nuts don't necessarily have a common agenda (though the neocons and corporate cons have a lot more to do with one another than with the Christian fundamentalists), and Bush managed to get all of them working for him.  Rove, DeLay, et al enforced a relatively strict orthodoxy among the different elements of their coalition that turned an already highly reactionary party in the 1980s and 90s into an even more vile, far-right crazy party in the 2000s.  Reagan and Bush 41 were perfectly awful, but even they didn't reach Bush 43 craziness.

The public's repudiation of Bush seems to me like it will force the Republicans to repackage themselves at the very least.  Some of them (the Rush Limbaugh crowd) are convinced that they need to move further to the right, while others like Steele are slightly more reasonable, even if they're not people you'd ever want to vote for.  Although it might be tempting to root for the Republicans to move further to the right and alienate centrist voters even more, the more attention the nutcases get, the more their views can be shown as legitimate in the media.  I want the far-right types pushed as far to the margins of the national political discussion as possible, because they're dangerous: they're the same people who brought us the past eight years.

---

by: Eurotrash @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 02:44:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You need some red eye reduction (4.00 / 1)

The fundy viewers will think you possessed!

My blog  

---

by: Dameocrat @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 00:56:33 AM UTC

Now that you took the "possessed" devil-light (0.00 / 0)

out of Matt's eyes, we don't understand why he's standing next to Steele anymore.

---

by: Querent @ Thu Dec 04, 2008 at 08:12:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Steve Gilliard had contempt (4.00 / 5)

for the way Steele tried to masquerade as a Democrat, making fliers with his picture next to those of various Democrats running for other offices, and printing up those "STEELE DEMOCRAT" signs.

But the main reason I bring up Gilliard is to post this link from a classic rant: You Have Shamed Us

http://stevegilliard.blogspot....

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

---

by: desmoinesdem @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 01:34:20 AM UTC

Yes- a true moderate- for example his position on marriage rights for gays (4.00 / 1)

It's the model of openness:

http://www.washblade.com/2006/...

"Marriage is not a purely human institution," he said, according to a report in the Baltimore Examiner. "Marriage defines not only the relationship between a man and a woman but also their journey through life. They should not be brow-beaten into thinking something that goes counter to what the people in the community aspire to."

"Rev. John Crestwell, minister at Davies Memorial Unitarian Universalist Church in Camp Springs, said Steele's stance on same-sex marriage wrongly mixes church and state."

Moderate in the same way that the Dixiecrats were moderates.  

---

by: bruhrabbit2 @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 02:06:41 AM UTC

I can certainly see (0.00 / 0)

how my right to marry is brow beating a straight person who already has that right.

---

by: bruhrabbit2 @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 02:08:07 AM UTC

Don't Get Squishy Soft On Steele! (0.00 / 0)

I'm from Maryland and he's no moderate! He's an idiot who told future Senator Ben Cardin to "shut-up" during one their debates! That about sums up the intelligence of the man!

Give a DINO more than a bone!

---

by: Happy Camper @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 03:49:23 AM UTC

comparing stem cell research to Nazi medical experiments (4.00 / 2)

is not moderate.  He's certifiable.

---

by: Marylander @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 03:56:22 AM UTC

And he's... (0.00 / 0)

pro-choice and anti-gay marriage.  On "Real Time with Bill Maher" he was unbearable and condescending.  And if that's not enough, legend has it he came up with the RNC chant "drill, Baby, drill!"

---

by: happycozy @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 06:47:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

But he got the Open Left stamp of approval for being "moderate" (0.00 / 0)

That's what counts.

---

by: bruhrabbit2 @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 07:07:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let me see if I have this: (4.00 / 1)

During the campaign, Matt, Obama often sucked in any number of ways, in your view.  But Michael Steele ... that's Michael Steele ... is a "pretty nice moderate kind of guy."  Could it be you just like to be contrary for the hell of it?  I hope so, because if not, you are orbiting Pluto without a paddle ...

---

by: Weeferdog @ Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 19:57:39 PM UTC

Re-Let me see if I have this (0.00 / 0)

I agree. To claim that Michael Steele is a "pretty nice moderate kind of guy," is simply absurd. My opinion of Open Left has deteriorated significantly.
I guess all that really matters is that nice, moderate kind of photo-op.

---

by: pupmunchkin @ Tue Dec 02, 2008 at 01:46:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm pretty sure Matt is putting you on. (0.00 / 0)

You guys are too self-righteous and superior to get it.  Oooh!  He had his picture taken with scum!  Well, at least you didn't start blabbering about a "loyal opposition" that we need the Repigs to be in order to restrain us from our excesses.

I don't give a damn about center-right/center-left realignment, or any of that crap.  I just want the public at large to realize that the conservative "philosophy" has refuted itself conclusively by putting itself into practice.  Whatever the future holds for either of the political parties, let's hope that conservatism has been tossed onto the ash-heap of history. Permanently.

---

by: Querent @ Thu Dec 04, 2008 at 08:20:39 AM UTC

Oh, and Matt? (0.00 / 0)

If you post a picture of yourself with Bill Kristol, I expect to see significant bruising all over him.

---

by: Querent @ Thu Dec 04, 2008 at 08:22:08 AM UTC