dagblog - Comments for "Ross Douthat Wants To Be Ruled By The Rich"

(No subject)

EmmaZahn — Fri, 31 Aug 2012 00:17:40 +0000

In reply to The Romneys after two years

The Romneys after two years

Elusive Trope — Fri, 31 Aug 2012 00:11:49 +0000

In reply to Before reading your link I

The Romneys after two years in WH?

Before reading your link I

EmmaZahn — Fri, 31 Aug 2012 00:09:59 +0000

In reply to Ross Douthat Wants To Be Ruled By The Rich

Before reading your link I thought I should first watch/listen to the speech and I did, both. My takeaway is that Ross must love Dynasty reruns.

The funny thing to me is that

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 23:59:35 +0000

In reply to Ross Douthat Wants To Be Ruled By The Rich

The funny thing to me is that I think Douthat nailed the Romneys. They are like old-school Boston Brahmins. What makes it funny is that Douthat seems to think it's a positive political attribute in 2012. Maybe he's too young to remember how ruling-WASP George W. Bush beat out ruling-WASP Gore and ruling-WASP Kerry with the help of a Texas twang and an ax.

Saying Romney is the right

Aaron Carine — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 22:46:45 +0000

In reply to Ross Douthat Wants To Be Ruled By The Rich

Saying Romney is the right man for the job isn't saying "he's better than all of you". What was the guy supposed to say, "Romney doesn't deserve the office, but vote for him anyway"?

And, of course, property

Michael Maiello — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 20:36:39 +0000

In reply to "All men are created equal"

And, of course, property owners. Because if you don't own property, what cause would you have to even care about politics?

"All men are created equal"

rmrd0000 — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 20:24:01 +0000

In reply to The revolution was what we

"All men are created equal" was the motto

(except women and the 3/5 folks)

The revolution was what we

jollyroger — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 20:13:55 +0000

In reply to Brooks argues that the elites

The revolution was what we call elite on elite violence. George W, for instance, was right there in the 1%, likewise all but a few of the signers of the declaration. Certainly.all at the 1787 convention. Conspicuously absent from our revolutionary creed: Equality and Fraternity (cf France)

If we lose the White House

Michael Maiello — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 17:23:34 +0000

In reply to Douthat's description makes

If we lose the White House and Congress to the Republicans in their current weakened state, we should not expect to be able to mount much credible opposition. If their party is weak now, what would it say about ours to lose to them? Forget keeping things from getting worse. We'd have to ignore policy entirely to rebuild the party from the ground up.

Douthat's description makes

AmericanDreamer — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:44:35 +0000

In reply to Ross Douthat Wants To Be Ruled By The Rich

Douthat's description makes him sound a bit like Bush 41.

Our day's CP, in its extremism and loopy, wildly impractical and dangerous radicalism, is the Catfood Party. (Rumor has it R/R's first move after voucherizing Medicare and privatizing SS will be to press for legislation renaming Florida as the Catfood State, although Arizona is said to be seeking first dibs on the name.) It right now is in the business of trying to make itself sound less scary than the Socialist Party of the Others, the Democrats, led by their scary incumbent, The Supreme Other.

So Ryan tells us the Catfood ticket has come not to bury Medicare but to save it. We the people are expected like good sheep to believe that. Romney's telegenic, earnest-looking sons reassure us that for their dad it's "not about ego" (resurrecting the Obama-as-vain- egomaniac theme from 4 years ago, as if anyone seeking the presidency doesn't have a sizable ego): he "just likes to help people". Romney's best selling point in the Douthat view is that he is, above all, safe. He won't do anything stupid. Like all those crazy Socialist things, giving the stuff that We rightfully earned to Them, that Obama has done. (or like put a certifiable loon like Paul Ryan a heartbeat away from the presidency, should Romney win. Right?)

Under the scenario Jon Chait wrote of in New York magazine the other day, if Romney/Ryan do win, and are able to pull off that agenda or even just set it on a very hard-to-revoke course, the party would have "succeeded" in implementing a program considerably more radical than Reagan ever proposed, or even ever intimated he supported. (Would even Barry Goldwater want to go as far as R/R may? If they succeed, Barry's beloved Arizona might just evaporate into the desert air.) And we know what happened to Bush 43 when he tried to partially privatize SS just 7 years ago. Reagan and Bush 43 would be seen in retrospect as forerunners of The True Randian Chosen One. Romney in that scenario might not need to rely on the opinions of others to have himself immortalized on Mount Rushmore. He might simply cut to the chase by buying the property instead.

At long last, after decades in the wilderness creating many new new problems for ourselves while solving few of the ones we had, is this what we have come to in our society? Where a Romney/Ryan ticket and an off-the-charts Republican party actually have a chance to retake control of our federal government? If the Democrats can't come up with a better narrative--just about any narrative at all may do--they might just manage to give this one away. Hard to beat something with nothing--even if the something pretty much defines idiocy.

As for those who fancy that we need a R/R win to grow the Democratic party a spine, the time to flush this nuttiness, this cruel joke of a political party, down the drain, in the most resounding fashion possible, is now. Not next year, from a position of far greater weakness. You don't grow greater will to fight by hoping for, or even working for, defeat. It's a copout. It's saying "next year we'll do it". Sure.

If the GOP does win the WH and Congress, I say to those folks: don't worry. There'll be plenty of opportunity to fight then. The problem is that much of the activist energy in that scenario goes to keeping things from getting even worse, not actually making things better, which is the vastly preferable course that needs to be pursued if November's outcome is different.