Republicans are just plain daft

Faith and Freedom Coalition Conference

What do you do when your party is getting clobbered on social media and among a demographic that is getting locked in to vote against you?

Why, adapt to the new thing, of course. In this case, the snarky, pithy and glib lingo of Twitter and FB posts. And what do you goof and eyebrow raise over?


I used to play in a pit band in a comedy club, '93-'94. Never heard an abortion joke. That and AIDS are generally right up there with "Holocaust howlers". People just don't think they're a crack up.

But the Faith and Freedom Coalition Conference begs to differ. If they can just be side splittingly hilarious on the matter of pregnancy termination, the kids'll flock to them.

Sorry. It isn't funny. And mocking the women that have them or the people that don't believe the government should interfere with those women--hard to see where the yuks come from. I suspect it'll be typical "conservative humor", which is to say snide, condescending and holier than thou, ie not funny.

At this point, "Republican" is synonymous with "daft". Or "out of it", "antwacky", "loonytunes". Take yer pick.



Today's Republicans

Posted by Greg on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 8:42 pm

Dem's. And when we do get a Dem president, they often simply continue the foreign, domestic and economic policies of their GOP predecessor, e.g. Obama.

Reagan and the GOP have defined the policies of the US for the last 35 years.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 6:47 am

What's relevant is the last 30 years, when we've seen tremendous demographic and social changes. It was a very different country that elected Reagan. Republicans lost the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 elections.

The more important point is your second one, which I agree with. We don't have real democracy. We don't even have two parties. There is only one party -corporatist and imperialist, with two slightly different wings.

But this can't last. When you're living in it, you think it'll last forever. But history teaches us otherwise. When these regimes do collapse, it happens fast and surprises all conventional wisdom.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 7:09 am

George W. Bush in the last decade, so writing off the GOP as the party of "old white men" hasn't worked as well as people think. Moreover, the rapid rise of the Tea Party, although seemingly now stalled, gave the GOP the House in this decade, which is of course the most democratic of the three elected chambers, nationally.

Point being, writing off the GOP because they are "old" has been a mistake, and the American people don't vote by class in the way that proponents of identity politics would like them to.

The latter point, which we agree on, is really just an observation that both the major US parties are right-wing, as opposed to the situation in Europe where there is typically either a left-wing party and a right-wing party, or there are multiple parties often leading to coalitions.

We in the US don't like coalitions - we like winners and losers. We don't like compromise and consensus - we like decisive action. And, to be blunt, we don't like left-wing policies either.

We have two right-wing parties because we are a right-wing people, at least by global standards. We get those parties because of who we are. It's not a con trick - Americans don't do socialism. And I see no sign of that changing.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 7:32 am

as opposed to Europeans. Same flesh and blood. It's all about how people are educated (or not). It's also the system they live under. Americans aren't as right wing as you claim. On the issues, they're not that far from Europeans. The bigger chasm is between the Americans and the American government, not between Americans and Europeans. It's not that we don't like compromise and consensus, or that we enjoy inequality, and the stress of living in a dog -eat-dog society. It's that the system isn't really a democratic one. It's much more difficult to affect social change through our system. If I can fault Americans for anything, it's that they're too docile. They tolerate a lot of their own oppression. A lot of it is ignorance, but at the end of the day, people wake up to the fact that they're being screwed. There's only so much abuse any people can take.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 5:41 pm

Americans believe in free enterprise. Europeans want a nanny state and government handouts. That's a fundamental distinction.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 6:19 pm

Who are you to tell us what Americans want?

...but please... have the last word. I know that the troll's m.o. is to always get the last word. I won't begrudge you.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 9:22 pm

Greg, if we're relying on our opponents to exhaust their political project as a primary strategy, then why even bother waking up in the morning and getting out of bed?

It is our political project that has been exhausted, superseded by a highly organized neoliberal coalition. If Scott Wiener can get away with stripping public participation aspects of CEQA that Ronald Reagan signed into law and we can't stop that by appealing to voters and winning elections, I mean, what the fuck?

We're not going to be able to bring the contest to the neoliberals until we extricate the neoliberal insinuation into popular politics by nixing the SEIU and nonprofits who are negotiating away our power in order to keep themselves employed.

Posted by marcos on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 7:33 am

Marcos is correct that you can't just sit around fat and happy, and one day a "revolution" will come along, as Greg believes. That's just solace and succor for losing.

On the other hand, Marcos's analysis that "if only" the left got organized, they would win is also wrong because, in the end, there just aren't enough people and voters who believe in it.

For Greg, the "if only" is some future revolution of which there is no sign at all. For Marcos the "if only" is not selling out. But the real "if only" is a starker one - "if only" there were a critical mass of left-of-center voters. There isn't - that pesky silent majority again.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:33 am

But what does Marcos do but sit around, taking jabs at people on the web? He sold out a long time ago.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:47 am

ownership that is displacing thousands of low income tenants, and in a non-white neighborhood as well. At least Greg has the decency to remain a renter.

Marcos claims to have sat on various "committees", but of course that is really just another way of sitting around, talking and doing nothing.

Then again, if he stood for office, who would ever vote for him.

But both Marcos and Greg fit the template of Sf progressives - white, middle-aged, professional. So in the end, like Redmond, they are quite comfortable and if the revolutions doesn't happen then, hey, they'll be just fine anyway.

Politics as a hobby.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 11:08 am

I'm not going to bother getting into a tit-for-tat, but this psychoanalysis is so off the mark that it's laughable.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 5:42 pm
Posted by anon on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 6:20 pm

Or are you just re-using a word that you heard someone use, think it sounds good, but really have no clue what it means?



Having or showing knowledge of events before they take place.
foreseeing - provident

Posted by Greg on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 9:28 pm

Uhh, how about No. The big W got us in a stupid war with no idea how to get us out. Obama got us out. The big W practically ruined the banking system and did ruin the economy. Obama is still cleaning up that mess. W set us on a path to bankruptcy after Clinton set us on a path to paying off our debts. Obama has battled the repubs for years now, and finally has us back on the Clinton course towards balanced budgets. Republicans are daft. How can you believe yourself?

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 9:03 am

Obama is much worse than Bush II.

Posted by marcos on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 9:37 am

How exactly does a president "ruin the banking system"? I never knew all those bad mortgages were approved by the White House...

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:11 am

'How exactly does a president "ruin the banking system"?'

By appointing Timothy Geithner?

Posted by marcos on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:21 am

Good one. I'm rethinking my position...

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 11:30 am

We all know that the moment Helicopter Ben quits dropping dollar bills onto Wall Street that equities and the banking stocks will hit the toilet. But for now who cares, spark that spleef, I wanna get HIGH!

Posted by marcos on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 2:13 pm

shorting those stocks. And yet you do not and have not. Put your money where your mouth is.

Posted by anon on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 2:33 pm

AIG, Citi and even maybe Fannie and Freddie are at various stages of being returned to the private sector.

Goldman repaid all debts very quickly and their share price is now heading back to where it was in 2007.

Obama's strategy worked, as much as it grieves me to admit it.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 11:47 am

on the terms that W had laid out.

Likewise Obama has continued W's policy on the economy i.e. print money, force interest rates to zero, keep lower taxes and bail out anyone and everyone who asks.

The only major difference was ObamaCare although, even there, the public option was abandoned. Meanwhile Obama is fracking up the wazoo.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:27 am

Obama tried to keep the occupation of Iraq going but in the wake of Wikileaks revelations in US conduct, the Iraqi government could not make that work politically. Perhaps the US did indeed bring democracy to Iraq.

Now if we could only address the pesky matter of voting not changing public policy here at home....

Posted by marcos on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 2:07 pm

massive change in domestic, foreign and economic policy. That isn't so clear to me.

I voted for Obama but wasn't voting to dismantle capitalism, but rather voted for a more competent implementation and administration of capitalism.

Posted by anon on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 2:14 pm

Daft, out of it (quote-unquote), and antwhacky.

Excellent analysis, JAW.

Keep the good ones coming.

Posted by Jane on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 5:58 am

Happily, the liberals are on track to abort themselves out of existence, which is both funny and ironic. I'm a little surprised that your own wife didn't choose abortion (twice), out of concern for her "reproductive health."

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 6:39 am

Leaving aside the personal unpleasantness of your comment ... Many, many Republicans are pro-choice. It's one of those social issues that lots of the GOP (especially younger ones) just can't get behind. Like gay marriage.

Posted by Crocker Amazon on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 7:43 am

I too am pro-choice, or "pro-abortion," as it were.

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 8:09 am

Your own mother might have chosen it if she had known her child would grow up to hide behind a computer keyboard and spew this kind of poison.

Posted by SoSueMe on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 7:45 am

I'm moderate compared to my own mother. But she enjoys the SFBG "articles" I send her, demonstrating the slow suicide SF's loopy left have engaged in over the past couple of decades, leaving us just the wheezing death rattles of the likes of Johnny Angel for comic relief.

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 8:15 am

Maybe she would have. In which case we wouldn't be reading it. The rhetorical tactic of "what if YOU'D been aborted?" never made any sense to me at all. Is it supposed to shame everyone into silence? Create a sense of empathy with a blastocyst? What's the point?

Posted by Crocker Amazon on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 8:18 am

The point is that maybe people who respond to an opinion they don't like with comments about the writer's wife aborting his children should apply their own puerile reasoning to themselves.

Posted by SoSueMe on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:10 am

Umm...abortion has been legal since 1972. So if liberals were "aborting themselves out of existence" wouldn't it have happened by now?

Posted by Thor on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 12:02 pm

for the GOP.

It got out the right-wing vote in the hinterland while distracting the left with what was essentially an irrelevancy while the right was taking over the important stuff - the economy and foreign policy..

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 12:22 pm

will be aborting themselves out of existence before the liberals. Your own mother probably had an abortion (or two).

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 12:49 pm

Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bush Snr. and Bush Jnr.

And they will be writing off the conservatives when the GOP win again in 2016.

Americans do not like any one power to be in charge all the time. That is called a dictatorship. Or at least, an oligarchy.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 1:01 pm

we'll never know. But if it's true, then shouldn't you be celebrating her right to terminate a pregnancy?

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 8:53 am

With this shrill Los Angeles-based writer taking up Guardian online space, we see exactly how low this operation has fallen.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 8:35 am

I live a scant mile just out of Rep. Steve King's district here in Iowa so I have a front row seat. His kind are convinced they amount to the only soldier marching in step out of a whole regiment that's not. To use another military metaphor, their ranks are not really being reduced as they lose ground. This only serves condense their fire. Many of their number will continue to pull their triggers long after they're out of ammo.

Posted by NLE on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:06 am

I would support the GOP if they became the party of the working class, the middle class, the small to medium businesses and their owners. Small business needs big business and big business needs those small businesses. What we got here folks is just big businesses wanting big businesses with as much money they can get.

Fair Tax Reform, would love to see the tax code used to build, produce, purchase and provide the following. Machines, healthcare, buildings, R & D, training, cars, trucks, and equipment, jobs, and other things that make business a go. Not just perks, jets, offices and outside investment in paper.

I would support the GOP if they can come up with customer friendly low cost health care system, keep all these workers healthy and their families. A healthy happy worker is a productive worker who will work and create wealth for himself. Don't forget the business, if the business has healthy happy workers who are working hard to produce, the business will also create wealth.

But I know it is too much to ask for, low wages, not healthy workers, unhappy, family troubles due to money, housing and food. No wonder why my country is going down to the toilet. The GOP and the DEMS have lost touch with everyone.

Posted by Garrett on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:12 am

and a pro-business, pro-jobs, pro-growth government.

it's the religious stuff that doesn't sit well with Bay Area conservatives. but the GOP needs that to get the votes out in the heartland, which is where general elections are decided.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:29 am

With Tim booted out the door and Steve Jones apparently in hiding somewhere, this has become Johnny Angel's exclusive webblog site.


Posted by Ralph Waldo on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:21 am

It's the Vogt and Angel show now.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:33 am

And Democrats are sane? Right. Why do you keep telling us what we already know? (Over and over and over again, ad nauseum) Basta! Why don't you ever shake things up by skewering the "moderate" Dems with their reactionary agenda? They are just as bad. Or are you satisfied with the status quo?

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 10:56 am

Let's try this one more time: THEY have COOTIES!

Posted by marcos on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 11:07 am

Who can blame him for verbal diarrhea?r

Posted by Guest on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 11:09 am

Wholesale leggings from China leggings Wholesalers. You can Online Wholesale tight leggings,Wholesale knitted Leather leggings and more, Best quality and Cheap price Jeggings in China.
Wholesale Legging China
Wholesale Leggings China
Wholesale Jeggings China

Posted by Wholesale Leggings China on Dec. 16, 2013 @ 10:41 pm

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.