The Party is Just Broken

[babylonsister]

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2012/1/10/12415/8116

The Party is Just Broken

by BooMan
Tue Jan 10th, 2012 at 12:41:05 PM EST


Ryan Lizza is right that Bush's crappy presidency contributed to the weak field of candidates that we see today:

"A successful Presidency can produce a new crop of future Presidential candidates for the party that controls the White House. The vice president and cabinet officials, as well as governors and senators elected over the course of the administration, are historically major sources for a party's next round of candidates. The Bush years had the opposite effect. It was unthinkable that his vice president would run for higher office and much of his cabinet left Washington tainted by the President's unpopularity. Moreover, Bush helped sink his party in the 2006 and 2008 elections, thus depleting the ranks of potential Republican candidates for 2012."

But, the problem is a bit deeper. It's hard to come up with a Republican who would make a plausible president and who, at the same time, could actually win the nomination. People talk about some of the less insane governors, like Bobby Jindal, Mitch Daniels, and Chris Christie. Maybe someone telegenic and non-threatening like Sen. John Thune could make a run, although he wouldn't necessarily win the love of the Republican base. If you're honest, the cupboard is pretty bare. The biggest problem is that the candidates have so little room to maneuver on the issues. It's like they all have to learn the Rush Limbaugh catechism and they can't deviate from it. In other words, it's just packaging. All the candidates are going to make the same argument and do largely the same things in office. Maybe this is increasing Ron Paul's appeal. At root, this is still the party of Tom DeLay. It is built to plunder. It rejects empathy. And it is giant reservoir for hate.

It's not capable of providing us with a hopeful, optimistic, inclusive vision of the future. Ronald Reagan would be a RINO in today's party, treated no better than Jon Huntsman. A lot of this is the legacy of Bush, but it has been building for much longer than that.

[gateley]

1. Agree, but apparently not broken enough to stop it from spanking the Dems in 2010. :-( nt

[lunatica]

2. It doesn't help to have the lowest ever IQ median ever among the candidates

I swear Idiocracy was a prescient movie!

[midnight]

4. I would like to suggest that the hard working people of America are bombarded with

so much manufactured info. that it would take more time than most American's have to cut through the lies. Thanks to Regan and the repeal of the FCC fairness policy....

"The FCC fairness policy was given great credence by the 1969 U.S. Supreme Court case of Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. FCC. In that case, a station in Pennsylvania, licensed by Red Lion Co., had aired a "Christian Crusade" program wherein an author, Fred J. Cook, was attacked. When Cook requested time to reply in keeping with the fairness doctrine, the station refused. Upon appeal to the FCC, the Commission declared that there was personal attack and the station had failed to meet its obligation. The station appealed and the case wended its way through the courts and eventually to the Supreme Court. The court ruled for the FCC, giving sanction to the fairness doctrine.

The doctrine, nevertheless, disturbed many journalists, who considered it a violation of First Amendment rights of free speech/free press which should allow reporters to make their own decisions about balancing stories. Fairness, in this view, should not be forced by the FCC. In order to avoid the requirement to go out and find contrasting viewpoints on every issue raised in a story, some journalists simply avoided any coverage of some controversial issues. This "chilling effect" was just the opposite of what the FCC intended.

By the 1980s, many things had changed. The "scarcity" argument which dictated the "public trustee" philosophy of the Commission, was disappearing with the abundant number of channels available on cable TV. Without scarcity, or with many other voices in the marketplace of ideas, there were perhaps fewer compelling reasons to keep the fairness doctrine. This was also the era of deregulation when the FCC took on a different attitude about its many rules, seen as an unnecessary burden by most stations. The new Chairman of the FCC, Mark Fowler, appointed by President Reagan, publicly avowed to kill to fairness doctrine.

By 1985, the FCC issued its Fairness Report, asserting that the doctrine was no longer having its intended effect, might actually have a "chilling effect" and might be in violation of the First Amendment. In a 1987 case, Meredith Corp. v. FCC, the courts declared that the doctrine was not mandated by Congress and the FCC did not have to continue to enforce it. The FCC dissolved the doctrine in August of that year."

http://www.museum.tv/eotvsection.php?entrycode=fairnessdoct

[malaise]

3. Bring out the champagne

let me toast to their departure

[customerserviceguy]

8. We were doing that three years ago

and it was premature. Yes, the Repukes have a hell of a nasty little nomination battle before them, and I expect it may well continue for quite some time. I still expect that there will be a single (non-Paul) anti-Mitt before the primaries become winner-take-all, and Willard's delegate total is bound to be quite diminuitive even if he 'wins' with 25-40% of the votes in the January contests.

Once the fundies figure out whether Santorum, Gingrich, or Perry is the anybody-but-Romney candidate, Mittens is going to have a tough time outside of a few Western caucus states and Michigan. Paul is never going to pull more than 15% of the vote in any state that does not allow crossover voting, he really only has the possibility of outright winning a few low-delegate caucus states, mostly in the West.

[Recovered Repug]

5. It's not a party until something gets broken. nt

[surfdog]

6. Some good stuff there , until ...

The author uses Ronald Reagan as an example of a rational Republican , this seems to be a very common tool used by writers for ... Well I don't know why they do it , after all ..Reagan had more convictions in his administration than any other president in history, him and bush sr quadrupled the national debt , we are still paying for Reagan and will be for decades

[stillwaiting]

7. Gov. McDonnell in Virginia could be a problem in '16.

He's insanely right wing, but he's not stupid and he covers it up very, very well.

He has a very telegenic family too.

He's my governor unfortunately.