Hunting Bubba

[pop goes the weasel]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/716psthq.asp

Hunting Bubba
From the June 20, 2005 issue: Can political consultants Dave "Mudcat" Saunders and Steve Jarding win rural voters back to the Democratic party?
by Matt Labash
06/20/2005, Volume 010, Issue 38

<snip>
Foxes in the Henhouse is due to be released next spring. It is probably the first pox-on-both-parties manifesto to come with a companion CD. Mudcat, 56, is a bluegrass fiend who hopes to get many of his friends in the music world to contribute to the disc. Bluegrass royalty like the Del McCoury clan and Ralph Stanley Jr. (who he simply calls "Two") are his compadres. He's already working out the title song for the CD with bluegrass virtuoso Ronnie Bowman, who's cowritten, along with Music Row Democrats cofounder Don Cook, Brooks & Dunn's current chart-topping single. Mudcat guards the Foxes lyrics as if they were his daughter's chastity (though he's pretty generous in sharing his other verse via email, including a favorite break-up poem he sent a girl, elegantly titled "F--you": I'm glad that you treated me rotten / I'm glad that you made me cry / Cause it's much, much easier to say 'F--you' / Than it is to say 'Good-bye').

The book itself, as Mudcat describes it, will "take a wire brush to Republicans" for peeling off traditional Democrats in southern and rural areas under false pretenses, first through Nixon's race-tinged Southern Strategy, then by suckering Reagan Democrats after preaching the gospel of limited government and heartland values while selling their jobs out to big business and socking the country with runaway deficits. But the screed is not only a prescription for how to bring those Democrats home on issues such as gays and guns. It's a stink-bomb lobbed at fellow Democrats--or as Mudcat often calls them, "f--in' Democrats," the northeastern liberals who he feels have contempt for his culture, and whom he dislikes more than he dislikes Republicans. (While the "foxes" in their tale are Republicans, Democratic leaders aren't so much hens as they are "possums--the ones who roll over and play dead.")

<snip>

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/716psthq.asp

[Mythsaje]

1. Probably one of the easiest ways

to reach these voters is to drop the (perceived) attack on the 2nd Amendment. Leading Democrats should stand up and say something to the effect of--"after careful analysis of the Constitution, and its meaning, we've decided that individual ownership of firearms IS a Constitutionally protected right and we were <insert collective gasp here> wrong.

I personally think the anti-gun movement IS wrong on this point, and it would show great humility for the Democrats to admit it.

[bobbieinok]

2. isn't Weekly Standard the William Kristol (PNAC) journal???

[pop goes the weasel]

4. Yes

I thought it was interesting that they did an article on the possibility of the Democrats re-taking the South.

[bemildred]

3. Why should we care what the Weekly sub-Standard thinks about anything? nt

[pop goes the weasel]

5. a couple of reasons

1. Keep up with your enemy.
2. Find out that your enemy is keeping up with you.
3. The article takes rural discontent with Republicans seriously.

[bemildred]

6. OK, fair enough.

1.) They are not the enemy, they are tools.
2.) Same as #1, why should I care, why should I hide?
3.) I can get that, better, in progressive sources.

Bubba needs to be discontented, he has been screwed rigorously and vigorously for centuries. and he has for the most part gone along with the screwing, eagerly helping out his screwers in exchange for the right to look down on someone, anyone, and to cling to some shreds of denial and self-esteem.

[pop goes the weasel]

7. lol

Why be afraid to read conservative and neo-conservative sources? You say that they are tools. May I point out that tools are for anyone to use. Pick them up. Stick some in your pockets. Use them as you would like.

And you are wrong that you can get "that, better." If you only, always, read sources that agree with you, you are putting yourself in an echo chamber. It is those who most disagree with us who are fastest to point out our weaknesses. We need to know about those weaknesses. We can disagree with their assessments, but we need to be aware.

[bemildred]

8. Who said "afraid"? I said it's a waste of time.

They are full of shit. I can get better and more meaningful shit in the MSM. I have read them, I am not afraid to read them, but they are full of dishonest, incoherent crap, like this piece, so it's not useful, it just rots your brain and clouds your intellect, like eating a BigMac(tm) messes up your digestion. But I don't want to interfere with anyones right to read such crap, anymore than their right to eat BigMacs(tm). I don't watch TV either, but it's not from fear of it. It's your brain, fill 'er up.

[pop goes the weasel]

9. tell me about the incoherence and dishonesty in this piece

Be specific. You are obviously wise and so must enlighten me.

[bemildred]

10. Sorry, no dissertation will be forthcoming, however:

1.) It is chock full of stereotypes about southerners.
2.) It treats "Mudcat" in a demeaning way.
3.) It's basic message is that Democrats are amusing but too dumb to live.
4.) Need I mention the use of the term "Bubba"?