natural political selection

[Sisyphus]

I wasn't sure whether to put this here or in politics. (I guess that in itself is revealing of the sad state of things.) Anyway, this was an editorial in the Saturday Washington Post. It made me smile. Here it is:

 

IF YOU LIVE BY politics, you can die by politics, too. That's the lesson of the school board vote on Tuesday in Dover, Pa. All eight of the board's Republican incumbents were defeated. And all of the defeated incumbents had supported a policy -- the first in the country -- requiring the teaching of "intelligent design" as an alternative to evolution in ninth-grade biology classes. The board had been sued by a group of parents who argued that intelligent-design theory is a thinly veiled cover for creationism and that it is therefore unconstitutional to force teachers to teach it in public school classrooms. A federal judge is still pondering the case, but in the meantime eight Democrats campaigning against the intelligent-design policy have thrown out the school board.

 

That vote is a fitting end to the Pennsylvania chapter of this saga. Because advocates of intelligent design have never been able to convince scientists that their theory has scientific merit, they've relied on political methods to get it into school curriculums. They've marketed their ideas to politicians using Web sites, news releases and free textbooks. Although the more nuanced proponents of intelligent design, such as the Discovery Institute in Seattle, frequently claim that their intent is not to promote a literal interpretation of the Bible, many of the politicians they win over are in fact creationists and do in fact deny that evolution took place. That certainly appears to have been the case in Dover. Now the limitations of promoting a theory through politics are clearly visible: The voters can vote the undercover creationists out.

 

Soon there may be an opportunity to do it again. This week the Kansas Board of Education voted 6 to 4 to force teachers to include intelligent design's critique of evolution in their curriculum. The constitutionality of that decision will certainly be challenged in the courts and possibly at the ballot box as well: Three candidates who oppose the teaching of intelligent design theory have already announced that they will be running for seats on the Kansas Board of Education. It's a strange way to resolve a scientific controversy, but once that controversy has been politicized, it's hard to see how it can be resolved any other way.

[Mokele]

It's a good post, but I'll move it to politics, if you don't mind, as it's more dealing with the political end than the scientific.

[Pangloss]

Someone on one of the weekend political shows -- I think it was George Will on This Week -- said that the Pennsylvania school board election was the most significant vote that took place last week. I think he's right, and I think it shows that the right wing of American politics has gone too far. They believe that statistics like "86% of all Americans are Christians" gives them a mandate for far-right, ideological demogoguery. But they're wrong, and if they keep pushing America is going to explain it to them.

 

The far right ideologues who were opposed to the Miers nomination were making the same mistake. Rush Limbaugh and others WANTED a fight over the next justice. They want their "culture war", and they want it right now.

 

They should be more careful what they wish for. This over-reaching by the "conservative movement" is one of the most blatant acts of hubris that I've seen in the 20 years that I've been following American politics.

[john5746]

The far right ideologues who were opposed to the Miers nomination were making the same mistake. Rush Limbaugh and others WANTED a fight over the next justice. They want their "culture war"' date=' and they want it right now.

 

They should be more careful what they wish for. This over-reaching by the "conservative movement" is one of the most blatant acts of hubris that I've seen in the 20 years that I've been following American politics.[/quote']

 

The social pendulum is swinging back to center, but the fiscal pendulum is stuck on spend. That is what the 'silent majority' is concerned about. They want government to stay out of their business and out of their wallet.

[Pangloss]

I wonder. I'd love to see that swing, but I'm afraid the pendulum may bypass the center this time around and go straight to the opposite extreme. The Democratic party is every bit as controlled by special interests and extremists as the Republican party right now. As Zell Miller points out, they're just not the "big tent" they used to be. They don't *have* a center position for people to vote for.

[Douglas]

As Zell Miller points out, they're just not the "big tent" they used to be. They don't *have* a center position for people to vote for.

I agree with Miller on that one. I thought after the 2004 election, the Dems would notice they had swung too far left, but No, we see Reid, Pelosi, Kennedy and Dean running the show.

[Pangloss]

Exactly.

 

Of course, it goes both ways. The far right would have you believe that the success of the "conservative movement" has been its outreach and awakening of the christian conservatives (who do seem to make up a far more important sector of the vote than the far left, I admit), but in fact it's really the big tent approach that has allied libertarians and conservative democrats and atheistic/gay/other conservatives with the emerging neo-cons that caused the tip.

 

But that errant perception has caused the religious right to get all cocky now and start declaring How Things Will Be, leading to a departure of libertarians and others. If the Democrats ever get their act together and reject the Michael Moores and Al Frankens (and more importantly replace the money men like George Soros), then they'll win back the conservative Democrats as well, and can easily regain power, leaving the religious right pounding the table in frustration.

 

That's the basic situation, at any rate. What actually ends up happening is anybody's guess at this point. Clearly Hillary is aware of all this and is trying to position herself in the center, but I think her biggest struggle will be within her own party. She's going to have a very hard time once Soros' minions start pointing their grubby little fingers at a Howard Dean or a Diane Feinstein.

 

Of course, a lot will depend on how the mid-terms go.