Right-Wing Angst Over McCain

[ecoli]

I used to listen to talk radio all the time, and used to consider myself a neocon... they got to my dad as well.

 

I don't regret that at all. It was an interesting philosophy to hold for a time, and it was actually a transition state from my young liberalism, to libertarianism.

If I didn't need something to listen to in the car, I hate FM radio, most of the music sucks and NPR is boring (except on the weekends and science Friday), I wouldn't have started listing to AM talk radio. It began my political awakening, and the more I listened and read online, the more I discovered I was probably a libertarian.

 

Getting information isn't necessarily a bad thing, as long as you can prevent being indoctrinated.

 

But, listening to conservative talk radio isn't being a close-minded zombie... being an apathetic non-voter is.

[Sisyphus]

The problem is that with 434 other voices that tend to disagree with him, he gets ignored alot... but don't worry the RP revolution is working on getting at least some of the gang of 434 replaced by Paul-type people.

 

That's exactly it. That's what should happen. His running for president will never result in President Ron Paul, but it already has resulted in a relatively small but highly (though narrowly) informed army of zealots. They will not win their "revolution" (pardon, but thank god) but they are adding a distinctive and tenacious voice to the national discourse. If his ideas hold water (and I believe some of them do) they will eventually and gradually be absorbed into the mainstream, which, despite the rhetoric of every politician ever, actually is the best way for change to occur.

[D H]

When you go into a cult to study it, you cannot help but have part of the core of your being influenced by their cult indoctrination.

Not always. I am apparently deep in the Ron Paul cult in this here forum. Fortunately, thanks to Tom Delay I am fully innoculated. Delay masterminded the gerrymandering that moved me into the Texas 14th. All I can say about Paul is ... Never mind. If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

 

Thanks to Romney's "suspension", the Republican candidacy will be out-of-play by the time the Texas primary rolls around. The Democratic candidacy may or may not be out of play then. Texas is a yall-come-by-and-vote kind of state. Anyone can vote in any primary, but only one in one primary. Turnout for the Republican primary will be very low (~10% historically) with the Republican candidate locked up. Turnout will be very, very low (nobody knows how low) with the Democratic candidacy still in play and Texas for once having the chance to play kingmaker. Which means ... whoever happens to show up for the Republican primary in the Texas 14th has a very, very good chance of getting rid of Dr. No. His constituency is quite unhappy. Particularly those of us who were gerrymander into his district just to get rid of Nick Lampson. Nick Lamspon, BTW, managed to beat the gerrymander.

[Realitycheck]

A week or two ago, I saw a poll giving Paul about 40% in Texas, not that it really matters.

[DrDNA]

I think there are many people who are glad of Paul's input who still don't think he should really be running things. Being in Congress, where he can have a pulpit and shake things up while still being kept in check by 434 others could be considered a good place for him, while the Presidency might not be.

But I can't imagine that the media (national and local) and the voting public (national and Paul's constituents in his home state) at large have been as inciteful as this. Can you?

 

I'm not implying anything negative about them. We have the advantage of 20 20 hindsight.

[iNow]

Texas is a yall-come-by-and-vote kind of state. Anyone can vote in any primary, but only one in one primary. Turnout for the Republican primary will be very low (~10% historically) with the Republican candidate locked up. Turnout will be very, very low (nobody knows how low) with the Democratic candidacy still in play and Texas for once having the chance to play kingmaker.

I work with a lot of incredibly bright folks, and I'll tell you... time and again... when we talk about politics, they talk about how SOME of Dr.R.Paul's ideas are good ones, and how very much they wish he were not so extreme and looney.

 

If Texas plays "king maker," then I must admit this worries me. This state has a poor history of choosing things for the wrong reasons. I'm in the capitol, Austin, which is definitely a liberal minded, highly intelligent, critically thinkin oasis in this grand country upon itself which we call Tejas... But there are some serious retards voting here too... and damnit if they won't choose the guy who gives 'em free chili.

 

 

I'll be one of those folks who adds to the percentage of the state's populace who votes. Now that I'm going to college again for my second degree, maybe I can talk some classmates into the same.

 

 

 

"One man with courage makes a majority." ~AJackson.

[D H]

when we talk about politics, they talk about how SOME of Dr.R.Paul's ideas are good ones, and how very much they wish he were not so extreme and looney.

I agree with you there. I certainly wish he wasn't so "extreme and looney", particularly since he is now my representative in Congress.

 

But there are some serious retards voting here too... and damnit if they won't choose the guy who gives 'em free chili.

Every state has its share of serious retards who vote. BTW, does the chili have meat or beans?

[ParanoiA]

Not always. I am apparently deep in the Ron Paul cult in this here forum. Fortunately, thanks to Tom Delay I am fully innoculated. Delay masterminded the gerrymandering that moved me into the Texas 14th. All I can say about Paul is ... Never mind. If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

 

Thanks to Romney's "suspension", the Republican candidacy will be out-of-play by the time the Texas primary rolls around. The Democratic candidacy may or may not be out of play then. Texas is a yall-come-by-and-vote kind of state. Anyone can vote in any primary, but only one in one primary. Turnout for the Republican primary will be very low (~10% historically) with the Republican candidate locked up. Turnout will be very, very low (nobody knows how low) with the Democratic candidacy still in play and Texas for once having the chance to play kingmaker. Which means ... whoever happens to show up for the Republican primary in the Texas 14th has a very, very good chance of getting rid of Dr. No. His constituency is quite unhappy. Particularly those of us who were gerrymander into his district just to get rid of Nick Lampson. Nick Lamspon, BTW, managed to beat the gerrymander.

 

I can't seem to find any evidence that Paul promoted or advocated gerrymandering of the 14th district, not that you said so, but it wasn't exactly clear.

 

I'm glad his contituency is quite unhappy. That means they didn't get to rape our constitution with continued rationalizations and they're probably crying about it. Good for Paul. The only sane politician in office right now. And the only one who seems NOT to resent the constitution.

 

Looks like you have a NASA guy running for that district. Should be a dream come true for you.

[Pangloss]

I used to listen to talk radio all the time, and used to consider myself a neocon... they got to my dad as well.

 

Somebody (I think it was Sisyphus?) asked in an earlier thread why I felt there was some value in Rush and his ilk, and that's the kind of thing I was thinking about right there -- the idea that CTR has, at some level, helped some folks activate their personal interest in politics. That's all the value I think it really has, but I think it's important and significant value. (shrug)

 

And that's exactly what happened with me, except the host in question was Neil Boortz.

 

---

 

Just to expand on the Rush angle a bit (since it gets back to the subject of this thread), I think it's interesting to look at the approach he is taking to this situation. I was a bit surprised by some of what he was saying on Friday, and I think it bears further discussion.

 

It was "open line Friday", and pretty much all the calls were about the McCain situation. Caller after caller was of the "long time listener, first time caller" variety. It was fascinating to hear all these Rush fans questioning his judgement about McCain -- I can't remember ever hearing that on his show before. These are, after all, the "ditto heads"! But there were no dittos on Friday.

 

Some callers agreed with him about McCain, but questionned the tactic. In other words, they were asking (and believe me, they were asking) if they should support McCain if he is the nominee, simply because he is Republican, and therefore has to be better "for the country" than the Democratic alternative.

 

Rush's response was invariably the same, which was that at this point it no longer matters who the next president is.

 

In other words he's basically thrown in the towel. But he's not telling people not to vote, he's actually telling them to get out and vote for Republican Senators and Congresspeople, so that the next president, whomever they are, will find it more difficult to move to the left. In other words, he was preaching for blockage.

 

I think it will be interesting to see how well that plays out in the minds of voters. Personally I can't really see the average person, even Rush fans, adhering to that approach. It's too complicated, and it's too antithetical to the general American way.

 

But it may actually play out that way, in that politics often involves blockage, and Rush will no doubt take credit for that during the next administration. So I think we're getting a little bit of a glimpse here at how that particular area of opposition will behave over the next 4-8 years.

 

But in the short term I think he's wrong, I think he's misplayed his hand, and I think McCain will have broad support amongst Republicans and moderates. I think the base will vote for him in higher numbers than Rush believes, and I think his dignitas will suffer for this move.

[D H]

I can't seem to find any evidence that Paul promoted or advocated gerrymandering of the 14th district, not that you said so, but it wasn't exactly clear.

It was the Texas Legislature, egged on by DeLay, who re-gerrymandered the Texas Congressional districts. AFIK, Ron Paul had nothing to do with it.

 

The reason I said re-gerrymandered was because the district layout was incredibly convoluted prior to the work of DeLay. Even though Texans have consistently voted Republican since the mid 1980s, the Texas legislation and the Texas Congressional delegation remained tilted to the Democrat side into this millennium. The reason: Texas Democrats controlled the maps.

 

Texas Republicans finally overcame the gerrymandering of the state legislature districts in 2002 and redrew the US congressional district maps. Unfortunately, they did the exact same thing the Democrats did before them. The new district lines are just as convoluted as were the old ones and produce disportionate results as did the old ones, only this time tilted in favor of Republicans.

 

But he's not telling people not to vote, he's actually telling them to get out and vote for Republican Senators and Congresspeople, so that the next president, whomever they are, will find it more difficult to move to the left. In other words, he was preaching for blockage.

 

I think it will be interesting to see how well that plays out in the minds of voters. Personally I can't really see the average person, even Rush fans, adhering to that approach. It's too complicated, and it's too antithetical to the general American way.

That is the American way as of late. We have learned that having the House, the Senate, and the Presidency all in the hands of one party can create some very bad laws, whether that one party is the Democrats or the Republicans. Our voting pattern for the last twenty years is quite clear -- we like blockage. We blocked Reagan, Clinton, and most recently, Bush.

[Pangloss]

I think partisans like blockage. But remember, congress has become known for blockage, and congress's approval rating is even lower than Bush's. I don't think the people, by and large, like blockage at all. They may like it on an individual issue basis, but on the whole they think it stinks.

 

That's part of what I mean when I say Rush has overplayed his hand.

[ParanoiA]

In other words he's basically thrown in the towel. But he's not telling people not to vote, he's actually telling them to get out and vote for Republican Senators and Congresspeople, so that the next president, whomever they are, will find it more difficult to move to the left. In other words, he was preaching for blockage.

 

From a purely partisan perspective, it's a good strategy. If I caught his point yesterday it was that basically McCain-Clinton-Obama - all the same; we're getting a democrat president this time, whether he sports the label or not. So, better to focus your efforts on all of the other offices up for grabs.

 

Party, party, party. Party this and party that, all we can think of is the freaking party. Here we have war hero, that's all up for bombing weakling countries and making believe this is spreading democracy and securing our homeland - and that's right in line with the current conservative base. He's big on low taxes and etc. But oh, I forgot, he actually TALKS and WORKS with DEMOCRATS. Down the tubes you go McCain...we can't have any of this 'putting the country over your party' crap.

 

Texas Republicans finally overcame the gerrymandering of the state legislature districts in 2002 and redrew the US congressional district maps. Unfortunately, they did the exact same thing the Democrats did before them. The new district lines are just as convoluted as were the old ones and produce disportionate results as did the old ones, only this time tilted in favor of Republicans.

 

That's interesting. Before reading about it, provoked by your post, I had no idea it was that rampant.

 

I'm inclined to repeat myself, too much perhaps, that this is yet another spurious consequence to party motivation over politically philosophical rights and wrongs.

 

That is the American way as of late. We have learned that having the House, the Senate, and the Presidency all in the hands of one party can create some very bad laws, whether that one party is the Democrats or the Republicans. Our voting pattern for the last twenty years is quite clear -- we like blockage. We blocked Reagan, Clinton, and most recently, Bush.

 

Yep, and I've read some interesting bits about libertarians creating blockage on purpose - an appeal to divided government - "Divided we stand, united we fall".

[iNow]

Every state has its share of serious retards who vote. BTW, does the chili have meat or beans?

 

As I understand it, real chili does not have beans, and that beans were used as a filler when meat was in short supply... not generally a problem in the longhorn state... oops... I meant lonestar state. However, I grew up in the northeastern US, and I prefer it with beans. They're good for the heart, and all.

 

 

Down the tubes you go McCain...we can't have any of this 'putting the country over your party' crap.

 

<...>

 

Yep, and I've read some interesting bits about libertarians creating blockage on purpose - an appeal to divided government - "Divided we stand, united we fall".

 

I'm encouraged to see so many people online discussing this and sharing their disgust over the party over country BS. Maybe we actually can turn this thing around as a nation and stop voting in robots who were shat out of the political machine.

[D H]

As I understand it, real chili does not have beans, and that beans were used as a filler when meat was in short supply... not generally a problem in the longhorn state... oops... I meant lonestar state.

You can get chili con frijoles even in Tejas. Just don't mix the two. Blasphemy! One might as well buy that canned chili made in New York City.

 

I'm encouraged to see so many people online discussing this and sharing their disgust over the party over country BS.

Me too. Then again, McCain has been the viable candidate in my eyes for a long time. I had just about given up ...

[Severian]

Speaking of education, the blogger at Daily Kos says

Okay, here's the thing - what exactly does this have to do with Space? I don't deny that its true, and there are serious issues in science and math education,

but exactly what does this have to do with Space?

 

The current administration is cutting fundamental science funding and instead channeling that funding into the space programme.

[Pangloss]

But oh, I forgot, he actually TALKS and WORKS with DEMOCRATS. Down the tubes you go McCain...we can't have any of this 'putting the country over your party' crap.

 

Yah I think I caught a bit of this in a Rush quote on a TV show the other day, showing him asking when the measure of a conservative became "reaching out to liberals".

 

I can understand how that can be frustrating when one believes in a cause, but that really irked me as a moderate, and I think it even irked some of his own base as well. Down deep, people just seem to know that partisanship is wrong.

[D H]

Speaking of education' date=' the blogger at Daily Kos says

[indent']Okay, here's the thing - what exactly does this have to do with Space? I don't deny that its true, and there are serious issues in science and math education, but exactly what does this have to do with Space?[/indent]

The current administration is cutting fundamental science funding and instead channeling that funding into the space programme.

 

Assuming your statement is true for the sake of argument, what is wrong with that? NASA is funded as a part of the government's overall science and technology budget. The President and Congress need to balance one brand of science to make the overall science and technology budget fall within projections.

 

Obama's space policy specifically raids NASA (rather than all of science and technology, for example) and specifically raiding one program within NASA to fund a completely separate program (science education) whose funding from a completely different part of the budget (education). Obama is paying lip service to NASA while he is stabbing it in the back. His space policy does not transfer money from human to robotic space exploration. Instead, it transfers money out of NASA completely. His space policy is an anti-space policy in sheep's clothing.

 

Now, back to your original argument. It isn't true! NASA funding has been flat for years. The President and Congress have been raiding NASA's budget along with other science and technology programs. Promises of greater budgets in the future don't mean didley when those promises are never kept. The Shuttle program will end in two years in make room in the budget for the Exploration Initiative.

 

Finally, you did not answer the question posed in the blog: What does science education have to do with space exploration?

[ParanoiA]

Obama's space policy specifically raids NASA (rather than all of science and technology, for example) and specifically raiding one program within NASA to fund a completely separate program (science education) whose funding from a completely different part of the budget (education). Obama is paying lip service to NASA while he is stabbing it in the back. His space policy does not transfer money from human to robotic space exploration. Instead, it transfers money out of NASA completely. His space policy is an anti-space policy in sheep's clothing.

 

Then Ron Paul ought to be your buddy since he wants to shut down the department of education. He hasn't mentioned the space program at all, although it certainly doesn't fit in his ideology, so I would think this would clear up your problem.

[D H]

He hasn't mentioned the space program at all, although it certainly doesn't fit in his ideology, so I would think this would clear up your problem.

You touched on one of the problems Paul faces in getting reelected to Congress. Nick Lampson was one of the ten Democrats targeted for removal in the Texas redistricting plan. The Texas legislature completely redrew the 9th district to accomplish this end. The part that contained NASA was split between DeLay's and Paul's district. Ron Paul won his last election by a smaller margin than ever before as a result. It is nip-and-tuck whether he will make it past the primary this time, and if he does, he is not expected to win the November election.

 

So what happened to Nick Lampson? The redistricting plan worked in a sense. The redistricting moved his home out of his old district. He could not run for reelection unless he moved. He instead ran in the district into which he was moved. He lost that race. When Tom DeLay ran into his troubles, Nick Lampson did move -- into Tom DeLay's district. He now represents Texas' 22nd district in Congress (but probably not for long; there are more necks there than you can shake a fist at).

[Severian]

Assuming your statement is true for the sake of argument, what is wrong with that?

 

Space exploration is useless, so it is a waste of money.

 

Finally, you did not answer the question posed in the blog: What does science education have to do with space exploration?

 

Space exploration is a waste of money (see above) which could be better spent on science education. All pretty simple really!

[D H]

You are entitled to your opinion. Thank goodness most policy makers disagree.

[DrDNA]

Why not start a new thread to discuss NASA and space exploration? This one is supposed to be about right wing agnst over McCain. And Obama is on the left.

 

In the meantime, here are some counter points for your new thread:

 

What is NASA's mission in the 21st century?

What have they done for me (Janet tax payer) lately?

NASA needs to figure out how to stop dragging its feet and work on problems of real human consequence or we should take its budget and spend it on critical issues like alt energy research.

Pretty soon, the private sector is going to kick NASA's butt in low orbit space anyway.....after that, the sky is the limit.

 

How come the number of people on the team tracking near earth asteroids is smaller than the staff at a neighborhood McDonald's (to borrow an estimate thrown out on a documentary on the Discovery Channel)? After the Big Mac of all asteroids hits the earth and exterminates the human species, I'm going to say I told you so.

 

Gene Roddenberry and George Lucas have given NASA a free ride for too long already.....they need to get their own marketing group.

[D H]

Why not start a new thread to discuss NASA and space exploration?

That sounds good. I'm going to respond to your post here and assume one of the moderators moves the relevant off-topic posts to that new thread.

 

In the meantime, here are some counter points for your new thread:

 

What is NASA's mission in the 21st century?

I'll quote NASA on this: From http://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/what_does_nasa_do.html

NASA's mission is to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research.

What have they done for me (Janet tax payer) lately?

Here's a few:

• Started work on the CEV and ARES.
  
• Helped get commercial space going with various space act agreements and with the COTS projects.
  
• Sent a probe to Mercury.
  
• Sending a lander to Mars.

NASA needs to figure out how to stop dragging its feet and work on problems of real human consequence or we should take its budget and spend it on critical issues like alt energy research.

What do you mean by "NASA needs to figure out how to stop dragging its feet"? NASA certainly has its share of bureaucratic silliness; it is a government agency after all. So will a government agency dedicated to alternate energy research. The free market can almost always outdo government agencies when it comes to short-term endeavors. The free-market is not so good when it comes to payoff that are further in the future, such as space exploration beyond low Earth orbit.

Pretty soon, the private sector is going to kick NASA's butt in low orbit space anyway.....after that, the sky is the limit.

I hope so, and so does NASA (at least some parts of NASA, anyhow). NASA is backing many commercial space ventures in the hopes that commercial space will offload that burden from NASA'.

How come the number of people on the team tracking near earth asteroids is smaller than the staff at a neighborhood McDonald's (to borrow an estimate thrown out on a documentary on the Discovery Channel)? After the Big Mac of all asteroids hits the earth and exterminates the human species, I'm going to say I told you so.

People tend to vastly overestimate NASA's budget. NASA gets less than 6/10 of one percent of the Federal budget. People spend more (a lot more!) on booze or movies than the share of their taxes that go to NASA. If you think NASA hasn't accomplished much since the end of Apollo, you're right! NASA hasn't received enough money to accomplish much since the end of Apollo.

 

Congress did tell NASA to do a better job of tracking near-Earth objects. They also did not provide any additional funding for this mandate. If NASA spent any more money than they are spending on tracking NEOs they would be violating the budget that Congress levied on NASA. NASA has so few people working on this problem because of Congress.

[DrDNA]

Back to McCain:

I have a prediction. McCain will win the nomination, the Republican base will come together in a luke warm manner after the convention and lose the election (no duh huh?). McCain will get trounced soundly by Hillary who will be given her party's nomination after she effectively negotiates every American's first born child away in a back room bargaining session at the Dem convention. She promises the Superdelegates the moon and the stars; which WE will pay for later.

 

Republican turn out for the election will be an all time low. A third party candidate will also get a huge chunk of the vote. The Republican machine will blame the voters for not accepting "the lesser of 2 evils"..."handing the country to the liberals"....ticking us all off even more....and alienating their base even further.

 

The democrats will take credit for "obeying the will of the people", when in fact, none of it will be because of any of their own doing....It will all be by default, because of this luke warm "neocon" nonsense we have been and are being fed.

 

The momentum will carry for a few years and we continue to have a Democrat president AND congress for at least six years.

Government will grow to an enormous size in an attempt to right all the wrongs of this world. The Dems, being in full control, will eventually screw it up beyond our wildest dreams, so eight years from now we will elect another "neocon" trying to evoke the Regan legacy in words only but without substance and the cycle will repeat itself OR the economy will be SO bad that we will elect a fascist and/or isolationist.....effectively blaming the world for all our problems at home.

If McCain wins (small chance of that though), almost the same thing happens. Just delayed after 4 more years of a "neocon"-type "Bush legacy" and then it will be Obama, not Hillary.

 

PS; Can we make it a politics of NASA and space exploration thread?

[D H]

Back to McCain:

I have a prediction. McCain will win the nomination, the Republican base will come together in a luke warm manner after the convention ...

Not too much of a stretch that McCain will win the nomination. If the wacko wing of the GOP has any brains (I admit, that is a big if) they will come together much sooner. I predict that the GOP will overcome their neuron deficit much sooner than will the wacko wing of the Democrats, leading to ...

and lose the election (no duh huh?). McCain will get trounced soundly by Hillary who will be given her party's nomination after she effectively negotiates every American's first born child away in a back room bargaining session at the Dem convention.

Obama winning the Democratic nod thanks largely to 366 excluded delegates from Florida and Michigan. The race between McCain and Obama will be neck-and-neck. The campaigns will once again focus on the perennial battleground states, with the exception of Florida, which Obama will all but concede to McCain. Nonetheless it will be one ugly election. It will come down to Ohio once again, and that state will be essentially uncountable due to multiple transgressions by both parties. My crystal ball is not good enough to foresee what the final outcome will be.

 

PS; Can we make it a politics of NASA and space exploration thread?

Fine by me.