US POLITICS: AMERICANS, PLEASE WELCOME YOUR NEW PRESIDENT... SCOTT BROWN!

Actually, the term goes back farther:

http://slog.thestranger.com/files/2008/04/AdlaiStevenson.jpg

tbf the modern world is pretty scary!

republicans have played on two themes relentlessly for at least the last quarter century -

1 - govt never did anything right
2 - you are being looked down on by liberal pointy-heads

this makes the job of right-wing radio host absurdly easy - just interpret any event thru these two filters

dems don't have messages that are even remotely comparable in their effectiveness - do they simply not give a shit?

no. they have a harder job unless the economy is in recession.

The problem is, if you're a member of the party that intrinsically supports the federal government or at least supports the federal government's role in our lives, then you're always gonna be on the defensive.

That's not true. If "we" thought of the federal government as "us", it would be otherwise. The enemy (enema) of the state would naturally be on the defensive then.

Yeah, but when we bitch about "bureaucracy" and "Washington," Euler, they're not "us."

at least the last quarter century

more like the last 100 years

Humanizing it helps, of course. My mom's bitching about the stimulus package noticeably dropped off after I explained how my (Republican) university president credited it for saving several underfunded departments.

more like since the first caveman thought fire was going too far with this progress thing

Right; and the civil rights acts remain the way that the right is able to argue that the feds aren't "us", at least if you're a "real" American.

more like since the first caveman thought fire was going too far with this progress thing

goddamn cavenerds

Right; and the civil rights acts remain the way that the right is able to argue that the feds aren't "us", at least if you're a "real" American.

wait

As far back as Toqueville people have talked about how prickly Americans can get when they're criticized. We were supposed to be exceptional, to be a vanguard but as the Republic got older and more and more compromises were made (even in the Constitution) and our expansionist policies became more and more blatant and full of disregard for the 'opinions of mankind' and as that very process eventually made us more and more powerful, we retreated into ourselves culturally (it's noteworthy that, while all countires have their sporting preferences, we tend to only be interested in 'our' sports).

Whereas once staunch U.S. patriotism could be wedded to high-minded, universal thought about the nature of mankind and the State, it grew in disrepute and what 'patriots' preferred was jingoism unadulterated with any rational thought or appeal to rational thought. One could always end up bested in a debate down that path. Add to that the various waves of religious revival that prize intensity of faith over subtlety of doctrine and I can see where 6,000-year-old-Earthers and virulent homophobes prefer not to inquire or think too much - there lies the Tempter. Conversely (and I'm never certain how honest they are with themselves) they're not really interested in climate change (could God's design or punishment) so much as they are in making sure that the 'limited Govmt' which really means local ways for local people (i.e. getting your school board bullied into relgious orthodoxy by cliques full of intensity and fervor and being able to run all the undesirables out of town). They've shown themselves largely amenable to certain govmt services and programs as long as they feel they're doing as well from them as anybody, epsecially those lazy, immoral people of that other ethnic group. To give up on the kind of limited government they say they like would be to renounce American exceptionalism and if they do that then they're just some stubborn shlub in a double-wide and some of those annoying Europeans might actually have been right about a couple points or it means having to work their heads around a lot of complicated, evolving, interconnected stuff that can be quite subtle and quite deceptive and that requires too much work.

American anti-intellectualism stems from high self-regard which is either too craven or too lazy to justify itself.

(it's noteworthy that, while all countires have their sporting preferences, we tend to only be interested in 'our' sports).

eh, but other countries don't really care that much about "our" sports either. American Football and Baseball are non-entities in Europe. Basketball has broken through (cuz it's AWESOME), but other than that...

Yeah. Basketball is breaking through very effectively but American sports culture has traditionally been very narcissistic compared to other countries. Even the Brits with their proud culture of sport have exported them and now have to face their old colonies (and now their neighbors) in football and cricket and rugby matches. Part of it is size and distance to other countries in the American case but we very consciously took rugby football and rounders and made them very much our own.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71MQZ5YE0TL.gif

published in 1963, covers more than a century before that

Yeah, that was in my grandfather's bookshelves when I was a kid.

neither anti-intellectualism or anti-big-govt ideas are

woops

they're not ineluctable aspects of the American character, they're the product of deliberate and consistent propaganda

I'm not as sure of that as I used to be.

what's the difference? the former stems from the latter, and... vice versa. i mean, it's not even a distinction worth making, the anti-intellectual force is there

Anti-big-govt is one of the founding ideological threads of American life, I would say. What's odd about that was the fear of a tyrannical majority that informed much of that tradition was endemic in slave-holding states. The Democratic-Republicans, the majority of the nullifiers, the CSA, etc...

the other thing is that "big government" became a code word thanks to Reagan's expanded Southern Strategy for pretty much spending on anything other than means of enforcing authority. Pentagon, FBI, CIA, DoD, etc are never called to slash funds, only everything else. Because it was hammered into many voters minds that only lazy poor minorities use government services, and thus taxes were stealing money from some moral upstanding hardworking businessman to give handouts to the welfare queens.

Again, they really think this way.

I've read several accounts of why America's racial diversity is one of the reasons we never adopted as many 'socialist' programs as Europe. To be fair to Libertarians and some of the Paultards, though, they're not just anti Dept of Education but not really happy about the culture of venality that surrounds the military-industrial complex and think the DOJ/FBI have massively overstepped their bounds.

http://i39.tinypic.com/saw7cy.jpg

ouch

deem and pass is the new awesome

i am kinda amazed that it is happening tbh

it = ?

deeming

using a weird parliamentary procedure because they're worried they don't have the votes otherwise is not exactly gonna endear them to the public maybe?

btw money quote from my roomie, our local rep of the mainstreamed fringe right: "hasn't it ever occurred to you how everything the obama administration does is totally confusing and opaque? it's because they don't want us to know what they're doing!"

this is, of course, b/w "they're doing it right out in the open because they think the american people are a bunch of retards, man!"

you realize saying "deem and pass" on tv/radio everyone thinks what is being said is, "demon pass"
see now all those folks who are trying real hard to convince the rest of us that obama is really the antichrist.. they're gonna get all riled up again

I mean wouldn't reconciliation alone do the job; I thought there was enough votes. Or have pro-lifers put a stop to that? And I don't even know why abortion is an issue with HCR in the first place because you can easily keep abortion policy the way it is now :? I'm confused

I think part of the abortion flare-up has to do with cover/an excuse to allow senators a reason to vote against it

They need to protect the bottom line of their most valuable campaign contributors. They know the other side is whipping up a frenzy, and it works perfectly. When they let it fail it will be because "the evil Republicans fought dirty", not because they're actually just selling out the American people to the very industry that caused this crisis.

Yeah, but at this point why would Dem senators want to vote against it at all, why need a cover? are any of them actually trying to be selfish by thinking they will get a 2nd term or whatever in congress if they vote against the bill?

I understand Joe Lieberman being an idiot but still there should be enough for reconciliation I thought. How many dems are in the house right now? The only recent change was Scott Brown I thought. And didn't 2 republicans support the bill within the past month?? And one of them might have been Scott Brown. (I admit I having been keeping up with politics as much as the Jones)

---------

Okay I just read your post Adam. So it is about senator reelection and campaign contributions. How stupid of some of these dems. Fuck your job mein.

Perhaps they would have a more respectable job if they did what they were supposed to do, which is represent the people that voted them into office. Not the people that last night's TV news polls show are scared of socialism. Not the insurance industry that has been spending assloads of money during this whole thing beating the idea of reform into submission. (Assloads of money that are conveniently being covered for with across-the-board premiums increases.)

They are already saying "Fuck my job" by not doing their jobs!

um i'm not entirely convinced that conservative democrats are not "representing the people that voted them into office" considering everyone should have known they wouldn't go along with something like this. they're not progressives. also this may be just me but i kinda reject the notion that politicians should be puppets for whatever side is more popular in their district - i'd rather have a politician who is principled and votes for what he truly feels is best for the people he represents than one whose finger is constantly gauging political winds

& i know that's kind of a naive thing to say but eh

see i'd almost rather the former (that they be wind gauges) because i don't trust my politicians to be morally impressive or even really insightful

at least with wind gauges we wind up with the public policy we deserve

^ rescinded

using a weird parliamentary procedure because they're worried they don't have the votes otherwise is not exactly gonna endear them to the public maybe?

I doubt the public is really going to remember the details of how the stuff got passed even a year later, unless they hate the end result of it.

"They've shown themselves largely amenable to certain govmt services and programs as long as they feel they're doing as well from them as anybody, epsecially those lazy, immoral people of that other ethnic group."

I think this is basically right but conflating this with anti-intellectualism is a mistake. Does "intellectualism" (or better: valuing reason) make people not racist, or tribalist etc.? Does "intellectualism"/valuing reason make people see that solidarity with all people is "the truth"? Those are moral matters and it's not clear that just "thinking through them hard or well" will make people "see the truth". These people would need, if you wanted them to change their views, moral reorientation, not intellectual reorientation.

you realize saying "deem and pass" on tv/radio everyone thinks what is being said is, "demon pass"
see now all those folks who are trying real hard to convince the rest of us that obama is really the antichrist.. they're gonna get all riled up again

already happening

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,040 for obama "demon pass". (0.31 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 799 for pelosi "demon pass". (0.43 seconds)

I mean wouldn't reconciliation alone do the job; I thought there was enough votes.

Ezra Klein yesterday: why have Democrats consistently made this "process" harder for themselves?

Results 1 - 10 of about 51 for obama "demonic majesty". (0.32 seconds)
Results 1 - 4 of 4 for obama "demonic splendor". (0.20 seconds)

you can prove anything with googles

Results 1 - 10 of about 870 for obama "child catcher". (0.25 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 186 for obama "really nice smart guy". (0.31 seconds)

but most of those "demon pass" ones are blogs about Obama's/Pelosi's "subversion of democracy".

Results 1 - 10 of about 870 for obama "child catcher". (0.25 seconds)

I lol'd real hard