The Republicans are doing their best to make gay marriage an issue in the midterm elections. Many expected that Republicans might return to their winning strategy of 2000 in the hopes it would motivate evangelicals to turn out the vote again. But Jacob Weisberg argues in this article that pressing “the gay panic button” won’t work this time around.
He argues that social conservatives are starting to see through the GOP’s motives, realizing that the party leaders only pursue the issue when elections are coming up. The way Bush is toting the issue out now, after ignoring it for the rest of his term, Weisberg writes, “is bluntly insulting to his evangelical backers, who are in effect being told: Come and get your election-year bone, before we kick you back into your doghouse on Nov. 8.”
Posted by Melissa Cooley
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Monkeyhawk on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Health care reform would save state money
- XXX on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- RightAngle on Open thread 11/22
39 Comments
Wait until late October. I’m sure the Republicans will be repeatly pounding that “panic” button as fast as a 14-year-old online Gamer that just slamed down a couple of 2-liters of Mountain Dew.
Good metaphor, Joe!
Jacob is as big a fool as anyone who lends him credibility. The gay marriage button was pushed by advocates and an advocate judge. It had nothing to do with a campaign strategy. It was not even an issue until they made it one, and it was prompty settled with the rash of state laws against gay marriage.Republicans did little to nothing to win in 2000, the democrats lost it via supporting Clinton to the end. People were sick and tired of seeing things like Janet Reno’s thugs raiding the houses of innocent families and kidnapping little kids at gun point for their friend Fidel. The were sicked to death to see leftists using military forces against a bunch of religious zelots who’s crime was to stockpile legal weapons. They were fed up to the gills with watching Clinton lackeys shooting a guys wife in the face because he just wanted to be left alone by the government.We won’t even get into the attempts by Hillary to socialize medicine or her invitation to appear before a grand jury or the embrassment they caused the nation by renting out the Lincoln bedroom. Never mind accepting campaign contributions from the Chineese military or selling radiation hardened chips to enable chineese nuclear missles to strike US soil.Who the hell even needed a strategy? The democrats did it to themselves. As much as Gay’s like to think they are the center of the universe, the fact of the matter is, very few people give a shit about them one way or another. They are just people for cryin out loud.I swear to god I have never seen such a bunch of clueless panty wastes in my life. It’s been 6 years and they have still never figured out that the Republican victory didn’t have a thing to do with anything other than a massive rejection of what the Democrats have become.
Interesting Nick.
Why don’t you share your take on what the Republicans have become?
Better yet, why not share your take on why Republicans are better? My take since you did not post yours. The GOP is the party of priviledge and lying to people that if they well serve the privilidged they will become privililedged also.
“The were sicked to death to see leftists using military forces against a bunch of religious zelots who’s crime was to stockpile legal weapons”
More like stopping a serial pedophile, who tried to justify his ways through some whackjob psuedo-religion.
“We won’t even get into the attempts by Hillary to socialize medicine”
I guess Jesus would only want the privileged to be able to afford medicine
“embrassment they caused the nation by renting out the Lincoln bedroom”
Katrina holds no weight against this issue!! Or the Dubai issue.
I think the social conservatives will take the bait again. I don’t give them too much credit for having anything between their ears to think with so of course gay marriage will be a hot topic. The religious right, the morality of America, must protect the sanctity of marriage to preserve the values this country was founded on. And all the while they will piss on the Constitution, after all it was probably written by godless liberals.
Of course they’ll take the bait. They always have and always will. And how has that worked? Republican politicians will cater to the far right right up till the election. Then, the far right gets put on “ignore”.
The Lincoln bedroom got “rented out” during the Clinton administration? Oh, that’s so much worse than selling the government out to big business.
Check out this op/ed piece. It defines the Democrat dilemmas:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/09/AR2006060901977.html
The hard truth of the election cycle is the Democrats are going to have to start thinking like Republicans if they want to win. The Republicans have put up issues that cater to the voters. The Democrats have not. What does it take to make the Democrats see this? A board upside the head?
The Democrat party is going to have to come up with voteable issues, and do it fast if they want to start winning again. Slamming the Republican party is not going to do it.
Hell, everybody alread knows Busco has spent this country into generational debt, gone to war for no reason, and catered to business at the expense of the average voter, but they will still win because the Democrats have not come up with a voteable plan.
It’s time the Democratic leadership accepted this and started thinking about a workable plan the voters will accept and want. Drop the namby pamby name calling and get down to the business of correcting all the wrongs the Republicans have foisted off on the American public. Only then will we see a voter turn around and start getting Democrats back in power.
My take on what Republican’s have become JR bears a great deal of resemblence to the Democrats, but that is not what the topic or my point was.The author wants people to believe that the reason Democrats have lost their ability to control the government, was because part of the Republican strategy was to scare them with Gay Marriage, which is a bunch of crap. The reason Democrats lost control was because of the Republican Strategy to allow Clinton to bury the party for them, which he did, while Democrats faithfully stood by and cheered him on. I’ll never forget the snarkey little line quoted so often by democrats. “Yeah, he’s a crook and a liar, but he’s our crook and liar”
Gary C,You said, “More like stopping a serial pedophile, who tried to justify his ways through some whackjob psuedo-religion.”
Serial Pedophile? I realize there was one allegation of one instance of child molestation which was used to leverage the warrents. I wonder how come the charges were withdrawn, and never presented as a part of the case after the massacre?I’m not a fan of religious zealots of any flavor, but a recognized, chartered, religion cannot be legitimately called a psudo-religion by any standards of which I am aware.
For the rank and file Nick is more right then wrong, it was a general hared for Clinton that caused a shift.But the gay marriage issue has always been a driving force in the Religious Right, it was pandering to them to get their vote that brought this to the forefront. And yes as far as they are concerned it will work again, even though a amendment one way or another would not be Constitutional. But they are betting on the shift of the Supreme court to a moral stance over a legal stance to make it work. Along with a President that tends to go his own way over what the other two branches say. In many sense this is no different then the right appealing to the faithful on gun ownership or the left appealing to pro-choice .A hot button issues is a hot button issue, it takes over for common sense and blinds those that feel strong to any other issues.
On top of that, the R.R and the Neo-cons are in a struggle for their lives politically, with the majority of voters slowly waking to what they have done. They have started to read the writing on the wall and realizing that they could lose the clout they have with the power they had over each other.
J.M is right.
Walker is right.
Walker and others, what should be the Democratic Party’s number one message to voters.
How about:
Working people should be able to afford what they need: housing, health care, food, gasoline, & college for their kids.
Other, better, ideas?
DD,How do you make it palatable to the public with regard to who pays? The Republicans are going to come back with “Do you want higher taxes to pay for the slob on the street who won’t get a job?”.
The democrats are going to have to push the class thing again, but do so in a way that placates the middle income voter. How about using Ken Lay, et al, as an example of the morally repugnant right picking tax payers clean? The people earning multi-millions, with deferred payments, no taxes and benefits are going to have to have loopholes closed and start paying. There are so many businesses out there paying little or no taxes, that it’s a free-for-all as to who to use. Big oil, for one: Stop subsidies, royalties, etc, etc.
Make the average voter know their hit will be minimal and the money will come from closed loopholes, ended subsidies and controlled waste and fraud. The moneys out there, but it will take people with major huevos to do what has to be done. The Democrats can do it, but it will take some serious new thinking.
And a serious time-table for getting us out of Iraq.
Imagine that DD. Returning to the traditional values and the “american dream.” What a novel concept. It will never occur to them, nor will securing the borders and enforcing severe sanctions against employeers that hire illegal aliens. Either positon could easily sweep either party to control across the country. Of course either postion carries with it a loss of support from their corporate masters.
Nick,All of the little incidents you listed that are your version of why Democrats lost in 2000 really ignore the real reason. You are not correct in stating the Republicans didn’t really do anything to win. They went to the U S Supreme court to get the Florida recount stopped. If they had let it play out, we probably would have had Al Gore as president instead of the empty suit we have now.Any republican who thinks we would be worse off with Gore than the shrub is guilty of wishful thinking.
Good point about enforcement, Nick. That’s got to be a key on illegal immigration. Everybody is making a lot of noise about holding employers accountable now, but we know it’ll get a lot quieter after the elections. And I seriously doubt if republicans will be the party that deals with renegade employers. Big Business owns the republican party.
Well brown, I think you forgot about Mr Gore’s own attempts to manipulate the election process through the courts that prompted the appeal to the supreme court, however, that is all water under the bridge.Had he been successful in his own manipulation and kept it within the states court system, and won, it would have triggered the counting of overseas absentee ballots that do not get counted unless necessary. If you will recall, the Gore people had already prepared to sue to prevent the overseas ballots from being counted. He had good reason to decide against this however, as the overseas ballots included an overwhelming amount of active duty military votes. The likely outcome of counting the overseas ballots would have been that Gore didn’t win the popular vote after all. His handlers wisely talked him out of it.As for whether or not he would have been better than Bush. I doubt it. They are both slaves to the corportaions and special interests they serve. He certainly never did or said anything during his vice presidency that impressed me, but I admit that would have been difficult when you are dealing with a co-presidency, half of which caused the democrats as many problems as the elected half.
Glad to see we agree XXX. I don’t really see getting either side to enforce them as long as Corporate and Special interests are allowed unlimited access via legalized bribery.First and formost what is needed is a serious and relentless anti incumbancy effort on the part of the American people in general. Then, an even more vigorous effort geared toward ending special interest and corporate donations combined with strict term limits.
“it would have triggered the counting of overseas absentee ballots that do not get counted unless necessary”
What? Let me get this straight. If your an American citizen living overseas, your absentee ballot only gets counted if necessary?
Do you think Al Gore would have ignored the memo that stated Al Quada was determined to attak using Airplanes as missiles? Take a look at the link below and tell me what you think.
http://www.cnn.com/US/9609/05/airport.security/
Apparently, conservatism can’t work without enemies. With the collapse of communism, they needed somebody to fight, and picked gay people, since they figured they’d have no defenders and be a safe target.
Gary C,”What? Let me get this straight. If your an American citizen living overseas, your absentee ballot only gets counted if necessary?”
Yes, and as a matter of fact that is word for word exactly what I said.
Sorry, but I didnt know If your an American citizen living overseas that your vote usually doesnt count.
Doesnt sound fair to all the servicemen fighting in Iraq, and all the others who are commited to their duty elsewhere across the world.
Nick, the sad thing is, no matter which side, no matter how clean the politician is. once they get to Washington, it seems like they almost all go bad. Just demonstrates that everybody has a price. And the lobbiests have the money to meet that price. There for a little while, it looked like we might get lobbying reform, but look what really happened.
We need to get rid of almost all of them, we need to take back our country. I for one, am tired of politicians being in the pocket of special interests.
It’s hard to say what he would have ignored Gary. Is it safe to assume that his boss refused to sign off on the measure his committee proposed? How does a measure supporting the use of government funds to install advanced bomb dection in airports reflect on Gore’s ability to predict and prevent terrorist activity? As I recall there was a great deal of ignoring threats, and actual acts going on during this time in Washington. Most of which were addressed by Hillary when she was telling us what a beautiful religion, “the religion of peace” really was. Once again however, it is impossible to say what Gore would have done.The key to a situation like this would indeed have been increased security and screening of passengers, something of which the government had long before fulfilled their obligation by providing a tax for this very purpose. The problem was, the tax was being collected and used to line the pockets of the airline industry instead of it’s intended purpose.Considering that there had been at least 3 attempts in the previous year at crashing planes into buildings, maybe Mr Gore’s committee should have concentrated on that? One way or another, it is impossible to place blame on a single administration for not acting to prevent an event that has not occured. What do you think the chances are of anyone getting anything passed the ACLU, The House or Senate without a previous incident to document the need?
You know XXX, awhile back I read the most interesting article, written by a former representative that illustrated in detail just exactly how and when they turned well intentioned freshman reps against the people they represent and into “one of them.” It even contained a large part of their orientation speech, and went on to tell of the price he paid for bucking them. It was great, but of course got little attention. I wish I would have saved that article or knew the name of the person that wrote it.
I remember when the Abramof affair first plied the web. I said then there would be no reform, and sadly, I am correct. Vote these morons out and get people who will reform this bloated monster as it should be.
I’ll testify JM. I remember reading your’s and someone elses comments saying nothing would come of it. Personally I found it kind of disturbing that only a couple of people could see what I considered obvious.
Nick,
I really do believe that Mr. Gore would have taken the threats alot more seriously than Fuck-up did. Considering he was involved in predicting that future terrorist attacks might involve airliners.
I really dont think he would have forgotten the study.
But you know I could be wrong.
“But you know I could be wrong.”
Well Gary,If I have learned anything over the years, the one thing for certain, is that politicians, almost without exception, have an uncanny knack for proving their supporters wrong. I am convinced that they have some sort of secret ceremony where they are required to prove their loyalty by committing an act of betrayal toward those that elected them. ;-)
Walker:The Republicans are going to come back with “Do you want higher taxes to pay for the slob on the street who won’t get a job?”.
Sorry about being so long in getting back to this. I think the Repub’s counter of “class warfare” has worked pretty well. Even though Warren Buffet says “Yes, it is a war and my class is winning”, attacking the rich does not seem to generate much traction.
The only thing along these lines that might be an effective point was Bush’s push to basically do away with Social Security. A popular FDR era program that has worked and could be made secure with little changes.
I recall a staunch Republican older woman who was at Bush’s KSU speech being interviewed after the speech on Wichita’s local TV. When asked about Social Security, she said something to the effect of “Well, that is where me and him [Bush] part company.”
So, I think highlighting those areas where strident ideology has been at work in hurting the middle class is needed. The diffuse attacks on “the rich” is not going to hold water, however.
DD,How on earth do you equate Bush’s plan to invest a portion of SSN funds into market accounts to a plan to do away with social security?
SS is too valuable to risk private investment, period.
Nick,The tone and frame of your question, implies to me that I could only refer you to resources that you wouldn’t believe. So, thanks, but I’ll pass.
Apophis,I have heard that as a reason to be against it before, while I disagree with it, it is a valid belief.DD, since emotion is impossible to convey through type, I just want you to know my tone and frame of the question was simply surprise. I am aware of the concerns and the legitmate lack of trust in government to do the right thing. This really is the first time I had ever heard it was supposed to be a way to do away with SS. Personally, I think it could have been an excellent opportunity for today’s young people to take control and improve their prospects for the later parts of their lives. Then again, depending on the deals cut, palms greased and lies told, it could have been a bad deal, but we will never know now, and the best our young can ever hope for is a whittled down version of the currently dying system we have today.
DD,Had to work today, so late posting:
I don’t think Bush was trying to do away with SS. He was trying to change the way it was looked at and run. There was a chance it would be weakened to the point of uselessness, but I doubt there ever was any doubt as to Bush’s plan failing.
As for the rich/class warfare, it is still a club that can carry real weight if it is used properly. The Republicans, as well as many Democrats, have sold themselves out to business at the expense of the average person. Business has so many loopholes, it would take more than all the dikes in the world to plug them.
If the Democrats can come up with soneone with the charisma to carry a “I will plug them” message, aand get the full backing of the Democrat party, it would be a votable issue. With the stench of the Abramof affair still strong, political reform would be another votable issue, but the Democrats are going to have to learn to use those things to their advantage; and they are not doing so now. They are still in the name-calling stage of childish nonsense.
The Republicans are experts at taking an issue and making the Democrats look bad. The Democrats are going to have to learn how to street fight and get their noses bloodied a time or two to understand what they are going to have to do to win in 2006 and 2008.