Losing the base
Posted by R. Neal
So yesterday I had to drive our old junker that we keep around for utility purposes. Unfortunately it doesn’t have XM Radio, and somebody had left the radio on the local East Tennessee talk station. It’s a swell station, too, with a great lineup of local conservative yahoos and creeps like Limbaugh, Boortz, O’Reilly, and Savage. You know, the usual suspects. (Which is why we have XM Radio in our everyday vehicle.)
The afternoon yahoo is some local guy called "Big Phil" or something. Imagine a cross between Rush Limbaugh and Larry the Cable Guy, except not as smart. Yesterday he was broadcasting from a local gun store. (In one of his spots hawking some kind of assault rifle he said “wouldn’t you like to have one of these the next time some punk comes driving down your street with one of those loud thumpa-thumpa stereos?” No, seriously, he really said that.) It’s a real redneck-o-rama. It’s quite embarrassing, really.
Anyway, Big Phil was all worked up about, get this, a new anti-war song by Merle Haggard. Apparently Merle also posted some comments on his website saying the "problems aren’t in Iraq" and that we need to "look inward" and reduce our dependence on foreign oil and start rebuilding our own highways and bridges. Yep, sounds like old Merle has gone off the reservation. Big Phil was giving that traitor Merle down the road and invited callers to agree.
The first guy said his son was over there in Iraq on his second tour of duty. He was understandably upset. He said the song is an insult, like sending a letter to his son with one of those "Muslim stamps" the Post Office sells. He said it’s like a "bullet to the head" for our troops, and it don’t do nothing but help "the Communists" over there. (No, seriously, he really said that.) He was a big fan of Merle Haggard before, but he ain’t buying no more Merle Haggard records, nor any other records on that label, and he’s taking his whole collection of Merle Haggard records out to the trash.
Big Phil concurred. But then it got interesting.
Next up was another guy who said his son was over there. He thinks Merle is right. He supports his son and the rest of the troops for doing their patriotic duty, but thinks that the war is unjustified and questions why we are there. He compared it to Vietnam.
Big Phil was flabbergasted.
Then, a truck driver called in. I believe he said he was former military. He, too, agreed with Merle. And he doesn’t think we have any business in Iraq.
Big Phil can’t believe it. He asked the guy, "So you’re saying you think we should bring back our troops?"
The guy said "I’m saying they shouldn’t have never been over there in the first place."
Big Phil is flummoxed. He started rambling on about "these people" but I couldn’t take any more and had to turn it off.
I know it’s a pretty small sample with a huge margin of error (and I’m sure the "real patriots" piled on later in the show), but by my count that was 2 to 1 against the war and for Merle. And these weren’t some radical peace activists. These were your "pickup-truck-with-a-gun-rack-driving Confederate-flag-waving good ol’ boys down South" that Howard Dean was talking about.
So, what does this mean? It could mean that Bush and the Neocon War Profiteers are losing the carefully cultivated core of their base that they have previously been so successful in manipulating. It could mean trouble for them and their agenda.
The Mrs. said her theory is that these guys have been watching TV reports from the hurricane-stricken Gulf Coast and they’ve finally seen with their own eyes that the government doesn’t really care about "regular people" and can’t be trusted. If she’s right and there is a sense of betrayal finally sinking in and causing folks to wake up and start asking questions, it could indeed mean trouble for the right-wing agenda.
OK, then.
So yesterday I had to drive our old junker that we keep around for utility purposes. Unfortunately it doesn’t have XM Radio, and somebody had left the radio on the local East Tennessee talk station. It’s a swell station, too, with a great lineup of local conservative yahoos and creeps like Limbaugh, Boortz, O’Reilly, and Savage. You know, the usual suspects. (Which is why we have XM Radio in our everyday vehicle.)
The afternoon yahoo is some local guy called "Big Phil" or something. Imagine a cross between Rush Limbaugh and Larry the Cable Guy, except not as smart. Yesterday he was broadcasting from a local gun store. (In one of his spots hawking some kind of assault rifle he said “wouldn’t you like to have one of these the next time some punk comes driving down your street with one of those loud thumpa-thumpa stereos?” No, seriously, he really said that.) It’s a real redneck-o-rama. It’s quite embarrassing, really.
Anyway, Big Phil was all worked up about, get this, a new anti-war song by Merle Haggard. Apparently Merle also posted some comments on his website saying the "problems aren’t in Iraq" and that we need to "look inward" and reduce our dependence on foreign oil and start rebuilding our own highways and bridges. Yep, sounds like old Merle has gone off the reservation. Big Phil was giving that traitor Merle down the road and invited callers to agree.
The first guy said his son was over there in Iraq on his second tour of duty. He was understandably upset. He said the song is an insult, like sending a letter to his son with one of those "Muslim stamps" the Post Office sells. He said it’s like a "bullet to the head" for our troops, and it don’t do nothing but help "the Communists" over there. (No, seriously, he really said that.) He was a big fan of Merle Haggard before, but he ain’t buying no more Merle Haggard records, nor any other records on that label, and he’s taking his whole collection of Merle Haggard records out to the trash.
Big Phil concurred. But then it got interesting.
Next up was another guy who said his son was over there. He thinks Merle is right. He supports his son and the rest of the troops for doing their patriotic duty, but thinks that the war is unjustified and questions why we are there. He compared it to Vietnam.
Big Phil was flabbergasted.
Then, a truck driver called in. I believe he said he was former military. He, too, agreed with Merle. And he doesn’t think we have any business in Iraq.
Big Phil can’t believe it. He asked the guy, "So you’re saying you think we should bring back our troops?"
The guy said "I’m saying they shouldn’t have never been over there in the first place."
Big Phil is flummoxed. He started rambling on about "these people" but I couldn’t take any more and had to turn it off.
I know it’s a pretty small sample with a huge margin of error (and I’m sure the "real patriots" piled on later in the show), but by my count that was 2 to 1 against the war and for Merle. And these weren’t some radical peace activists. These were your "pickup-truck-with-a-gun-rack-driving Confederate-flag-waving good ol’ boys down South" that Howard Dean was talking about.
So, what does this mean? It could mean that Bush and the Neocon War Profiteers are losing the carefully cultivated core of their base that they have previously been so successful in manipulating. It could mean trouble for them and their agenda.
The Mrs. said her theory is that these guys have been watching TV reports from the hurricane-stricken Gulf Coast and they’ve finally seen with their own eyes that the government doesn’t really care about "regular people" and can’t be trusted. If she’s right and there is a sense of betrayal finally sinking in and causing folks to wake up and start asking questions, it could indeed mean trouble for the right-wing agenda.
OK, then.
15 Comments:
Meanwhile, at the other end of the financial spectrum: "Bashing Bush in Aspen"... by Robert "The Enforcer" Novak.
Phil Williams is usually a pretty level-headed guy but he does tend to cater to the redneck demographic. It's worse when one of the local yahoo regulars calls in and babbles for 5 minutes about gays or whatever else. Feh.
So, they still broadcast from Coal Creek Armory?
-SayUncle
So, they still broadcast from Coal Creek Armory?
Yeah, that's the place.
Rush Limbaugh and Larry the Cable Guy, except not as smart.
Now, that's dumb. Larry the Cable Guy is smarter than he acts. I tend to towards conservatism but Limbaugh's an intellectual lightweight.
Very good question about losing the base. I wonder if the Republican Party is losing its base or if Bush is losing his base or both? I suspect Bush is losing his base more than the Republican Party. We'll find out during the next election.
Bet you anything Bush doesn't win the next election. ;-)
As for Katrina proving that the government doesn't really care about the common folk... who is responsible for that perception? If Katrina proves anything at all it's that the government (Feds or local, but Feds in particular since apparently people don't have much expectations of their local governments) isn't God.
Well... duh. The Feds aren't God.
As for losing the base... most people I know who voted for Bush either agreed with, or found terribly funny, the sentiment that they were going to vote for Bush while they held their nose. The unthinking lockstep *thang* is a myth.
The talk show guys are selling a product that requires a certain over the top drama and controversy. Sometimes they're wrong, sometimes they are right, quite often they are offensive. Their job, though, is to be entertaining.
OTOH, there's a certain apalling element to repeated calls to examine how this is "All Our Fault." It is perhaps unfortunate that questions more limited in scope get lumped in with those prominent... ah... gentle persons who insist that civilians in NY deserved what they got. (Moore, Churchill, etc.) It's a bit like insisting that the victim of abuse examine her own behavior.
It's offensive.
I'm registered with a political party that is neither the Rebulicans nor Democrats so I couldn't say about the Republicans losing their base. I suspect that it's wishful thinking though. Those of us watching what's going on with the Dems can't imagine how their entire party isn't imploding, what with elected persons making the most incredible statements about how the whole world will end because a judge candidate isn't a foaming at the mouth pro-abortionist.
Just on logic here... if the Democratic base seems stable to you, take on faith that the Republican base is stable as well.
My sample is probably as small as yours because of the answer to the question, "How do you talk to a Conservative?"
...You can't, Actually!
But I am seeing more and more of the same sentiment among the ones that still have a brainwave: Iraq was a mistake...Support our troops...Bring them home.
I have fairly serious questions about what happens if we just load up and come home, but I am beginning to believe that the long term cost of staying is greater.
The base erodes at the point where expectation collides with reality.
Defining those as having a "brain wave" left as those who agree with you is... okay, it's one way to avoid having to try to understand the other side because you've defined them in a such a way that they can be dismissed. It leaves no room whatsoever for honest disagreement or loyal opposition.
And if every "you may have a point there" or hint of disagreement is met with a triumphant howl of "They are splintering! Their base is abandoning ship!" who is more demanding of lock-step adherence to the party line? You or them?
Somebody made the Dauo Report.
Synova:"what with elected persons making the most incredible statements about how the whole world will end because a judge candidate isn't a foaming at the mouth pro-abortionist"
I wonder if you could provide a link to whichever Democrat said this?
I don't think that its out of line to expect someone who is applying to a LIFETIME appointment to the most powerful position in the most powerful court in the land to answer a few questions. But that's just me I guess.
Synova said: most people I know...
Well there is a scientific sampling if I have seen one. Kind of like Fox News when they say "Some people say...." Who can argue with population sampling like that? But I got a feeling Synova gets all his info from Fox anyways.
This is getting scrolled way down and probably replying is pointless...
First, Yup... "most people I know" isn't a scientific sample. Wow, you get and "A+". Good for you!
Chances are that I know different people than you know and they are, well, different than the people you know, but I suppose that isn't important to know that there are people with other attitudes than the ones you know. Unless, of course, it's a scientific sample of people who don't know.
As for the other... it was hyperbole. My mistake. I assumed (oops!) that everyone would figure out easily enough that it was meant to be over the top, that it wasn't meant to be a quote. OTOH, it does seem to be a reasonably accurate amalgomation of objections to Roberts... oh, and complaints that his wife and kids dressed up in, gasp!, pastels. Oh, too contrived, too conservative. And that his daughter has a shiny blond page-boy.
As for questions... what questions were asked anyhow? Apparently Feinstein wanted to know what kind of a father he was. Other than that, did they ask anything other than hypothetical questions about how he'd rule on cases he hasn't heard?
Yup... lottsa good reason to oppose the guy. He refused to assure everyone that he'd vote a certain way on cases he hasn't heard yet. How dare he?
Was my "failing to be a foaming at the mouth pro-abortionist" really that far out? Do people really not understand the concept of ruling according to the consitution and the law rather than according to your personal feelings?
Apparently not.
Hyperbole, generalizations and stereotypes. Building blocks of a strong rightwing argument.
Pot and kettle my friend.
It really is funny though, how personal experience becomes illegitimate when someone elses doesn't agree with yours.
My personal experience that persons who voted for Bush did so with a certain amount of humor doesn't have to be more than an anecdote to disprove the general idea that a previously unquestioning loyalty has been breached. It can't be breached because it never existed.
Now you've got a choice. You can believe that the Republican's are losing their base, somehow, because that would be good news to you. Or you can wonder if, perhaps, your view of the Republicans is similar to the Republican's veiw of you.
And isn't hyperbole legitimate when emphasizing the fact that this is the not necessarily legitimate way the other side views the Dems since my purpose was to illustrate that the distortions may well apply the other direction as well?
I'm sorry I hit your buttons so that my purpose was obscured. The Republicans are not losing their base. Just because it seems that way to you doesn't make it so. It seems to conservatives that the Democratic party is imploding before their eyes. If you think they are wrong about that, it makes sense to examine your own reasoning when it comes to your own secret hopes concerning the Republicans.
What I'm not doing is posting some ode to party loyalty. I chose to register with a different political party some time ago. They can't lose me because I'm already gone.
Synova: What I saw/read of the Roberts softball session showed him treating the senators like they were incompetent lawyers and he was the experienced expert witness. He consistently (as far as I saw) refused to give substantive answers to much of anything, choosing instead to offer meaningless legal minutia. If the dems had a spine, they would filibuster the jerk at least until he chose to answer the questions.
The very idea of someone finding humor in voting for the Insane Horse Wiggler makes me want to throw up. I remember back when some folks actually cared about the nation.
Post a Comment
Return to Facing South's main page