How McCain Shed Pariah Status Among Evangelicals

[MTK]

You know a lot of those YouTube clips are cheap shots, but part of it is just something to spark some conversation. That's how news is today, instant info, react, and move on to the next story. And a lot of times the clips spark some lively debate here. Sometimes not, but it's not like all the talk here is YouTube clips and juvenile potshots.

[The Goat]

McCain never really became part of the inner circle to the Religious Right. W always was a member and that is precisely why his disastrous policy decisions and even more disastrous political appointments never caught up w/ him - dude had about 1/3 of the electorate sealed from day one and just had to piece together enough incidental constituencies to get over 50%.

I'll never forget a classic Bush tale that circulated among evangelicals in my neck of the woods. I heard it from relatives first and then started hearing it from acquaintances and even a few strangers: supposedly a local miner had the opportunity to visit the White House but did not want to leave his wife dying of cancer. He decided to make the trip and after his delegation met w/ the pres as a group Bush took the guy to a private room and said God was calling them to pray together. They prayed. The friggin end. Every time I heard this story I asked what happened to the miner's wife. Nobody knew the answer. In fact, the miner didn't have a name, neither did his wife. And nobody knew when this thing happened. Then I started searching for the story online and in every paper in the state - never found it. It's like a conservative political operative somewhere knows exactly what will touch evangelicals (I actually had people shed tears when they told me this story, but I noticed they never cried until they got to the part about W praying) and then the story just gets retold at church groups, retreats and wherever.

Most of these people don't give a shit about policy, which means they don't give a shit about reality. Helps to explain the mess we're in IMO. Don't think I'm knocking people of faith across the board though. I go to church. C.S. Lewis is a favorite of mine. I just get my news and knowledge from sources beyond Lush Bimbaugh, Hannity, Jimmy Dobson, and O'reilly.

[hooskins]

The far left are annoying and stupid too but they really aren't powerful enough to significantly change this country.

We always have hippies on our campus holding free tibet flags, and sometimes I want to go up to them and ask if they actually know what they are talking about. Good chance they dont, and they just do it to be "cool". And I am positive that is what is with those who are far right. Majority of the activist groups on my campus are like that too. All about talking about how they want to change things and all these big revolutionary ideas that are clearly not even practical.

My friend, getting sick of this stuff, started a genocide speakers series, which gets professors from around the US to speak about the issue and educate on what CAN be done rather fucking sitting around the campfire and singing bob marley.

END RANT....

[JWsleep]

The thing that most disappoints me about recent US politics is how very polarized everything is. And for that I blame Rove more than anyone. 9/11 should have been like Pearle Harbor; it should have brought the nation together. Instead, it was used to brand the opponents of Bush policy as anti-American. And it got wrapped up with the religious stuff as well. All to build Rove's "permanent" republican majority. That went well.

Meanwhile, it drove the far left off a cliff--conspiracies, embracing anything that's against Bush, no matter how crazy or potentially harmful. They kind of fulfilled Rove's plan.

Then this election came, and I felt pretty good: I liked both Hillary and McCain, and Obama seemed fine, though I didn't know much about him. I figured, hey, no matter who wins, we get something better this time. Than McCain embraced the Rove operatives, picked Palin, and it just spiraled back down hill. Is this really the campaign McCain wanted to run? How did he let it get to this nonsense? Palliing with terrorists? Unamerican folks in congress? It's just milking all those same divisive things and worse. Obama had the balls (unlike Kerry) to answer in kind, but it's a friggin mess.

Hope Obama can really pull in some moderate repubs and serious people to be in his administration. That would help a lot, I think. Chuck Hegel at DOD, Powell anywhere he wants to be, Warren Buffett, whoever. Just bring the country together! We've got some serious issues here.

(Steps off of soap box...)

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

The thing that most disappoints me about recent US politics is how very polarized everything is. And for that I blame Rove more than anyone. 9/11 should have been like Pearle Harbor; it should have brought the nation together. Instead, it was used to brand the opponents of Bush policy as anti-American. And it got wrapped up with the religious stuff as well. All to build Rove's "permanent" republican majority. That went well.

Meanwhile, it drove the far left off a cliff--conspiracies, embracing anything that's against Bush, no matter how crazy or potentially harmful. They kind of fulfilled Rove's plan.

Then this election came, and I felt pretty good: I liked both Hillary and McCain, and Obama seemed fine, though I didn't know much about him. I figured, hey, no matter who wins, we get something better this time. Than McCain embraced the Rove operatives, picked Palin, and it just spiraled back down hill. Is this really the campaign McCain wanted to run? How did he let it get to this nonsense? Palliing with terrorists? Unamerican folks in congress? It's just milking all those same divisive things and worse. Obama had the balls (unlike Kerry) to answer in kind, but it's a friggin mess.

Hope Obama can really pull in some moderate repubs and serious people to be in his administration. That would help a lot, I think. Chuck Hegel at DOD, Powell anywhere he wants to be, Warren Buffett, whoever. Just bring the country together! We've got some serious issues here.

(Steps off of soap box...)

leave gates, put powell and buffet anywhere, and we'd be SOO much better off. seriously, those are real heavy weights that actually know what they're doing. powell gives him military respect and an advisor to counter his weakness there, and buffet basically ensures no one can call that a weakness - as long as he's willing to listen to their advise.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

The thing that most disappoints me about recent US politics is how very polarized everything is. And for that I blame Rove more than anyone. 9/11 should have been like Pearle Harbor; it should have brought the nation together. Instead, it was used to brand the opponents of Bush policy as anti-American. And it got wrapped up with the religious stuff as well. All to build Rove's "permanent" republican majority. That went well.

Meanwhile, it drove the far left off a cliff--conspiracies, embracing anything that's against Bush, no matter how crazy or potentially harmful. They kind of fulfilled Rove's plan.

Then this election came, and I felt pretty good: I liked both Hillary and McCain, and Obama seemed fine, though I didn't know much about him. I figured, hey, no matter who wins, we get something better this time. Than McCain embraced the Rove operatives, picked Palin, and it just spiraled back down hill. Is this really the campaign McCain wanted to run? How did he let it get to this nonsense? Palliing with terrorists? Unamerican folks in congress? It's just milking all those same divisive things and worse. Obama had the balls (unlike Kerry) to answer in kind, but it's a friggin mess.

Hope Obama can really pull in some moderate repubs and serious people to be in his administration. That would help a lot, I think. Chuck Hegel at DOD, Powell anywhere he wants to be, Warren Buffett, whoever. Just bring the country together! We've got some serious issues here.

(Steps off of soap box...)

Good post. I too find it disturbing that McCain hired the same people who smeared him in 2000 and ran the exact kind of campaign he was supposedly against.

[SmootSmack]

Interesting comments from Chuck Todd on the chemistry (or lack thereof) between McCain and Palin.

Hardball: Williams/Todd Discuss the McCain/Palin Interview + Interview Video

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by hooskins

The far left are annoying and stupid too but they really aren't powerful enough to significantly change this country.

We always have hippies on our campus holding free tibet flags, and sometimes I want to go up to them and ask if they actually know what they are talking about. Good chance they dont, and they just do it to be "cool". And I am positive that is what is with those who are far right. Majority of the activist groups on my campus are like that too. All about talking about how they want to change things and all these big revolutionary ideas that are clearly not even practical.

My friend, getting sick of this stuff, started a genocide speakers series, which gets professors from around the US to speak about the issue and educate on what CAN be done rather fucking sitting around the campfire and singing bob marley.

END RANT....

My pespective on this is slightly different. I equate the looney free tibets hippie types with nutso like the KKK in their ignorance. Not the evangelicals.

I equate the evangelicals with the left side of the Democratic party in their size, influence and distance from center. The far left and the far right both have too much power and CAN change this country if we let them. There's a reason this country has become more liberal socially in the 40 years. It is because the Democratic party moved farther left. Ultra-liberal social policies became mainstream. Now the Repubs are moving similarly farther right. We aren't very well served by either.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

My pespective on this is slightly different. I equate the looney free tibets hippie types with nutso like the KKK in their ignorance. Not the evangelicals.

I equate the evangelicals with the left side of the Democratic party in their size, influence and distance from center. The far left and the far right both have too much power and CAN change this country if we let them. There's a reason this country has become more liberal socially in the 40 years. It is because the Democratic party moved farther left. Ultra-liberal social policies became mainstream. Now the Repubs are moving similarly farther right. We aren't very well served by either.

I don't get this notion that the Rep. party has moved more to the right if anything they have moved more to the left. My problem with this article and the one that SS gave a link to above is that the leberal media is trying to influence the out come of the election. I know the right has Rush and those guys but on a more national type show they only have Fox. The liberal media does this CBS, ABC, CNN, NBC, MSNBC, PBR, and others just start thrown out everything they can to shape the minds of Americans. That would be fine if they did the same on both sides or they where frank about their left slanted articles. Atlest when you listen to people like Rush or Hannity you know up front that their bias is to the right. Main streem media hides behind their bias to the left and calls what they do as reporting the news. If you looked over the stories coming from these networks there is only negative reporting on McCain/Palin and I cannot think of one thing lattley (the weeks leading up to the election) were they have had any negative reports on Obam/Biden. Why do they ignore the issues on the left? Its simple they are in their corner and willing to do what it takes for them to win.

[hooskins]

I dont buy the liberal media crap, but for the sake of argument I'll agree.

You still haven't proven how the Republicans are farther to the left. I guess we need to make clear SS and I are probably thinking about the Republican base, and by moving farther right, it is more socially conservative. I would love to see anyone disprove that...

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by hooskins

I dont buy the liberal media crap, but for the sake of argument I'll agree.

You still haven't proven how the Republicans are farther to the left. I guess we need to make clear SS and I are probably thinking about the Republican base, and by moving farther right, it is more socially conservative. I would love to see anyone disprove that...

I mean there is definitely liberal media. MSNBC is the first that comes to mind, but it's not all liberal media.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by hooskins

I dont buy the liberal media crap, but for the sake of argument I'll agree.

You still haven't proven how the Republicans are farther to the left. I guess we need to make clear SS and I are probably thinking about the Republican base, and by moving farther right, it is more socially conservative. I would love to see anyone disprove that...

Conservatives believe in less goverment and look at how Bush has expanded goverment and what McCain has proposed. Thats not conservatism. We could go back and forth but I'm speaking on how I feel and not what I have been told to think. There was a pole done in the media and it was something like 85% said they voted democratic. I would perfer to post the poll but I don't have the time to search for it today. I will find the polls and post at another time.

[FRPLG]

Both parties get elected from their bases (right and left) then govern from the middle. The Repubs certainly have done this with all the spending but ultimately they got elected by the base which is more and more being over taken by the evangelicals. Blah.

[MTK]

I think this whole 'liberal media' has been seriously blown out of proportion lately. It's a right wing excuse for their last 8 years of F ups.

Good read on the subject here

What Liberal Media?

Move over to the mainstream publications and broadcasts often labeled "liberal," and you see how ridiculous the notion of liberal dominance becomes. The liberal New York Times Op-Ed page features the work of the unreconstructed Nixonite William Safire, and for years accompanied him with the firebreathing-if-difficult-to-understand neocon A.M. Rosenthal. Current denizen Bill Keller also writes regularly from a DLC neocon perspective. The Washington Post is just swarming with conservatives, from Michael Kelly to George Will to Robert Novak to Charles Krauthammer. If you wish to include CNN on your list of liberal media--I don't, but many conservatives do--then you had better find a way to explain the near-ubiquitous presence of the attack dog Robert Novak, along with that of neocon virtuecrat William Bennett, National Review's Kate O'Beirne, National Review's Jonah Goldberg, The Weekly Standard's David Brooks and Tucker Carlson. This is to say nothing of the fact that among its most frequent guests are Coulter and the anti-American telepreacher Pat Robertson. Care to include ABC News? Again, I don't, but if you wish, how to deal with the fact that the only ideological commentator on its Sunday show is the hard-line conservative George Will? Or how about the fact that its only explicitly ideological reporter is the journalistically challenged conservative crusader John Stossel? How to explain the entire career there and on NPR of Cokie Roberts, who never met a liberal to whom she could not condescend? What about Time and Newsweek? In the former, we have Krauthammer holding forth, and in the latter, Will.

[FRPLG]

To me the issue of a liberla media has nothing to do with columnists or commentators, which almost all of the conservatives above are. It has more to do with the actual news reporting individuals. When the straight news isn't so straight that is a problem. Bernie Goldberg's book on this is pretty good and it is hard to argue his points.