Yes Virginia, There Really Are Rational Republicans Still Out There

[Skeptic Ginger]

Apparently conservative David Frum, formerly a Fox News pundit among other things, has been thinking critically for some time, (Pundit changes view based on (*gasp!*) evidence)

Frum was interviewed on CNN's Reliable Sources this morning** about this piece in the New York Magazine:

When Did the GOP Lose Touch With Reality? Some of my Republican friends ask if I’ve gone crazy. I say: Look in the mirror.

During one unpleasant moment after I was fired from the think tank where I’d worked for the previous seven years, I tried to reassure my wife with an old cliché: “The great thing about an experience like this is that you learn who your friends really are.” She answered, “I was happier when I didn’t know.”

The CNN interviewer, "Host Howard Kurtz, Washington Bureau Chief of The Daily Beast", went out of his way to claim he wasn't agreeing with the obvious things Frum was saying about Fox's distortions. Makes you wonder what planet Kurtz lives on or if he's taken his media critic role as far as possible into the "but not me" zone, but I digress....

It was not so long ago that Texas governor Bush denounced attempts to cut the earned-income tax credit as “balancing the budget on the backs of the poor.” By 2011, Republican commentators were noisily complaining that the poorer half of society are “lucky duckies” because the EITC offsets their federal tax obligations—or because the recession had left them with such meager incomes that they had no tax to pay in the first place. In 2000, candidate Bush routinely invoked “churches, synagogues, and mosques.” By 2010, prominent Republicans were denouncing the construction of a mosque in lower Manhattan as an outrageous insult. In 2003, President Bush and a Republican majority in Congress enacted a new *prescription-drug program in Medicare. By 2011, all but four Republicans in the House and five in the Senate were voting to withdraw the Medicare guarantee from everybody under age 55. Today, the Fed’s pushing down interest rates in hopes of igniting economic growth is close to treason, according to Governor Rick Perry, coyly seconded by TheWall Street Journal. In 2000, the same policy qualified Alan Greenspan as the “greatest central banker in the history of the world,” according to Perry’s mentor, Senator Phil Gramm. Today, health reform that combines regulation of private insurance, individual mandates, and subsidies for those who need them is considered unconstitutional and an open invitation to “death panels.” A dozen years ago, a very similar reform was the Senate Republican alternative to Hillarycare. Today, stimulative fiscal policy that includes tax cuts for almost every American is “socialism.” In 2001, stimulative fiscal policy that included tax cuts for rather fewer Americans was an economic*-recovery program.

I can’t shrug off this flight from reality and responsibility as somebody else’s problem. I belonged to this movement; I helped to make the mess....

The article addresses the serious consequences of selling the Republican brand with such deceit.

Frum points to the distorted reality on Fox as seriously problematic because it is so successful. And they no longer invite him to come on. But he also suggests more than just a political conspiracy, rather selling to a market segment, as being behind some of the marketing of an alternative reality. Conflict sells news. The Murdoch business model has two sides, profit and politics, not just politics. A review of the bizarre roster of Republican candidates for the 2012 Presidential election demonstrates the problem when you try to market news and affect political discourse in the same breath.

I read a book a while back that was related titled, "What Orwell Didn't Know". It's a very quick read of 18 different authored short pieces on this topic. George Lakoff's piece from the book is online here. It should be a must read for all the Fox lovers in this forum who believe they are also skeptical political thinkers.

Now if only the Democrats can figure out how to market their world view without using so much distorted reality to do it.



**After the link scrolls on to future dates look for this archived piece to view it:

Media Monitor (Dec 11)
More Murdoch malfeasance, biased TV experts for hire and baseball's ban on scantily-clad journalists.

 

[Bikewer]

Pleasing to hear.... Does the fellow have any suggestions for a candidate?

 

[varwoche]

I was also impressed by the things Frum said.

Your characerization of Kurtz's comments impresses me as entirely off the mark though. I just replayed the interview and I'm at a loss. He handled it as a critical thinker and not as an amen chrous, and I appreciate that.

 

[R.A.F.]

My Dad was a rational republican. he died Sept., 2008.

In the year before he died, he expressed to me how disgusted he was with his own party.

I can't imagine what he would have thought about these current republican "yahoos", but I do know that he wouldn't have been happy about it.

 

[RandFan]

can’t shrug off this flight from reality and responsibility as somebody else’s problem. I belonged to this movement; I helped to make the mess....

I represent that remark.

 

[Quinn]

Best line in the whole piece:

Rather than workable solutions, my party is offering low taxes for the currently rich and high spending for the currently old, to be followed by who-knows-what and who-the-hell-cares. This isn’t conservatism; it’s a going-out-of-business sale for the baby-boom generation.

I think the going-out-of-business sale analogy applies to numerous other points of GOP ideology as well.

 

[Upchurch]

A remarkably well written and insightful piece.

 

[Stacko]

Pleasing to hear.... Does the fellow have any suggestions for a candidate?

Romney or Huntsman.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I was also impressed by the things Frum said.

Your characerization of Kurtz's comments impresses me as entirely off the mark though. I just replayed the interview and I'm at a loss. He handled it as a critical thinker and not as an amen chrous, and I appreciate that.

I agree when he pointed out correlation was not causation which Frum was quick to correct, but Kurtz's denial that he accepted as fact the lies one can find any day on Fox seemed incredible to me. It's not like there is a shortage of evidence supporting that claim by Frum.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The thing I liked best in this piece was the discussion the problem is not some oversimplified Murdoch CT to pump out political propaganda. The marketing to a niche market and selling news as a commodity (conflict sells) needs to be included in analyzing the problem. My thought is that the rational Republicans who contributed immensely to this train wreck, Luntz and Rove come to mine, are now sorry for what they wished for. Or perhaps I should say they may be sorry for the Frankenstein monster they built.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I represent that remark.

Have you learned anything about your thought processes that underlie your own conservative moral framework?

For example the liberal narrative is we all benefit from taking care of the weakest members of our society. The conservative narrative is that people reap what they sow.

There's a lot more to these narratives, of course, but they color how we see a lot of other things.

 

[Tricky]

I know a whole bunch of rational Republicans. Most of them are horrified by the direction the party is taking. They hope that when they dump this election, the party will say goodbye to teabaggers, birthers, anti-vaxers and so many of the ultra-right baggage that has labeled the party as idiots for the last few years. Frankly, I'm hoping that too. I prefer having an opponant I can respect

 

[RandFan]

Have you learned anything about your thought processes that underlie your own conservative moral framework?

For example the liberal narrative is we all benefit from taking care of the weakest members of our society. The conservative narrative is that people reap what they sow.

There's a lot more to these narratives, of course, but they color how we see a lot of other things.

Interesting question, shortly after leaving JREF in 2009 I read the George Lakoff book Don't Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate--The Essential Guide for Progressives.

I highly recommend it. Any way, since my conservative sentiments were still strong I could easily see how framing influenced my views.

FTR: I very much believe that Demorats are not immune from framing. I see a lot of blind acceptance of left wing ideology. I believe there are trade offs for different philosophies and I think we should be skeptical of any political party. I don't believe that it is a matter of good (Democrat) vs evil (Republican) but I also do not buy into the idea of equivalency.

Bottom line, because of the dynamics of shifting social values the GOP adopted a strategy that relied on pandering to fears and prejudices rather than advancing rational policies. They also invested heavily in think tanks that focused more on sculpting public perception rather than finding effective policies. IMO: I want viable and vibrant opposition parties. As it is the GOP has gone off the tracks.

 

[RandFan]

I know a whole bunch of rational Republicans. Most of them are horrified by the direction the party is taking. They hope that when they dump this election, the party will say goodbye to teabaggers, birthers, anti-vaxers and so many of the ultra-right baggage that has labeled the party as idiots for the last few years. Frankly, I'm hoping that too. I prefer having an opponant I can respect

IMO: We are seeing the storm before the calm. Conservatives see the writing on the wall. The cultural war is lost. People are leaving religion in droves and each successive generation is more and more tolerant of gays and lesbians and less influenced by fear and prejudice.

 

[Upchurch]

I know a whole bunch of rational Republicans.

I know a couple of used-to-be rational Republicans. I've watched them evolve over the years into the mindset described in the OP article. Now, at least, I have an insight into why.

 

[LSSBB]

Bottom line, because of the dynamics of shifting social values the GOP adopted a strategy that relied on pandering to fears and prejudices rather than advancing rational policies. They also invested heavily in think tanks that focused more on sculpting public perception rather than finding effective policies. IMO: I want viable and vibrant opposition parties. As it is the GOP has gone off the tracks.

+1

Of course, in feeling my party has been hijacked by the extreme, I am speaking of the national Republican Party. In my own state of Illinois, corrupt as it is, there is no real difference between the parties, they are in it for what they can get out of it for themselves and their friends, not for any public good except as lip service to get re-elected.

 

[tyr_13]

Bookmarked, and sending it to some Republican friends so they know they are not alone.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Interesting question, shortly after leaving JREF in 2009 I read the George Lakoff book Don't Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate--The Essential Guide for Progressives.

I highly recommend it. Any way, since my conservative sentiments were still strong I could easily see how framing influenced my views.

Lakoff is great for gaining insight into this. His short piece I linked to above should be required reading for critical thinkers.

FTR: I very much believe that Demorats are not immune from framing. I see a lot of blind acceptance of left wing ideology. I believe there are trade offs for different philosophies and I think we should be skeptical of any political party. I don't believe that it is a matter of good (Democrat) vs evil (Republican) but I also do not buy into the idea of equivalency.

Preacher meet choir. My underlying moral values lean toward the humanitarian left (not the equal wealth distribution left). But I am often bothered by my anti-war, anti-corporate liberal friends who see the world as over-simplistically as the NeoCon right wingers do.

Bottom line, because of the dynamics of shifting social values the GOP adopted a strategy that relied on pandering to fears and prejudices rather than advancing rational policies. They also invested heavily in think tanks that focused more on sculpting public perception rather than finding effective policies. IMO: I want viable and vibrant opposition parties. As it is the GOP has gone off the tracks.

That's funny. Take a look at what Lakoff had to say about that:

From my link in the OP:

What Orwell Didn't Know About the Brain, the Mind, and Language; GEORGE LAKOFF

New Democratic think tanks haven't helped much. The problem is that they are policy think tanks. They mistakenly think that "rational" programs and policies constitute political ideas. They don't understand unconscious thought. It's the unspoken ideas behind the programs and the policies - the worldviews, deep frames, metaphors, and cultural narratives - that need to be changed in the public mind. Only one progressive think tank, the Rockridge Institute , is even working in this direction. Its handbook for progressives, Thinking Points, applies the study of mind to the cause of truth.

I want to see the term, "thinking points" be adopted by the Dems. Unfortunately the Rockridge Institute is no more. Not a promising sign.

 

[RandFan]

Lakoff is great for gaining insight into this. His short piece I linked to above should be required reading for critical thinkers.

Preacher meet choir. My underlying moral values lean toward the humanitarian left (not the equal wealth distribution left). But I am often bothered by my anti-war, anti-corporate liberal friends who see the world as over-simplistically as the NeoCon right wingers do.

That's funny. Take a look at what Lakoff had to say about that:

I should have read the OP closer. My bad.

From my link in the OP:I want to see the term, "thinking points" be adopted by the Dems. Unfortunately the Rockridge Institute is no more. Not a promising sign.

Agreed.

 

[Minoosh]

I'm doing some work helping filmmakers identify prospects for a documentary. Despite my repeated nudges toward moderate/mainstream Republicans, they were interested only in "Tea Party types" until a couple of weeks ago. Then I started getting requests for moderate Republicans.

I find candidates for inclusion, without no say in the final product, and I don't ask a lot of questions. It seems this was stirred in part by the ascendancy of Newt Gingrich (as well as the flame-out of Perry, Cain, and the perceived irrelevance of Michele Bachmann) that pushed the filmmakers in this direction.

Where I live, there are quite a few Republicans who would qualify as RINOs (and who have been vilified for it). But there are others who come from Goldwater-era ideology - who believe it's possible to do too much for people, and that social programs should be evaluated on a fiscal basis - and in my strictly anecdotal experience, such Republicans are easier to find than they were even a few weeks ago. To me the shift started with Perry's characterization of Social Security as a "Ponzi scheme." It seems to me that the most blatant Tea Party/religious right rhetoric has burnt itself out, for now. There are just too many people in the country who are gay, poor, uninsured, intellectual or "of color." For what this is worth, I've detected a shift in mood - a bit more practical and forward looking, a bit less outraged and xenophobic - that may reflect a desire for a serious candidate to represent the GOP, and for serious Republicans to compete in the primary.