How to Discreetly Feed The Beast

[paft.livejournal.com]

Recently, Eric Cantor provided a textbook example of how the GOP has been countenancing (and therefore encouraging) extremist rhetoric while pretending not to countenance (and therefore encourage) extremist rhetoric.

Right Wing Heritage Foundation Speech 5/4/10

Audience member at Heritage Foundation: My question is – and this is something I personally don’t understand…. in light of what Obama has done to leave us vulnerable, to cut defense spending, to make us vulnerable to our outside enemies, to slight our allies. How…what would he have to do differently to be defined as a domestic enemy?”

(Laughter and applause from audience.)



Eric Cantor (smiling, after waiting for the claps to die down) Listen, let me respond very forthright to that. No one thinks that the president is a domestic enemy. (boos) It is important, it is important, it is important for us to remember, we have the freedom of discourse in this country. And the president’s policies, the administration’s priorities, in my opinion, do not reflect the common sense conservative traditions on which the greatness of this country was built…

Here, Cantor makes a statement that’s been demonstrated to be untrue in the seconds before he made it, and is again demonstrated to be untrue by the audience reaction after he makes it.

“No one thinks the president is a domestic enemy.”

No one? Someone just said he did -- and a bunch of other people just applauded him for it.

A “forthright response” would be to say, “No, the president is not a domestic enemy merely because we disagree with his policies.”

But Cantor just couldn't say that. He knew being that "forthright" might have gotten him booed off the stage by those "no ones" who've been incited by the inflammatory rhetoric the GOP has been banking and encouraging for twenty years.

Comments

Re: On a sidebar

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Whoa, he did? Awesome.

The GOP needs to move to the right to survive. Even if it didn't, Bennett was not conservative enough for Utah. You at least have to admit that.

Re: On a sidebar

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Yeah Jeff, that's why the head of the Utah GOP was raising hell about outside conservative groups spending shitloads of money on ads to get Bennett out (including Club for Growth).

Re: On a sidebar

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Am I supposed to care about what the head of the Utah GOP has to say about anything?

Re: On a sidebar

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Not really. He's no-one of note. Right?

Re: On a sidebar

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Teehee.

Re: On a sidebar

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Oh, ok. Someone woke up on the wrong side of the teabag this morning.

Re: On a sidebar

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

That was actually a serious question. What makes the Utah GOP head an arbiter?

Re: On a sidebar

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Because he knows the state and would know who's conservative enough I suppose, since he has a pretty informed opinion. Moreso than the out-of-state right wing PACs buying up all the ad time against Bennett.

Re: On a sidebar

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Or is it more that the state GOP would prefer the guy who's the incumbent, the well-known name, and a proven fundraiser?

Re: On a sidebar

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Which really has nothing to do with being conservative enough, right? :-D

Re: On a sidebar

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Actually, no. Scott Brown's going to be a hell of a fundraiser this cycle - he's definitely not conservative enough for places like Utah.

Re: On a sidebar

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Scott will not be re-elected :-) Lucky ducky on the first shot, and considering how lame his opponent was, that will not happen again. Enjoy the stay Scott, but keep that truck running :D

Re: On a sidebar

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Maybe not, but that's kind of irrelevant to the point at hand.

Re: On a sidebar

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Not really since we're talking about perceptions of how conservative one person in a state known for being more liberal politically versus another known for being conservative.

Re: On a sidebar

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

So do you think Scott Brown is conservative enough for half the red states? Do you think they'll be turning away his fundraising help?

Re: On a sidebar

[telemann.livejournal.com]

He's not running for office in red states, so who cares?

Re: On a sidebar

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Okay, you can miss the point today.

Re: On a sidebar

[telemann.livejournal.com]

[ghoststrider.livejournal.com]

Well, Obama isn't running for offices in blue states this November, so who cares about his campaigning, eh?

[telemann.livejournal.com]

You're my hero.

[ghoststrider.livejournal.com]

Um, I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying.

Obama has been going around stumping for people, that's what I'm saying. The man, as President of the United States, is a magnet for liberal donors and supporters. The same thing can be same for Scott Brown. I don't know if he's going around stumping for people, but many have seen his success in Mass. and are thinking, "You know what? We can do that here too." So yeah, his campaigning and such is bringing some resources into the GOP, especially its extra-conservative faction (which doesn't seem to realize that Brown is, when we examine the matter, more of a moderate Republican.)

[telemann.livejournal.com]

I appreciate that, I really didn't catch Jeff's meaning because I was juggling entirely too many things at the time.

[ghoststrider.livejournal.com]

No prob. It happens to everyone here.