When Tea Party organizers say Take back your country

For some reason, they are racist haters and homophobes. How dare the Tea Party stand on the Constitution! When James Carville said it after the Democratic flop of 2004, well, it was just the coach laying out strategy (and it worked in 2006 by pretending to be moderate, middle of the road, core values candidates). "The book is organized under chapter headings from the Constitution, such as "The Common Defence," "Insure Domestic Tranquility," and "Establish Justice," under which he presents brief essays on Homeland Security, the deficit, jobs, the environment, etc."





The leftist media can say "Bush regime" thousands of times during his administration (a search of the Nexis database for "Bush regime" yields 6,769 examples from January 20, 2001 to the present) to proclaim their dislike, demean the war effort, and throw out road blocks to fight terrorism at home and abroad, but if Rush Limbaugh says "Obama regime," he becomes a racist who is accusing Obama of nefarious behavior, an act needing more government regulation of free speech. Drudge Report, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are somehow a threat to the most powerful man in the world, a man supported uncritically by the little watched broadcast media and cable news and opinion shows, leader of the formerly most wealthy country in the world just by criticizing him.

Meanwhile, the federal appeals court today has ruled that the FCC doesn't have the authority to require "net neutrality." This is not a ruling about the good guys and bad guys of free speech, but big and bigger. Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and eBay all have lobbied for net neutrality and stand to profit from it. This court ruling is a setback not only for the Obama administration, but also for Obama's corporate allies in the fight according to the Washington Examiner.

Short memory--the paranoid conspiracies of the right, never the left

Thomas Frank at the Tilting Yard in the WSJ today displays a very short memory. The only paranoid conspiracies and talkers he can think of are all appearing on Fox News. He's forgotten Rosie and the Dixie Chicks; Carville and Dean; Carter and Gore; Rahm and Dunn; Moore and Soros. I guess he got the Obama memo on denigrating Fox. Next he’ll be touting volunteerism and green tips. He apparently doesn’t remember the Hollywood stars and talkers who bought into the conspiracy theories about 9/11, accusing George Bush of plotting the whole thing; or the Katrina Hurricane when an entire state and city firmly in control of Democrats managed to blame President Bush for years of their neglect, Corps of Engineers, environmental EPA decisions, etc.; nor does he remember all the Democrats who pounded the podiums about WMD in the late 90s when they thought Al Gore was going to be President; or how the Republicans were accused of stealing not only the 2000 election but the 2004; and who can forget the Patriot Act conspiratists? And have you read Janet Napolitano's latest dictionary of terrorism words? I mean before it got pulled for really, really bad press. Wow. Talk about paranoid. It's her middle name! And who could be kookier than the global warmists? They make the birthers look absolutely reasonable, but with less evidence. Yes, Mr. Frank, Mr. Pseudo-journalist, you ought to see a doctor--your short term memory is really slipping.

Carville on the 2004 loss

I saw this at The Chief Source, a Democrat blog, in November 2004.

MR. CARVILLE: The purpose of a political party in a democracy is to win elections. We're not doing that well enough, and I think that we can't deny that the problem exists. I think we have to confront the problem. And by and large, our message has been we can manage problems, while the Republicans, although they will say we can solve problems, they produce a narrative. We produce a litany. They say, "I'm going to protect you from the terrorists in Tehran and the homos in Hollywood." We say, "We're for clean air, better schools, more health care." And so there's a Republican narrative, a story, and there's a Democratic litany. And, you know, at a point, you look at 45 Senate seats, you look at a lost presidential election, and you say, "We have to rethink this thing." I really believe that.

MR. RUSSERT: But you're suggesting the Democrats lost, that George Bush didn't win.

MR. CARVILLE: Well, I'm suggesting--look, I said both. I gave him enormous credit. I said it was the signature political achievement of my life, but it wasn't just this election--and I think it's an election that people wanted change. I think if we had produced--the party itself--I just don't want to focus on Senator Kerry or his campaign. This is not the first election that we've lost. There's--something is setting in here.

Now, having said that, my friends caution me, and they're right. I mean, 48 percent--I mean, we're not starting in terms of shambles here, but I think this is a message to the Democratic Party: We need to produce a narrative. We need to be more about solving problems as opposed to managing them, and I think it's going to be interesting to see how it comes out.

Now it's the Republicans saying we're for clean air, better schools, and more health care, and the Democrats are for hope and change. They've switched focuses. Democrats decided they don't win with Hollywood and have gone to church. Republicans decided to go to warm and fuzzy specifics that sound good and offer nothing. It worked. Carville is one smart guy (he married a Republican). At that time (November 2004), Obama was preferred by 3% of Democrats, Hillary Clinton by 25%.

I watched all those weepy Democrats and sad faced media-folk in the post 2004 election analyses. They really focused on religion and cultivating the grass roots as the keys to winning (so long Hollywood celebs--see you after the election). And it worked--at least in Ohio--in 2006. We elected a former Methodist minister as our next governor. Very pious man, nice looking, good machine. But it really grates on my nerves to see him in ads for the state lottery.

Evangelicals have helped. The "emergent church" movement has decided the message of the cross isn't nearly as much fun as social feel-good topics and flashy worship services with loud music. So we can't give the Democrats all the credit.