About the Hate Filled GOP

The problem with not getting out and about is that you can form some pretty insular about people far away. In a recent discussion it was remarked that (my remarks quoted from a previous comment in italics):

I actually personally don’t know any GOP members who “hate gays”, perhaps they are a mythical bugbear put forth by the left or a small minority?

I think you’re in some serious denial about the Republican base. You stick to your elitist blogs and big-brained philosophers and tune out the Rush Limbaughs and the Michael Savages and the Joe the Plumbers of the world. The people who make up and rally the real base.

Now, this is reminiscent of a liberal diatribe/book I read some time ago about fundamentalism and conservative theology “stealing” Christianity from the liberals. The salient point I’m drawing here is an intended non-ironic remark the author made upon discovering during a conversation with a person at a gathering … when they found out that the person with which they were conversing was exactly one of those people. And to the authors surprise the person was intelligent and quite nice. This, I suggest, is a more generic phenomena. That those one the left, who characterize as those on the right, especially conservative Christians, as “haters” and “bigots”. When they actually, meet those they despise, in non-confrontational social settings are surprised that they are actually quite nice.

Church pot-lucks as social interaction, personal involvement in charity, and in general an open and friendly manner these things characterize rural and small town flyover communities. These are the people who make up the real base. If they also posses a natural suspicion of academics and the East and Left coast elitist intellectual movement who simultaneously would tell them how to think and act and despises them, I would suggest that intuition is not just natural but that it is right. Northern Europe is much further along in their social experiment and progressive change that those same said elitists want to implement. It is also undergoing catastrophic demographic collapse, has been hit harder in general by the recession, and in general if held up as an “example” of the benefits of progressive practices put into play serves as more as a really good … bad example.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

5 comments

  1. You haven’t explained why a Michael Savage has a national audience if hate’s not involved.

  2. Mark says:

    JA,
    And I’m unclear on why you think a variant on shock jock radio defines the GOP base.

  3. Mark says:

    JA,
    Oh, and I’m betting he’s syndicated in CA and the northeast … and that a big part of his audience, especially there, are liberals listening to him to validate their hatred or at least feelings of superiority over that “hate filled bigots of the GOP.”

  4. Boonton says:

    Last night I caught Hannity and he played a clip of a Congressman being asked about a comment Rush supposedly made. The comment was along the lines that conservatives shouldn’t have to ‘bend over’ for ‘a black President’. While much was made of the supposed liberal bias of the reporter asking the Congressman about the statement, I noticed (and correct me if I’m mistaken, I wasn’t paying close attention), that Hannity made no effort to either deny that Rush made such a comment or if he did that it was anything that anyone should care about.

    I can see Savage dismissed as a bit of a shock jock and a bit of a nut but Rush? Yes it’s nice that people in ‘flyover country’ are very friendly at pot-luck dinners and social gatherings. Guess what, academics also have very nice socials where I’m sure you can have a good time with friendly people. But you know what, believe it or not the majority of people who live on the East and West coasts are not academics. They are not ‘intellectual elites’. Contrary to the populist chic that many GOPers like to done, the East and West costs are not made up of one giant extended Harvard campus. (And the GOP is run by coastal intellectual elites, Rush made his fame as a NYC talk radio star, Sarah Palin was all but choosen by New York Times Columnist William Kristal, by far the Weekly Standard carries more weight in the Republican Party than any 4 midwestern states. It is the Democratic Party’s Obama who is the true example of someone coming in from outside the Washington establishment and upsetting the established order).

    Anyway, I notice here that Mark exhibits the usual intellectual problems of his party. Notably a serious confusion of style over substance. While I’m sure it’s nice that gays might be welcome at various Church pot-luck dinners, I fail to see what that has to do with the actual rhetoric and policies of actual GOP leaders.

  5. Mark says:

    Boonton,

    Anyway, I notice here that Mark exhibits the usual intellectual problems of his party. Notably a serious confusion of style over substance. While I’m sure it’s nice that gays might be welcome at various Church pot-luck dinners, I fail to see what that has to do with the actual rhetoric and policies of actual GOP leaders.

    You are an unfair debater. You talk zeitgeist on one hand and then when it suits you complain about policies of leaders. The claim was that the “base of the GOP” consist of gay-haters and bigots based in part on evidence of the popularity of radio personalities like Savage whose schtick is ranting and demonizing the Other. But, when I reply to that … you insist I’m exhibiting the “usual intellectual problems”. This isn’t that discussion.

    I grew up in Pennington in New Jersey. The East coast is not foreign to me, like perhaps the Midwest and South seem to you. I know there are friendly people on the East coast. I haven’t claimed, you’ll note, that the east coast is made up of haters. I’m refuting the claim that the base of the GOP is that however.

    Rush isn’t “a member of the Press” he’s a conservative entertainer. His bias is well known and established. It is the “Press” which has bias (arguably their bias is not entirely on ideological boundaries but aligns more in the manner of industry wide “accepted narratives and stereotypes” of each party as well as a strong personal party bias which often bleeds into their implicit assumptions).