The price of populism in the republican party

[jonbig04]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Here is a pretty good explanation:

Quick definitions (idealism)

▸ noun: impracticality by virtue of thinking of things in their ideal form rather than as they really are
▸ noun: (philosophy) the philosophical theory that ideas are the only reality
▸ noun: elevated ideals or conduct; the quality of believing that ideals should be pursued

Make no mistake, it is not idealism working for Pabst, it is not on the basis of some ideally derived high minded intellectual concept.

It is an inner desire to return to a white male dominated time in American history, and to do so via very fascist pragmatic means.

Pabst in no way is saying "I have a dream..."

He is just an angry aging white male who is seeing changes he doesn't like and wants to return to a world and a time that was ideal for very few, and very harsh for most.

I disagree. Not that it really matters, but I think idealists are constantly trying to affect some type of perfection. Whether it serves their best interests or not is irrelevant. I don't think ideals are necessarily good, or necessarily bad..or intellectually founded or just plain dumb. Ideals are ideals...they are YOUR idea of perfection..period. Hitler had his, and I have mine, etc. Fanatical is just a way to describe the intensity if with which to try to achieve that perfection (ideal).

Pabsts ideals are strange, but not atypical. Believe me their are people in our country who take the opposite side, who openly advocate communism and the destruction of capitalism. I'm not sure which is scarier, their ideals or pabst's. But idealists they are and hopefully they cancel each other out.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

The difference is in that true idealists don't resort to violence to force their ideal on others.

Hitler, Mao, the early Popes, the Islamic extremists and of course Pabst if he could would force his beliefs and ideals on others implementing violence as the method of compliance.

Idealism stays in the mind only...the non idealists use the political process generally coupled with violent methods to force their "ideals" onto others.

The true ideal is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

That has only been seen in a few, like Christ, Buddha, Gandhi, King, etc.

They were truly idealists, the rest are not driven by principle but by darker forces that are not about ideals they would like to be exposed to themselves...

Thieves don't want to be robbed, murders don't want to be killed, liars don't want to be lied to, despots don't want to be ruled by others...it is a universal principle.

Quote from jonbig04:

I disagree. Not that it really matters, but I think idealists are constantly trying to affect some type of perfection. Whether it serves their best interests or not is irrelevant. I don't think ideals are necessarily good, or necessarily bad..or intellectually founded or just plain dumb. Ideals are ideals...they are YOUR idea of perfection..period. Hitler had his, and I have mine, etc. Fanatical is just a way to describe the intensity if with which to try to achieve that perfection (ideal).

Pabsts ideals are strange, but not atypical. Believe me their are people in our country who take the opposite side, who openly advocate communism and the destruction of capitalism. I'm not sure which is scarier, their ideals or pabst's. But idealists they are and hopefully they cancel each other out.

 

[jem]

I challenge the whole premise of Republicans driving away intellectuals. What a bunch of bullshit.

Professors have been liberals and socialists since 60s. Most professors are liberal or socialist because they are pissed they do not want to work hard enough to make money in the private sector. So why should their peers make the big bucks.

Almost every other, non gay, non jewish, tax paying intellectual is a Republican. Unless they are a politician.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from jem:

I challenge the whole premise of Republicans driving away intellectuals. What a bunch of bullshit.

Professors have been liberals and socialists since 60s. Most professors are liberal or socialist because they are pissed they do not want to work hard enough to make money in the private sector. So why should their peers make the big bucks.

Almost every other, non gay, non jewish, tax paying intellectual is a Republican. Unless they are a politician.

Agreed

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Doesn't fly AAA.

I hear the same excuse of "oh it was only a joke" or "it was only sarcasm" constantly from the right, when it fact it is a particular brand of specific slimy rhetoric made popular by Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, Levin, etc.

It is in fact an attack, a "poor me" false victim method that when called on suddenly becomes "just a joke" etc. It is not a good spirited laughing at one selves' own flaws while laughing at others. It is divisive in nature, and not intended to bring laughter to others. It is insidious, as the direct attack is made, then pawned off as not really an attack.

Reminds me of Coulter who after spewing venom and is called on it, rolls her eyes and twirls her hair playing dumb as if to say "I am only a girl don't blame me."

This is why kool aid talk radio is such a failure. You people are so angry all the time, you can't even laugh at a joke I poked at your worst enemies, the country club republicans.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

It was not a joke, why can't you just be honest about it?

At least when I hear Michael Savage screaming like a banshee I know he is at least putting on a good show for the audience...

Actually the country club republicans are not nearly as dangerous as the dumbshit sheeple voters who thought Bush was going to look after their interests while the country club republicans made out like bandits...

You can figure the dishonesty and corruption of the right wing country clubbers, it is the dumbass stupid people that are the most dangerous, you never know what they will do.

They might even vote in Obama...

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

This is why kool aid talk radio is such a failure. You people are so angry all the time, you can't even laugh at a joke I poked at your worst enemies, the country club republicans.

 

[Thunderdog]

Quote from jem:

I challenge the whole premise of Republicans driving away intellectuals. What a bunch of bullshit...

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

The Class War Before Palin
By DAVID BROOKS

...What had been a disdain for liberal intellectuals slipped into a disdain for the educated class as a whole...

...Republicans developed their own leadership style. If Democratic leaders prized deliberation and self-examination, then Republicans would govern from the gut...

...The Republicans have alienated whole professions. Lawyers now donate to the Democratic Party over the Republican Party at 4-to-1 rates. With doctors, it’s 2-to-1. With tech executives, it’s 5-to-1. With investment bankers, it’s 2-to-1. It took talent for Republicans to lose the banking community...

 

[hofficita]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:


Brooks shudders when he contemplates the sort of boorish positions the so-called populist republicans take. They're actually for immigration control and securing the borders. How quaint, but really, old boy, how is one to get decent help if you do that?

Pat Buchanan calls Brooks and his ilk kennel-fed conservatives. They represent the privileged country club republicanism of Bush 41, which could never win elections but by jove, they lost with a dashing spirit and elegant style. Then off to a weekend of yachting.

They would be quite content to be democrats except they don't care for those union fellows, not a Yale man amongst them you know, and frankly, those negroes and Jews are a bit off-putting. Now wouldn't you know it, these religious people have invaded "their" party and ruined it too. It's all just too horrible.

Wonderfully written. Thanks.

 

[jem]

Quote from Thunderdog:

first while many litigators are well rounded - I am not sure too many attorneys are intellectuals. But,
as a lawyer - licensed in two states - I can tell you this, there are a lot of lawyers who are gays, jews or politicians. I have always thought the profession seemed to be split around 50 - 50 based on their clients - plaintiffs and criminals vs prosecutors and defendants.

Doctors- do they even have the time or desire to claim they are intellectuals.

I dispute the tech execs numbers - no way that is a good number. They despised the plaintiff's lawyers and all the shareholder suits just a few years back. They could not have converted that quickly. If you told me they gave more to dems perhaps they were trying to influence immigration policy.

Are these numbers being derived by counting donations - that would not be an accurate representation.

It might show dems are more easily purchased. Like Dodd and Frank.

 

[Mav88]

Attorneys are creatures of opportunity, they will be whatever they need to be.

High income people continue to favor republicans but in smaller numbers. I think that is more significant than what some poly sci professor thinks. Income is a truer measure of useful intelligence in an information based economy, the market is never wrong. The poly sci jagoffs engage in mental masterbation and resent the hell out of pragmatic conservatives who don't want to pay them to be communists.

Conservatism use to be defined as economic mostly, and that had huge appeal. Now the Repubs have some idealogical strains and that has hurt them. Religion is mostly to blame, but so are some issues like immigration. It's too late to secure our border, too many have already crossed, so naturally libs will court them.

The good news is that liberals are idealogical, so when they fuck up the economy, there should be one more swing back. After that though demographics and immigration will take over and we will head down the tubes. Banana republic here we come.