- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
- Messages
- 2,443
- Reaction score
- 733
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Excerpted from “Confessions of a Tea Party Casualty; Why GOP Rep. Bob Inglis is looking for a new job.” By David Corn, Mother Jones, Tue Aug. 3, 2010 3:00 AM PDT
[Rep. Bob] [SIZE="+2"]I[/SIZE]nglis found that ideological extremism is not only the realm of the tea party; it also has infected the official circles of his Republican Party. In early 2009, he attended a meeting of the GOP's Greenville County executive committee. At the time, Republicans were feeling discouraged. Obama was in the White House; the Democrats had enlarged their majorities in the House and Senate. The GOP seemed to be in tatters. But Inglis had what he considered good news. He put up a slide he had first seen at a GOP retreat. It was based on exit polling conducted during the November 2008 election. The slide, according to Inglis, showed that when American voters were asked to place themselves on an ideological spectrum—1 being liberal, 10 being conservative—the average ended up at about 5.6. The voters placed House Republicans at about 6.5 and House Democrats at about 4.3. Inglis told his fellow Republicans, "This is great news," explaining it meant that the GOP was still closer to the American public than the Democrats. The key, he said, was for the party to keep to the right, without driving off the road.
Inglis was met, he says with "stony" faces: "There's a short story by Shirley Jackson, 'The Lottery.'" The tale describes a town where the residents stone a neighbor who is chosen randomly. "That's what the crowd looked like. I got home that night and said to my wife, 'You can't believe how they looked back at me.' It was really frightening." The next speaker, he recalls, said, "'On Bob's ideological spectrum up there, I'm a 10,' and the crowd went wild. That was what I was dealing with." …
Heh, ‘10’. I believe it. The conservative movement has driven off the road, through the weeds and into the lake.
Right Now - Why did Rep. Bob Inglis lose by 42 points?Why did Rep. Bob Inglis lose by 42 points?
On paper, the massive, 42-point defeat of Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) is tough to explain. Sure, he voted for TARP, and all Republicans who did so are experiencing some blowback in their primaries -- but how does an incumbent lose by such a swollen margin without some sort of horrible scandal? According to the Greenville News, he blamed it on his lack of partisan anger.
Inglis said he wasn't surprised by the outcome because of his controversial congressional votes to reprimand U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina for his “you lie!” outburst at President Obama and to oppose former President Bush's 2007 troop surge in Iraq.
He split with some conventional Republican beliefs and “the result was I haven't been a very good match with the partisans,” Inglis said.
Using an analogy to U.S. troops serving overseas, Inglis said, “If you’re in the Congress and not willing to fall on a political hill, then it’s not worth being in Congress.”
Actually, the last time most national observers heard of Inglis, he was chastising attendees of a town hall meeting for watching Glenn Beck.
They suggest that you watch Glenn Beck. Here’s my suggestion. Turn that television off when he comes on. Let me tell you why. You want to know why? He’s trading on fear. You know what? Here’s what I think. If you trade on fear, what you’re doing is, you’re not leading. You’re just following fearful people. So if you want to lead, stop being fearful.
Inglis's explanation for his defeat is self-serving, but he's also right -- Republican voters have no interest in rewarding bipartisanship that involves shaming other conservatives
'GOP watch: Inglis blames Palin and Beck
"Too many Republican leaders are acquiescing to a poisonous 'demagoguery' that threatens the party's long-term credibility, says a veteran GOP House member who was defeated in South Carolina's primary last month. While not naming names, 12-year incumbent Rep. Bob Inglis suggested in interviews with The Associated Press that tea party favorites such as former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and right-wing talk show hosts like Glenn Beck are the culprits.
"He cited a claim made famous by Palin that the Democratic health care bill would create 'death panels' to decide whether elderly or sick people should get care. 'There were no death panels in the bill ... and to encourage that kind of fear is just the lowest form of political leadership. It's not leadership. It's demagoguery,' said Inglis, one of three Republican incumbents who have lost their seats in Congress to primary and state party convention challengers this year. Inglis said voters eventually will discover that you're 'preying on their fears' and turn away."
Actually, you make my point that the most radical elements in American society are all that's left in the Republican party. They are all ‘10's’; mindless, ignorant ‘10's’.
Are you actually saying that everyone in the Republican party is a "10" on the scale meaning all are die-hard conservatives?
If so...
:rofl
Clearly it's not everybody, but it's a growing demographic for the GOP. Unfortunately for them, the extremism is tearing their party in half. You can't win an election solely with the votes of the "10's," but without acting like a 10 the candidate ends up... like the one in the OP.
In 2008 everyone ran screaming from the GOP because the country was tired of the right-wing authoritarian government we'd had for years. The GOP's conclusion? "Clearly we weren't far enough to the right!"
I'm a South Carolinian, and I voted against Inglis in the primary.
I'm one of those who helped give him the boot, and I'm proud of it.
Why? Lots of reasons. Inglis has been a poor representative of the wishes of his constituency in many ways, far more than I care to go into just now.
One of the big ones for me was when he came out in favor of far-left Green legislation, like cap-n-trade. His radio blurb said that his kids told him they didn't want to support him, because he was "going to ruin the planet along with all the other people that don't believe in global warming." Because of his kids saying that, he reconsidered his position and sided with those who think AGW is such a crisis that destroying our economy and putting a lot of our economic decisions in the hands of foreign intrests was a correct response.
My question was why the **** was he letting his kids set policy?
Lot of other things too, but he just wasn't the representative I wanted anymore, so I voted against him and I'm glad he's gone.
Assuming there is some left-right scale marked 1 to 10 with 10 being the "far right", whatever that means, I wouldn't be a 10. Maybe a 7. Part of the problem though, is that the far left has redefined this hypothetical scale so that they call a 2 a "centrist" and a 5 is a "right-wing-extremist". :roll:
Then I think pretty much everyone at DP can now put you on ignore and dismiss you as being not worth the time or effort to read.I consider conservative “10's” so idealogical that they would rather see America and Americans fail than to have it succeed under Obama and his policies.
The long term harm of Gov't giving people a "hand up" is what we are against. The unsustainable debt, the reliance on Gov't to exist rather than their own abilities. The VERY REAL damage to our economic system where Big Corperations know all they have to do is be "too big to fail" and take any risk they wish knowing DC will just "Bail them out again". These are BAD things.Are you one of those? Do you hate the mere possibility that some Americans might get a hand up by government from a bad situation?
I CHALLENGE you to bring us proof of Conservatives actually saying that people down on their luck are "******s", I want you to find Conservatives saying people should go to hell cause they are poor.Are you so extreme that you're ready to call Americans down on their luck a bunch of ******s? You want to say **** 'em to their faces? Do you think that if they can't lift themselves by their own bootstraps, then you think they should go to hell? And, their families, too, of course. Is that you? 'Cause if it is, if you would rather Americans fail than benefit from government help, I really think you are worse than Bin Laden. Yes, I do.
Actually, you make my point that the most radical elements in American society are all that's left in the Republican party. They are all ‘10's’; mindless, ignorant ‘10's’.
I consider conservative “10's” so idealogical that they would rather see America and Americans fail than to have it succeed under Obama and his policies. Are you one of those? Do you hate the mere possibility that some Americans might get a hand up by government from a bad situation? Are you so extreme that you're ready to call Americans down on their luck a bunch of ******s? Do you want to say **** 'em to their faces? Do you think that if they can't lift themselves by their own bootstraps, then you think they should go to hell? And, their families, too, of course. Is that you? 'Cause if it is, if you would rather Americans fail than benefit from government help, I really think you are worse than Bin Laden. Yes, I do.
Then I think pretty much everyone at DP can now put you on ignore and dismiss you as being not worth the time or effort to read.
.
ah yes, I see your logic: not supporting a Republican because he acts like a Democrat makes you a radical
“I hope Obama fails.” — Rush Limbaugh
Well, for all you conservatives who don't want America to fail under Obama's leadership, here's your chance to tell that America-hater ****, Rush Limbaugh, what a ****ing asshole he is. Speak up … now!
Wow, are you “pretty sure” Limbaugh didn't mean it when he said it? A successful America under Obama that abhorrent to you?
Wow, are you “pretty sure” Limbaugh didn't mean it when he said it? A successful America under Obama that abhorrent to you?
A successful America under Obama is impossible.
I consider conservative “10's” so idealogical that they would rather see America and Americans fail than to have it succeed under Obama and his policies. Are you one of those? Do you hate the mere possibility that some Americans might get a hand up by government from a bad situation? Are you so extreme that you're ready to call Americans down on their luck a bunch of ******s? Do you want to say **** 'em to their faces? Do you think that if they can't lift themselves by their own bootstraps, then you think they should go to hell? And, their families, too, of course. Is that you? 'Cause if it is, if you would rather Americans fail than benefit from government help, I really think you are worse than Bin Laden. Yes, I do.
!0's. Reading your posts, that's what comes to mind.
Conservative 10's.
America must not be allowed to succeed under Obama.
That's what they say. That's what they do.
Wishing Obama's policies ill will doesn't equate to conservatives voting for the end of America.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?