Notes from a Disgruntled Hollywood Conservative
My partner told me about this post by Los Angeles Times blogger Patrick Goldstein, where he interviews Michael DeLuca, a Hollywood conservative (a rarity) who is leaning towards Obama in this year’s race, but grudgingly. His words read like something I would say, heck it IS something I said. He liked McCain, but wonders what happened to the McCain of 2000:
As much as I’ve been impressed by Barack Obama’s ascension, I was sure that this year would be an easy call for me. McCain would have been my choice in 2000 had he survived the South Carolina bloodbath and won the nomination, and I was looking forward to having a chance to vote for him this time around. Then a funny thing happened on the way to the election. The McCain of 2000 vanished, and the man on the left who was supposed to stand for a new kind of politics proved he could pander with the best of them, in a decidedly old style of politics. Where to go now? What to do? Anguish has set in.
After the incompetence and cronyism of the last four years, fours years that I admittedly voted for, I swore to myself that this time I would be extremely well versed in all the issues and every candidate’s positions. I watched every single primary debate on both sides, I’ve read every op-ed piece, seen every pundit, heard every radio talk show host and devoured issue after issue of the Economist and Foreign Affairs. Through it all I’ve watched McCain 2008 with increasing alarm. The move to the hard right, that convention, the stutter-step on the economic crisis, the robo-calls, Palin’s positions and lack of gravitas, they’ve all stopped me in my tracks. There’s something more emotional than policy at work on me here. It may be shallow, but it’s affecting my gut and it has to do with the “type” of leader these men are revealing themselves to be. Disappointingly partisan and not transformative or maverick enough by half.
But don’t count him as someone who is look at Obama with rose-colored glasses, either. He thinks both candidates are not ideal by a long shot:
Obama’s initial painting of McCain as out of touch and caught in a perpetual “senior moment” insulted my intelligence and offended my sense of fairness, as has McCain’s shocking effort to paint Obama as anti-American. When I want to believe the myth of “Obama the messiah,” he opens his mouth and sounds an awful lot like the hell-spawn of Jimmy Carter and George McGovern. When I want to believe in the McCain of 2000, the man who decried the “agents of intolerance,” he then goes out and seeks their endorsements. Like many Americans, I operate out of a base of centrist common sense. It makes sense to me to not raise corporate taxes in the middle of a recession if you want to protect job creation and lower the risk of inflation. It makes sense to me not to give tax refunds to people who pay no income tax. It makes sense to me to not afford regimes like Iran the same treatment you’d give countries like the former Soviet Union.
On the other hand, common sense also tells me it is blasphemous to threaten something as sacred as the U.S. Constitution by suggesting we use it to deny people equal rights on the basis of sexual orientation. Common sense tells me it’s about time the right stops calling evolution a “theory.” It’s not. Common sense tells me not to trust the government to get between a woman and her doctor on reproductive rights, nor to trust it with the power of life and death in the form of the death penalty. I want the government to keep its boot off my neck, hands out of my pocket, eyes out of my bedroom, I want it to keep the playing field fair so people can achieve and not just collect handouts, and I want it to keep us safe. That’s it. That’s a common sense role for government. Where’s that candidate?
Where, indeed. But maybe the part of the interview that was telling was this:
Maybe it is unrealistic of me to be a pro-choice, pro-school voucher, anti-affirmative action, pro-business, pro-environment, pro-gay marriage, anti-death penalty, pro-globalization, pro-universal health care, pro-tax cuts, anti-pork barrel spending, pro-war on terror Republican, but that’s where I am.
I think this sentence is telling because it sums up what is wrong with the GOP and the conservative movement as a whole: it has become rigid, only wanting people who line up with some imaginary checklist on who is a conservative and who is not, instead of trying to build a coalition of people who may not agree on everything, but agree on many issues.
The people who are falling over themselves at the sight of Sarah Palin seem more than willing to let people like this go by the wayside and vote for Obama. The enemy of good is the perfect, and that is what is going to determine how long the GOP stays in its well-deserved wilderness.
Cross-posted at NeoMugwump.
10 Responses to “Notes from a Disgruntled Hollywood Conservative”
sounds like a Texas Democrate
The term “common sense” is fascinating. It's ceased to mean much and is mostly used to praise whatever we think is right. It's a term of approval: How could you disagree with my foreign policy stance on Iran? It's only common sense….
” Maybe it is unrealistic of me to be a pro-choice, pro-school voucher, anti-affirmative action, pro-business, pro-environment, pro-gay marriage, anti-death penalty, pro-globalization, pro-universal health care, pro-tax cuts, anti-pork barrel spending, pro-war on terror Republican, but that’s where I am.”
“I think this sentence is telling because it sums up what is wrong with the GOP and the conservative movement as a whole: it has become rigid, only wanting people who line up with some imaginary checklist on who is a conservative and who is not, instead of trying to build a coalition of people who may not agree on everything, but agree on many issues.”
That, in a nutshell is what is killing the GOP. Intolerance of dissent instead of pragmatism and coalition building continues to shrink the party base and turn off independents and moderates who can't stomach Republican stands on one or more issues. They insist, after electoral failures, on regrouping and going back to the same stale ideology, never realizing that many Americans disagree on their stands on the war, stem cell research and health care.
The Democrats have always been a big tent party, and since 2006 have successfully run Conservatives like Heath Schuler and Jim Webb, whose views fit their district or state. They are capitalizing on the ever shrinking GOP by expanding their base– unifying Americans instead of using divisive, hateful rhetoric. That is why I am a proud card-carrying Democrat.
This line gives pause:
“Common sense tells me not to trust the government to get between a woman and her doctor on reproductive rights, nor to trust it with the power of life and death in the form of the death penalty.”
The writer is pro-abortion, and anti-capital punishment. Talk about inconsistent! He'd destroy innocent life in the womb, and refuse to take the life of the convicted. Nor does the GOP have a consistent view on this, since they are only 1/2 pro-life, protecting the unborn, but executing criminals. A consistent pro-life ethic opposes both abortion and capital punishment. The only group I've found within a major party that does that is Democrats for Life, and if McCain loses this election, I'm joining.
Manchester, you read that wrong. Skip down to the last block quote for clarification.
Thanks, Dyre42, and you're right. I missed that part. Gov. Bob Casey and anti-abortion Democrats have definitely gotten my attention. On another topic, though I'm opposed to gay marriage, BTW, Dennis, I'm also opposed to a Federal Amendment defining marriage. McCain has this right, don't you think, let each state decide? Realistically, it will end up before the Supreme Court. Should be interesting to see how that goes, but next Tuesday, should be more interesting to see how Prop. 8 fares in California. Do you or Joe Windish have a prediction?
kritt,
the bigger spending party can always be the bigger tent party. That is why President Bush and Karl Rove thought they could buy elections with more entitlements and special government programs. However, in the long run, the people who voted for Webb may find out that they did not get what they want. Having the Democratic Party as the one, dominate party puts gun control, open borders, school busing back on the political agenda and puts every liberal Democrats in charge of Senate and House Committees.
What the Democrats know is that in the future, they will be able to ignore middle class whites where the middle class whites vote fro Jim Webbs or Jon Testers because there will be enough blacks and Hispanics to vote for high taxes and expansive governments.
SD- Busing went out in the '70's , LOL!
kritt,
You may want to tell the citizens of Louisville and SEattle that since they were in front of the Supreme Court last year arguing that race based forced busing as unconstitutional. The Supreme Court agreed.
Also, if the Democrats do not want forced busing, why do they invited Johnathan Kozol to speak at so many think tank meeting?
Manchester2, my prediction is that one day soon these laws will fall like dominoes. Anyone who reads the voluminous research on young people will agree that either they are going to have to radically change their minds on the issue or, as is more likely, they will overturn them as the older generation passes. As to the legal reasons for my objection…
<embed src=”http://blip.tv/play/lG3WjUyBolM” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” width=”1600″ height=”1054″ allowscriptaccess=”always” allowfullscreen=”true”></embed>