The Death of Moderation: Republicans Have Become a Party of Naysayers

[sysop]

Mitt Romney has succeeded in securing the Republican nomination in Tampa this week. And while he may want to govern as a statesman, he won't be able to count on his party for support. For years, many US conservatives have given up political responsibility in favor of hardline ideology.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...852817,00.html

[lwjr]

Germans, how did Der Spiegel get infiltrated by a bunch of Ossies with leftists views? Republicans are the only moral voters left inthe USA. Everyone else is on the govt payroll.

[roman_gregori@yahoo.com]

What on earth are you mumbling about??

[titus_norberto]

During my MBA at Macquarie University in Sydney I asked my lecturer of Strategic Management, a young Jewish American lad, about the triviality and simplicity of the topics for discussion during presidential campaigns, his answer was blunt: “USA is such a convoluted aggregation of conflictive interests forcing the candidates to talk no more than trivialities. Any serious discussion of policy wold meant losing the election straight away”.

Well, that was a great startingpoint regarding the usefulness of the political campaigns in USA and elsewhere.

In modern TV democracies (the famous American journalist Vance Packard warned US of the death of the American democracy at the hands of the entertainers as early as mid 1950’s during Nixon’s election as Governor of California exploiting the mass media apparatus, especially TV) the IMAGE is far more important than the speech.

In the same way we watch sports on TV hearing the rumble of the commentators chatting non-stop in the background (a “Fraudian doctor” might link this phenomenon to the voices of our parents while we are in the womb) we do not REALLY listen to every single stupidity they proffer, we are surprised only if THEY STOP TALKING, thus, it is not important what they said really, they must talk about SOMETHING and we feel comfortable as we were inside our mother’s womb hearing the voices of our parents.

With the presidential candidates in campaign is the same, they want to be VISUALLY RECOGNIZED at ballot-box time, they positively know that none vote someone they cannot recognize by his face and the pitch of his voice, once elected it is another story altogether.

Since the choosen topic is not relevant to the election, the far best choice is to talk all the time about practically nothing or something catchy and lurid such as the theory that raped women cannot become pregnant and so forth.

Therefore, a presidential campaign is about imprinting your face inside your victims’ heads, not to convince rationally.

Another aspect of USA’s TV democracy is the fact that has been subjected for a while (probably after Kennedy AND brother murders) to an erosion I call “Parliamentarization” and I mean by this a systematic reduction of presidential power in benefit of the Prime Minister (Secretary of State).

Presidential power means the power of a monarch (a monarch in Aristotle’s meaning, not European feudal monarch, which is a quite different system) for a limited time.

This power has been drastically reduced, especially with the dynamic duo Kissinger-Nixon (in that very order), the Secretary of State (not elected by the people) is gaining power at the expense of the president, which is becoming a negotiator more than an executive, a CEO, much in the way power was stripped from the English kings especially after the Dutch invasion of England by William III Orange in 1688.

After the last successful invasion of England, the monarch became a “head of state” and the political power resided in the Prime Minister, but the position of Prime Minister belonged to the PARTY, that is the trick…

Take for instance Australia recently, a Prime Minister elected by the majority, Kevin Rudd, was removed in a secret meeting by the PARTY.

The media is still speculating about the party member who instigated the coup d'etat, to no avail, and I know why, there is not a single person, spurious INTERESTS did it.

In USA the same process is taking shape, “anonymizing decisions”, group of interests take control via the Secretary of State, specially the all-powerful Jewish lobby.

Thus, it does NOT MATTER who WINS, the SAME GROUPS of INTERESTS will manage the nation Behind the Scenes regardless by imposing to the token president their true candidate, the Secretary of State, Hillary, or Kissinger and so on.

The presidential system relies in the fact that decisions are taken timely and responsibly, I mean we all know who took them, in the parliamentarian system none knows who really take decisions, there is a mêle of people arguing under the mantle of an organization called “political party” (legal masonry I do call it) in order to disguise spurious INTERESTS.

Obama was “bocatto di cardinale”, probably the man best suited for the strategy of converting the US president into a negotiator as William III Orange was as “joint monarch” with his wife…, a period in which was invented the United Kingdom (UK), the Bank of England, The South Sea Company with main Konzern was focusing on the black slave trade, a vast migration across the channel of financiers, money lenders, rogues, gamblers and entrepreneurs from Holland (perhaps even an ancestor of President Roosevelt as well, family of a Sephardi family called Rosa Campo while living in Spain) landed in the London SOHO, and with the continental innovation of a wonderful drink called “Geneva” or Gin in short for the punters, to keep the populace if not quiet at least happy and confused.

[ahenobarbus]

Der Spiegel has great difficulty understanding today's Republican Party but it is really quite simple. Under no circumstances will Republicans accept that America (which is a historical reality older and deeper than the federal government called the United States) should become like Europe. Over the past 100 years we have made Germany what it is today and we will not take lessons in reverse because America has always existed as the place Europeans go to leave Europe. It is not possible to compromise on this any more than Germany today would compromise on the location of its borders. Obama's popularity in Berlin in 2008 is exactly why everything he does is anathema to Republicans. Seeing where Europe is today what is strange is that the wisdom of Republicans' intransigence about adopting the European social model should not be obvious to Der Spiegel.

[longknife]

I can easily be labeled an Independent - although I hate labels. I care more about a candidate's policies and character than what party s/he is registered as. I have beliefs that range from ultra-conservative [the absolute right of individual freedom] and liberal [the right of a woman to chose whether or not to have an abortion - AT HER EXPENSE, NOT MINE!]

I am a political junkie and follow it closely, including daily feeds about what bills and meetings are held in the US Congress.

For Der Spiegel to call the GOP "naysayers" is to completely mis-represent the members in Congress who continually submit legislation to help Americans - which are consistently blocked by the Democrat Majority Leader in the Senate - WITHOUT DEBATE OR DISCUSSION. Does der Spiegel call that naysaying? Clearly not!

And, as you well know from your own political problems - SOCIALISM/MARXISM HAS NEVER WORKED!

[longknife]

Originally Posted by ahenobarbus

Der Spiegel has great difficulty understanding today's Republican Party but it is really quite simple. Under no circumstances will Republicans accept that America (which is a historical reality older and deeper than the federal government called the United States) should become like Europe. Over the past 100 years we have made Germany what it is today and we will not take lessons in reverse because America has always existed as the place Europeans go to leave Europe. It is not possible to compromise on this any more than Germany today would compromise on the location of its borders. Obama's popularity in Berlin in 2008 is exactly why everything he does is anathema to Republicans. Seeing where Europe is today what is strange is that the wisdom of Republicans' intransigence about adopting the European social model should not be obvious to Der Spiegel.

An excellent post!

And, it is NOT Republicans who have tied up bills in the Senate for three years, not even permitting them to come up for debate. And, it is NOT Republicans in the Senate who have not even passed a budget in years.

Again, it's a shame such puff and inaccurate stuff comes from Der Spiegel.