Conservatives And The Environment And The Middle Class–UPDATED
Monday, November 24th, 2008At Pajama’s today, I wrote an article about the conflict between the economy and the environment and that when the two crises compete, the economy wins. It is not an either/or problem, of course. It is possible and important, I believe, for conservatives to have a cohesive message and coherent policy regarding the environment. Currently, we have neither.
The Left has both won and lost the environmental argument. (More by Patrick Ruffini on Leftist ideas that are old.) They’ve won in that most people now are convinced there’s a problem. They’ve lost in that the solutions are more stringent than a Pentecostal’s sin list. So, people pay lip service to the environmental problem, do what little they can and tune out. This is a an opportunity for conservatives.
The fact is, there are many conservatives deeply concerned about how to care for and protect the environment while addressing the economic and human concerns. Tied into this issue is a general lack of restraint and a corpulent life-style now in America symbolized by our big waist-lines and mind-numbing debt top to bottom. Conservatives are for personal responsibility and grown-up thinking and discipline. Caring for the environment in concrete ways conforms to that thinking.
Part of the problem with this issue is that it’s not simple in the same way that stem cell research isn’t simple. Complex theories don’t make for simple policy solutions. That doesn’t mean the Left has a complex solution. They have simple logos and simple solutions: “Hurting the environment is bad” is simple. Do conservatives have a simple response? Can the argument be reframed right now, especially, while the economy struggles and there’s a tension between expensive pie-in-the-sky solutions and reality? Will “waste not, want not” sell right now?
Another problem is that conservatives are against regulation and government interference and nanny-statism. How can government policy encourage responsible behavior without seeming coercive and take away rights or economic freedom? I’m not a smoker, but I bristle at the punitive government behavior on legal activity. To me, that means tax breaks and lots of press for things considered good behavior. What good behavior do conservatives want to encourage? Well, why not tax breaks for efficient everything–hot water heaters, windows, etc. But again, these retrofits take money, money that people don’t have right now.
I’m seeing problems as I write this and think out loud. The “right” solution means identifying the real problem. With the science so shoddy, good luck figuring out what the best solution is for fill-in-the-blank environmental issue. The problem, of course, is that the Left accepts this shoddy science on faith and crafts punitive public policy. The Right must answer, every, single, time. And we must be preemptive.
The Left has co-opted the environmental message and managed to irritate a lot of people in the process. The Right can do better. The key will be to simplify the message and make it relevant to economic realities. And another thing before I’m done babbling. I think the environment will retreat as an issue should the economy continue it’s slide. The Right doesn’t need to end up being a day late and a dollar short on an environmental message only to miss the more important message that has been their traditional strength–the economy and changing the American culture of debt. In fact, part of what undid McCain was his seeming irrelevance. He was holding environmental talks, extolled the fundamentals of the economy and sounded seriously out of touch.
Conservatives need to remember that citizens expect the Left to be fou-fou about the details and expect the Right to be solid on the big picture. We lost the big picture in the last election, played to our weaknesses and forgot our strengths.
James Joyner has more.
UPDATED:
The Left has become somewhat of a caricature:
The Youth Will Save Republicans
Monday, November 24th, 2008The Youth Will Save Republicans
Or they’ll have a good time trying.
David Frum on Rush Limbaugh: “Say It Louder Conservativism”
Tuesday, November 18th, 2008How about “say it snobbier pseudo-conservativism but really liberal elitism”?
Money quotes from David Frum:
“The Suburban voter who should be a bedrock Republican voter, these voters see a Democratic party that is no longer a threat to their money, but a Republican party that is a threat to their values.”
His interpretation of conservative philosophy: “As long as you don’t kill babies, anyone can run the U.S. government.”
“On our side of the aisle, we have a big problem. We have a party that is not serious about government.”
Cross-posted at RightWingNews.com and The Houston Chronicle
Patrick Ruffini: Senate Recruitment Project
Monday, November 17th, 2008Patrick Ruffini: Senate Recruitment Project
Awesome work at finding the “right” contenders in 2010. Go look.
Mommy Bloggers Get Respect, Conservative Bloggers Get Dissed–UPDATED
Monday, November 17th, 2008So, I’m watching advertising people and mommy bloggers erupt this weekend on Twitter. The subject didn’t interest me much–moms were mad at Motrin. I didn’t go look at the video, but gathered that it was disparaging to moms. Well, the ladies were majorly peeved and mounted a protest via YouTube and firestorm of rage coursed through their blogs.
Today, in my New York Times feed, what do I see? This:
By Saturday evening they were the most tweeted subject on Twitter. By Sunday there was a nine minute video on YouTube, to the tune of Danny Boy, showing screen shots of the outraged twitter posts interspersed with photos of Moms carrying babies in slings.
Bloggers began calling for boycotts. Bloggers asked their readers to alert the mainstream press. A few voices chimed in to say they didn’t find the ad to be that big a deal. There are a few more examples here and here.)
By Sunday afternoon a few bloggers and tweeters had gotten the ad agency that created the ad on the phone, to find they didn’t know a lot about Twitter and didn’t seem to have a clue that there was so much anger piling up online. And Peter Shankman, a public relations all-star who knows everything and then some about new media, was giving the manufacturers some advice:
I’m not siding with Motrin. They messed up, granted. I’m ok with that. Companies mess up all the time. They fix the problem, and it usually doesn’t make the radar screen. The problem is, Motrin happened to mess up at the expense, and in the face of, one of the most vocal, quickest-to-blog, “strongest-to-band-together-and-form-one-opinion-like-the-Borg” collectives out there - The Mommy-Blogging community.
Now I am NOT slagging on Mommy-Bloggers. Not in the slightest. Nor, am I saying they’re over-reacting to the commercial, which, by rights, was stupid and patronizing. What I AM saying though, is that Motrin will pay a MUCH bigger price, as opposed to if they’d messed up in front of say, “Construction-Worker-Bloggers.” Mommy-Bloggers are not a voice to be messed with, probably because they’re one of the most clearly identifiable voices on the web. You have a kid? You blog about said kid? You’re a Mommy-blogger. You don’t need an advanced degree in particle physics to see what these bloggers have in common.
Or, as one Tweet put it:
note to self … never piss off moms … especially twitter moms … they can be a nasty bunch
My Twitter feed also is filled with conservatives. The political folks buzz constantly about this and that, important issues, and The New York Times covers a bunch of moms ticked about a condescending pharmaceutical commercial? Sure, it’s newsworthy, but so is the rebuilding of the Republican party.
Part of the problem with the mainstream media is editorial. What and who they choose to highlight is not nearly as important as who they’re ignoring. And the voices on the Right are ignored. I don’t want to start a war with the MSM, but a little attempt at representing all voices–not just the mushy moderates who sound so sweet and “intellectual” to liberal ears–would be nice.
The Washington Post ombudsman (via Glenn Reynolds) said that there need to be more conservatives in newsrooms. Ya think?
Anyway, I like the idea that the power of a bunch of mad mommies at the bottom forced changes at the top. I’d like to see concerned conservatives bubble up from the bottom, too. But a fat lot it will do them, if no one pays any attention. The media seems to be making a concerted effort to NOT pay attention. It’s working.
Follow me on Twitter!
UPDATED: Here’s the offending video:
Cross-posted at RightWingNews and The Houston Chronicle
Iowahawk Leads The American Invasion
Friday, November 14th, 2008Iowahawk Leads The American Invasion
It’s about time we paid them back for the Beatles.
Oh Boy! Obama Is In For It
Sunday, November 9th, 2008The honeymoon is officially O-V-E-R. Those on the right have been polite but firm. Dan Gainor of the Baltimore Examiner sums the feeling up nicely:
Conservatives need to make that clear as day so the media don’t twist opposition into something it’s not. We support law and order and, as loyal citizens, we respect the office of president.
Now on to the opposition. It’s a given that conservatives oppose most of what Obama campaigned for. He will tax business even more than we do now, continue to increase the size of government and push a liberal social agenda that undermines the whole basis for American exceptionalism.
As such, he must be opposed – at every turn. Contrary to the desires of the left, Obama didn’t get a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. That means he can be stopped consistently. Rather than zone out for the next four years, conservatives must pressure Congress to fight the Obama agenda – even here in naively liberal Maryland.
Every bit of the Obama platform must be opposed. Card check, the destruction of the secret ballot, must be hammered as a crime against democracy. The misnamed Fairness Doctrine must be fought at all costs before it undermines free speech on talk radio. Heck, if Obama wants to order takeout, it’s up to conservatives to question that expense.
That’s because the media will not. This election proves every claim of liberal media bias and then some. Obama’s limited qualifications would be laughable if he were not the incoming president. But his empty-suit rhetoric went unchallenged by the media who almost wear Obama buttons during interviews.
Those on the Left are, as usual, impolite and erratic, but no less troubling for Obama:
No, Barack Obama made such outlandish promises on the campaign trail that buyer’s remorse is going to set in soon. In fact, it may already have.
“Comedian” (and I do use the term loosely) Patrice O’Neal dialed the John Gibson show on Friday night to explain that Obama’s election was nothing more than a propped up mechanism to falsely relieve “white guilt” over the idea that all white people are racist, and that they’ve now elected an “acceptable black man” so as to believe that America is now a post-racial nation. O’Neal went on to decry that Obama can’t and never will be able to get “black America” to forgive “white America.”
Man I’m glad that Obama’s supporters took all that “one America” stuff to heart!
But if Obama can’t make headway on a “chicken in every pot” or digesting most of Reverend Wright’s racism left overs, he’ll at least bring the troops home… right?
Have you noticed how since he’s been getting his daily security briefings that the discussion of bringing the troops home completely disappeared from his public speech? It’s also bankable that since he’s begun to see the high-level advanced intelligence on what our enemies are doing abroad, he’s regularly having to censor himself in private so as to not let all the profanity he knows be uttered in shock at what we’re actually facing in the war on terror.
Uh and oh. So, what is Obama, squished like a ripe tomato in a vice, to do? Wheeeee! Executive orders!
John Podesta, Obama’s transition chief, said Sunday Obama is reviewing President Bush’s executive orders on those issues and others as he works to undo policies enacted during eight years of Republican rule. He said the president can use such orders to move quickly on his own.
“There’s a lot that the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action, and I think we’ll see the president do that,” Podesta said. “I think that he feels like he has a real mandate for change. We need to get off the course that the Bush administration has set.”
Here’s the thing: I have more faith that the furious Lefties will squeeze Obama more than the spineless Republican squishes. However, the Republicans have some rather incensed constituents of their own to help stiffen spaghetti spines. Conservatives should not reward the terrible Republican losing streak. Mealy-mouthed undercutters should be dealt with and swiftly. Too much is at stake for the future of America. Republicans better be the counter pressure to an unchecked Obama.
Cross-posted at RightWingNews.com
Remember How The Left Reacted After Bush Won?–UPDATED
Thursday, November 6th, 2008Remember all the actors who were moving to Canada and France? I remember the hate-filled bilge. So does The Anchoress:
It has been wonderful - really beyond wonderful - to consider how differently most of the right has reacted to their defeat than the left did in 2000 and 2004. In the two previous elections, the left responded by calling the other half of the country “stupid,” “morons,” and “Nazis” - Jane Smiley called them “unteachably ignorant” - they indulged in high drama, sniffling “apologies” to the globe, and denunciations of their fellow countrymen as “lying between repugnant and reptile in the dictionary.”
And oh, yeah (eyeroll) George W. Bush was not “their” president.While you’ll see a few disgruntled extremists on the right say foolish, even ignorant things - and many throwing daggers at the sickening double-standards of the press - they’re not indulging in that sort of dehumanizing (and very adolescent) hate of their fellow countrymen or the president-elect. The reports they’re filing read very differently than those following the Bush wins. They read as grown-up, tolerant, open-minded discourses, not tantrums. There is a willingness to be hopeful, even in defeat.
And there is a determined respectfulness being offered to the winners - people who could not manage maturity and respectfulness in their defeat and who, sadly, are not always managing it in their victory, either.
And, if Obama had lost, can you imagine the temper-tantrum? Yeah. Yes you can!
UPDATED:
Liberals rediscover the flag. I just threw up in my mouth a little.
And remember, the press bias was for your own good.
And Obama will be good for the economy.
Something To Believe In
Thursday, November 6th, 2008What can Republicans believe in that can unify the party AND the nation? Fiscal responsibility. That’s right. Money. As in, the government is going bankrupt and with the economy constricting, tax receipts dwindling, and Barack Obama’s big plans all costing more money, what are the alternatives? Cut spending or raise taxes.
Did John McCain even mention cutting taxes? Um, not that I recall. He mentioned a government wage freeze. That’s it.
I’ve been reading Michael Gerson’s book Heroic Conservativism. Maybe I haven’t gotten there yet, but through chapter 3, he’s waxed poetic about Bush’s compassion (big spending for agreeably important projects) but said little about how mean it is to sock the next generation with this generation’s ostensible compassion.
Compassionate Conservatism has meant big debt. Big debt makes the person, or the state, a slave to the master who owns the debt. As much as oil dependence is a national security issue, indebtedness is a security issue. A global recession means that everyone’s money constricts. Those who need money, need it now. Can America pay up?
The Bank Bailout is like the new Hydra. Who knows what head this thing will grow. It’s bad news.
Republicans need to get back to being the party of personal responsibility. That message alone will stand in stark contrast to everything the Democrats stand for. Conservatives believe in the power of the individual to affect change. At a certain point, bills come due. Compassion doesn’t seem so kind, then. And Socialism will go one step further and make the individual a slave to the state. Freedom constricts when money is taken away. It’s just that simple.
Thomas Jefferson says it best, “Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.” And this, “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
Cross-posted at RightWingNews.com
Dr. Melissa
Donations
