Increasing Signs of GOP Desperation
By Bernard Weiner, Co-Editor
Given how low the Republicans have fallen in popularity in the past several years -- mainly because of the dire economy,
the endemic corruption, the never-ending war in Iraq, the extremist snooping on ordinary Americans, a government that
doesn't function well in emergencies, torture as state policy, etc. -- given all that, one would think that the GOP
higher-ups would realize that John McCain is heading for an ignominious defeat unless some major policy shifts in the
party move it back closer to the middle.
But, no, almost as if they have an uncontrollable death-wish, the Republicans remain locked into a self-destructive
separation from the popular will. Either that or they simply are incapable of thinking straight after eight years of
sensory-deprivation in the dark CheneyBush spin chamber.
The public in general has moved ahead of the politicians in so many areas: opposing the endless Iraq occupation,
tolerant of same-sex relationships, eager to move beyond divisive race politics, desirous of effective regulation of
food and product safety, even more supportive of Social Security and Medicare, open to major health-care reform, etc.
Yet those in charge of the Republican Party continue to hitch their wagon to the old extremist shibboleths that play
well mainly to the fundamentalist and Old South base, which by this time is barely 25% of the electorate.
This status-quo tropism in the GOP may be great for Democrats in the November election, but may be horrifically bad for
the body politic in general, keeping in play the worst sorts of divisive, hate-filled rhetoric both for the presidential
campaign and the next four years in Congress.
Indeed, one could make the case that at least a good share of Barack Obama's popularity rests on the public's perception
that he is trying to move America away from the extreme rhetoric practiced by both major parties in the past several
years and back to a more rational, positive way of conducting politics in the 21st century so that something positive
actually can be accomplished in Washington.
SPREADING THE MANURE
McCain occasionally makes little noises about trying to rein in the rabid rightwing pundits and agitproppers out there
acting on his behalf, but he takes no practical steps, for example, to stop the filth from spewing out against Obama.
The clear implication is that he's happy to seem to be keeping his hands clean, while he gains from the noxious bile and
lies spread by those supporting a McCain presidency.
It's the tried-and-true dirty politics tactics perfected by the GOP masters of the trade: Roger Ailes, Lee Atwater, Karl
Rove, et al. Rove, by the way, is not as divorced from the political campaigns as he pretends to be; he is serving the McCain campaign as
a consultant.
Staring at a possible Democratic sweep in November and facing increasing unpopularity in the electorate, GOP strategists
are using all the old Roveian techniques of smear and distortion against Obama, hitting him and wife Michelle with all
sorts of claptrap bullbleep ("terrorist fist-jab," "flag-lapel pins," "baby mama," "whitey," "Pastor Wright," "not
reciting the Pledge of Allegiance," "not born in America", etc.)
All that nonsense about Obama being a Muslim, or not being a native-born American citizen, or not reciting the Pledge of
Allegiance, or not supporting Israel with enough fervor -- all the effects of those false rumors could be stopped in
their tracks if McCain, supposedly Mr. Integrity, stepped up to the plate and forthrightly condemned them and those
passing them around the internet. But he doesn't, and, sad to say, he probably won't.
ROVE'S BIG-LIE TECHNIQUE
Rove's theory of how to ruin your opponent goes something like this: It's OK to tell the most outrageous lies about
someone, even if those rumors can be countered by actual facts, because you're not after voters necessarily believing
what you say. What you want to do is to confuse them over time -- so that eventually they might think where there's
smoke, there might well be fire, that type of reasoning. It's propaganda chaff you're dispersing. Some of it will stick
and be believed, some of it will simply be ignored, some of it will remain floating out there in peoples' minds. Since
most voters don't pay attention all the time, the meme might actually influence what and how they believe and could pay
off on Election Day.
For example, I don't know about you but I've received countless anti-Obama emails aimed at voters, especially Jewish
voters, that assert that Obama is a Muslim ("check out his middle name"), and that he got hate-indoctrinated in
extremist "madrassa" schools in Indonesia.
When I was in South Florida recently, I asked a politically-connected Jewish leader how Obama was doing among Jewish
voters in that state. "Not well," he said. "A lot of Jews, especially older Jews, will not vote for him." "Is it because
he's black?" I asked. "Yes, many believe that way. But so many also believe Obama is, by association, anti-Semitic, that
he's Muslim, and/or that he would sell Israel down the river to placate militant Islam. The facts don't matter. They
want to believe all this nonsense." The beneficiary of this way of thinking, of course, is McCain, even though some of
his religious advisors have made clearly anti-Jewish (and anti-Catholic) statements, which, of course, were not
well-reported by the mainstream media. The point for many older Florida Jews seems to be that McCain is white, old, and
a gung-ho advocate of wars against Muslims in the Middle East. Ergo, even though Jews historically have voted
overwhelmingly Democratic, there will be fewer such Florida votes than expected for Obama in November, though the
Illinois senator is picking up much of the younger Jewish vote.
More examples of Rove's technique of spreading the Big Lie have surfaced in recent days. So desperate is the lame-duck
CheneyBush Administration and its huge energy conglomerate supporters to start pumping for oil offshore and in the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) that such GOP luminaries as Dick Cheney, George Will and Congresswoman Jean
Schmidt last week stated unequivocally that China was now drilling for oil 60 miles off the U.S. coastline. Pure B.S.,
not happening, but these GOP heavies just say whatever they want in an effort to move their extreme agenda. Even if they
have to retract, the time-release meme is already located deep in the recesses of the collective mind of the electorate
and, they hope, could pay off down the line.
THE INCITEMENT OF MURDER
But often, using such national leaders as Cheney, Bush and Rove as role-models (after all, they were able to lie and
deceive America into an unnecessary war and occupation), it's not just lies and innuendo and rumor being peddled by the
agitprop pundits of the HardRight. Sometimes the activity and speech of the GOP operatives crosses over the line into
downright incitement of illegal acts, for which nobody ever is criminally charged, of course.
For example, taking off from Ann Coulter's earlier incitements (she said that liberals are "traitors" who deserve to be
shot, a Supreme Court justice should be poisoned, the New York Times building should be bombed with the reporters and
editors inside it, etc.), two noted conservative pundits in recent weeks seemed to be suggesting that assassination of
political opponents was a reasonable political option in the name of victory.
Fox News' veteran reporter Liz Trotta recently said: "If it could," the U.S. should "take out" both Barrack Obama and
Osama bin Laden. And radio talk-show host Michael Reagan (Ronald Reagan's son) said that an anti-war activist trying to
influence U.S. military forces in Iraq should be tied to a post on a firing range and shot by the American troops.
In a similar vein, Andy McCarthy at National Review said, in response to the Supreme Court ruling that Guantanamo
detainees have the right to contest their imprisonment in civilian courts, the U.S. should round up all the detainees
there and just slaughter them en masse.
Laura Ingraham on Fox News was more circumspect about the court's decision last week, confining her opposition to
recommending a violation of the presidential oath to faithfully execute the laws of the land: If she were President, she
averred, "I would have said at this point, that's very interesting that the court decided this, but I'm not going to
respect the decision of the court because my job is to keep this country safe."
CAN WE ASSUME AN HONEST ELECTION?
There are more such examples, but you see the pattern. The Far Right, which has had its way with the law and with
controlling the ideological parameters during the past eight years, could well lose those powers via the ballot box, so
it's pulling out all the stops in a desperate attempt to stop the future or, at the least, to minimize GOP losses.
We all, but especially Republicans this time out, have to expand our thinking beyond the damage we can do to our
opponents. A former McCain stalwart parses it this way:
"Simply put: Republican strategists who think that business-as-usual -- i.e., the slanderous politics of the past 30
years -- will take care of matters this time around are deluded. Worse than that, they will doom the reputation of the
Republican Party and turn it into a marginal footnote of American history if they keep trivializing this historic event.
That is too bad because, as I said, we need a two party system."
As everyone understands, there is so much riding on the November election, which, one would think from the early polls,
should yield a major defeat for the Republicans. But this assumes that the November election is reasonably honest and
that, despite the GOP's voter-suppression maneuvers, Democratic or third-party voters come out in such massive numbers
that, seeing the overwhelmingly anti-GOP pre-vote polls and the post-election exit polls, vote-manipulators would not
dare fiddle with the tabulations. But if that Democrat/third-party surge doesn't happen and McCain were, say, to take
45% of the actual vote, the mainstream-media spinners could hype the possibility of a GOP victory in key states and the
Republican corporations that tabulate the votes with their secret software could serreptitiously make up the needed
percentage points for victory. (For more on all this, see Mark Crispin Millers' new book, "Loser Take All: Election Fraud and The Subversion of Democracy," and Ernest Partridge's articles "Where's the Outrage?" and "According to Plan?").
Would Bush be willing to try something fraudulent like that in November? Aside from the fact that the evidence suggests they
already have in previous elections, imagine yourself facing possible criminal indictments and time in the federal
slammer, standing in the war-crimes dock at The Hague, and losing all the riches and power you've built up over eight
years -- you might be tempted, too.
MR. FLIPPITY-FLOPPITY
Even John McCain, supposedly Mr. Straight-Talker, has turned into Mr. Flippity-Floppity, as he, desperate to nail down
the GOP base vote, tries to run from his former, somewhat more moderate positions.
As Digby writes: "There is nothing --- nothing --- that John McCain won't do or say to get elected." It's clear that McCain sold his political soul to the Dark Side
when he decided in 2006 to make another run for the White House, and he isn't going back to the principled GOP maverick
so many once knew and admired. How he lives with himself these days, I can't even guess.
The lesson in all this is that when a candidate or party is staring at likely defeat, it is not uncommon for them to
flail out in desperation against their opposition. That either works or, in this case, is so obvious and short-sightedly
mean-spirited that the public, in revulsion against such tactics, turns against them even more eagerly at the ballot
box.
Let it be so.
*************
Copyright 2008, by Bernard Weiner
Bernard Weiner, Ph.D. in government & international relations, has taught at universities in Washington and Calfornia, worked as a writer/editor with the San
Francisco Chronicle for two decades, and currently serves as co-editor of The Crisis Papers (www.crisispapers.org). To comment: crisispapers@comcast.net.