Republican revolution eating its children

[RandomGuy]

I have long noted the ongoing GOP expulsion and alienation of moderates, especially within its ranks, is quite akin to the various "purity" committees on the part of various past revolutions that have overthrown various governments and monarchies.

Your ultimate measure of suitableness is how closely you adhere to the message and party line. In these past revolutions, not being "revolutionary" enough got you dragged off to jail, and/or shot.

It is in the nature of extremists of all stripes to seek perfection once they have been given the reigns of power. That is what is happening in the Republican party now. They are seeking perfection, and that does not include people who have elected not to drink the cool... er, tea.

After sitting on the fence as an independent for my adult life, I decided after watching the move to the right in the GOP to throw my hat in with the Democrats, flaws and all.

I know a lot of people don't see any difference between the two, and to be fair, there is a degree of political correctness within the Democratic party, but there is far, far more room for dissent and people of differing opinions within the Democratic party than the Republicans.

----------------------------------------------


Why Jon Huntsman is leaving the GOP (not because they’re Communists)

It’s an exhilarating, if somewhat mystifying, experience to find yourself a supporting player in a modern media maelstrom. It’s even more instructive to learn that a dust-up over a few words can obscure a much more significant message.

“My first thought was, this is what they do in China on party matters if you talk off script.”

Those words were spoken Sunday night by Jon Huntsman, the former Utah governor and Republican presidential candidate, in a public interview with me at New York’s 92nd Street Y. Huntsman was describing how his comments about the potential appeal of a third party got him disinvited to speak at a Republican National Committee event in Florida.

Before dawn, websites were reporting the quote under headlines like “Huntsman compares GOP to Communist Party of China.” By sunrise, Huntsman was on “Morning Joe,” scoffing that “bottom-feeder” blogs had taken his comments out of context. By midday, Buzzfeed--the target of Huntsman’s critique--had posted a lengthy video excerpt from my interview to argue that no, he had not been taken out of context.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Huntsman was painting with a brush so broad as to compare the Republican Party with Communist China. For one thing, Huntsman is not yet under house arrest with his Internet access forbidden.

But here’s what the dust-up missed. If you take all of what he said to me over some 90 minutes, it is all but certain that John Huntsman is not going to be a Republican much longer.

Yes, he has endorsed Mitt Romney for president, though his expression when he does so has all the spontaneous pleasure of the star of a hostage tape. He cites President Barack Obama’s failure to work the levers of power to accomplish change--intriguingly, he contrasts Obama not with a Republican president, but with Bill Clinton--and Romney’s understanding of the free market and job creation. (Huntsman was animated in scorning Republican candidates who called for a hard line on China or protective tariffs--notions that Romney has enthusiastically embraced.)

The real message he is carrying is that both parties--the “duopoly,” as he calls it--are paralyzed by polarization and inertia, and that the Republican Party in particular is pursuing an “unsustainable” course.

Why, I asked him, shouldn’t Republicans learn from their 2010 midterm victory that an unswerving opposition to Obama is politically profitable?

Because, he replied, “It’s unsustainable. It can’t last more than a cycle or two. ... With the political center hollowed out, the American people are going to say, who’s going to populate the center where you’ll get things done.”

His distance from the party whose nomination he sought goes beyond tactics. When he recalled his first appearance on a debate stage with his rivals, he said he remembers thinking two thoughts. First: “The barriers to entry are very low.” Second: “In a nation of 315 million people ... is this the best we can do?”

If he was including himself, this is a remarkable example of self-deprecation. If he was talking about his rivals, it is an extraordinary indictment, because it includes the man he is supporting for president.

There was more to what Huntsman said than party politics. Listening to him describe his concerns over the emerging generation of Chinese leaders--because they were shaped not by the disasters of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, but by enormous economic growth, they‘re likely to be more nationalistic and “hubristic,” he said--you realize you’re listening to a political figure who served as an ambassador to three Asian nations (Singapore and Indonesia as well as China). His understanding of the Asian-Pacific region surpasses that of any presidential candidate in history.

When he talks of his three urgent priorities for change—term limits, campaign finance reform, and congressional redistricting--you can detect a touch of naiveté. Term limits have been a reality for years in California, where they have fed, not halted, a dysfunctional government. Campaign finance reform is beyond the reach of any political leader unless and until the Supreme Court stops thinking of money as speech, leading it to strike down such laws on First Amendment grounds.

You can also hear in his critique of his party the voice of a candidate who tasted enormous popularity--he won re-election as governor of Utah with 77 percent of the vote--and who may have been wounded by the peremptory dismissal of his presidential prospects. (My belief is that his campaign was doomed as soon as he became President Obama’s ambassador to China. In this political climate, no Republican who served under Obama was going to win the GOP presidential nomination.) The charge of “sour grapes” or “sore loser” will not be far from the lips of many Republicans.

Why does this add up to a conviction on my part that Huntsman has one foot out the door of the Republican Party, and is likely placing a bet on his belief that a third party will be increasingly attractive to the electorate, perhaps not this year, but by 2016?

One reason is how he contrasted Republicans from Teddy Roosevelt to Dwight Eisenhower to Richard Nixon with the current party orthodoxy. Could Ronald Reagan be nominated today? I asked. “Likely, no,” he said.

And here’s what he said when a member of the audience posed this question to him: “Given the present direction and positions the party has taken ... is there room for people like you?”

Well, he answered, “I’m sitting here as a Republican.” But after he talked with great enthusiasm about the rise of the unaffiliated voter and the challenge to the political duopoly, I posed one more question.

“Why do I get the feeling,” I asked him, “that if we have this conversation a couple of years from now, you will not be sitting here as a Republican?”

“Because,” he said with a smile, “you’re a good journalist.”

Flattery aside, the answer couldn’t have been clearer.

http://news.yahoo.com/why-jon-huntsm...mmunists-.html


Once again, the GOP seems bound and determined to make itself nationally irrelevent. Alienate moderates, alienate hispanics, etc.

[EVAY]

And I just read online that elsewhere.

I know that lots of hardliners will say "About time" or "He was just a RINO anyway", but I think there are any number of us who used to consider ourselves moderate Republicans who now consider ourselves moderate Independents. And apparently Huntsman has just joined us. There is less and less room for rational thought in the modern Republican Party.

[ElNono]

I thought this was about Chris Christie... nevermind

[boutons_deux]

Repugs are their own worst enemies. Actually the rabid asshole astro-turfing tea baggers and "Christian" authoritarian theocrats are.

GOP Politicians Struggle to Disentangle From Party's Fringe

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/video/...=Google+Reader

Gecko hired a spokesman who is gay, and the AFA/Fischer is screaming about it.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Goodluck with the dems. I can get the appeal of people that do not vote as a singularity but I still see it as a false choice. I wouldn't be surprised if there is conflict in the North China Seas soon that makes our political process moot anyway.

[EVAY]

Goodluck with the dems. I can get the appeal of people that do not vote as a singularity but I still see it as a false choice. I wouldn't be surprised if there is conflict in the North China Seas soon that makes our political process moot anyway.

It's almost overdue, tbh. My kid's dissertation was about the issues in the China Sea and that was like ten years ago.

[Old Man Kidd]

Goodluck with the dems. I can get the appeal of people that do not vote as a singularity but I still see it as a false choice. I wouldn't be surprised if there is conflict in the North China Seas soon that makes our political process moot anyway.

explain. you mean no elections during wartime, is that what you're insinuating?

[SnakeBoy]

I decided after watching the move to the right in the GOP to throw my hat in with the Democrats, flaws and all.

just decided that huh?

Just kidding RG, I can completely understand where you're coming from. After the GOP went way to the right by nominating McCain I was considering doing the same. Now that they're going to the extreme right with the likes of Romney I just don't know what I'm going to do.

Anyway your argument is compelling and eloquent, more so than when I heard Axelrod on the morning shows this weekend making the same case. Obama should put you on the payroll.

[DarrinS]

After the GOP went way to the right by nominating McCain ....

Great thread, btw.

[DarrinS]

I thought this was about Chris Christie... nevermind

[RandomGuy]

just decided that huh?

Just kidding RG, I can completely understand where you're coming from. After the GOP went way to the right by nominating McCain I was considering doing the same. Now that they're going to the extreme right with the likes of Romney I just don't know what I'm going to do.

Anyway your argument is compelling and eloquent, more so than when I heard Axelrod on the morning shows this weekend making the same case. Obama should put you on the payroll.

Should have been a bit more clear.

I made that call in 2000 or so. I was willing up to that point to go for a Republican, and went so far as to pull for McCain in that election.

Bush got the nod, and it was obviously not because he was qualified intellectually, but more ideologically pure.

McCain had to re-triangulate himself and go right to keep getting elected, and that is that. Picking Palin as a VP made the 2008 decision a slam dunk.

I would have been happy voting for Huntsman, or at least not aghast at the choice of nominee.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

explain. you mean no elections during wartime, is that what you're insinuating?

No.

[RandomGuy]

Goodluck with the dems. I can get the appeal of people that do not vote as a singularity but I still see it as a false choice. I wouldn't be surprised if there is conflict in the North China Seas soon that makes our political process moot anyway.

China will not have the capacity to actively contest control of that body against the US.

The militants in China will find that as much as they might want to press their rights on this, the potential loss of trade will align them against a lot of moneyed interests.

Military confrontation will play well with myopic nationalists who are useful idiots for those in power, but those in power have too much to lose from a "boycott China" movement in Europe/North America in the event of a military confrontation.

Not that I don't see an assertive China, or that they might press some of this in a belligerent manner, but I just don't see an outright war.

Not that all policy decisions are completely rational...

[RandomGuy]

No.

I would guess a new cold war then, with politicians playing up the Chinese bugaboo for election purposes?

[RandomGuy]

Great thread, btw.

Thanks.



I think.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I would guess a new cold war then, with politicians playing up the Chinese bugaboo for election purposes?

i was talking more about the things that Huntsman was referring to. GOP isolationist rhetoric. I was probably tending towards a bit of hyperbole but China is to the point now where they run military 'exercises' in the North China sea routinely and there was been concern over a confrontation with amongst other things the Philippine navy.

Given the geographic reality and logistics being what it is I fail to see how China would not be able to maintain military dominance over the are if they so choose. China has also for the past decade put a focus on expanding their navy. Their 'capacity' is more than it once was and rhetoric internal and external has continued to prod that policy.

[RandomGuy]

i was talking more about the things that Huntsman was referring to. GOP isolationist rhetoric. I was probably tending towards a bit of hyperbole but China is to the point now where they run military 'exercises' in the North China sea routinely and there was been concern over a confrontation with amongst other things the Philippine navy.

Given the geographic reality and logistics being what it is I fail to see how China would not be able to maintain military dominance over the are if they so choose. China has also for the past decade put a focus on expanding their navy. Their 'capacity' is more than it once was and rhetoric internal and external has continued to prod that policy.

China's beligerence will simply make US basing in the region easier.

Reference:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Militar...e-in-Australia
--US marine bases in Australia

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2012/...es-for-Myanmar
Myanmar normalized relations with the west (obvious calculus: China is overbearing, we are looking for new friends)

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-...ns-to-escalate
China-Vietnam relations take a hit

... among other developments that signal growing unease in the region with an assertive China.

The alternative to the countries in the region to Chinese hegemony is... the US, and to some extent, India, also not a Chinese stooge.

China can be more assertive, but the costs for them of pushing it... are greater than one might think on the face of it, and their leaders are acutely aware of it.

[heynao]

China's beligerence will simply make US basing in the region easier.

Reference:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Militar...e-in-Australia
--US marine bases in Australia

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2012/...es-for-Myanmar
Myanmar normalized relations with the west (obvious calculus: China is overbearing, we are looking for new friends)

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-...ns-to-escalate
China-Vietnam relations take a hit

... among other developments that signal growing unease in the region with an assertive China.

The alternative to the countries in the region to Chinese hegemony is... the US, and to some extent, India, also not a Chinese stooge.

China can be more assertive, but the costs for them of pushing it... are greater than one might think on the face of it, and their leaders are acutely aware of it.

just another bit of information as to why other countries in the region might be happy to have a strong US presence in the region into the future

[SnakeBoy]

I would have been happy voting for Huntsman, or at least not aghast at the choice of nominee.

Damn the GOP was so close to getting your vote. Two moderate mormoms and they picked the wrong one.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

China's beligerence will simply make US basing in the region easier.

Reference:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Militar...e-in-Australia
--US marine bases in Australia

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2012/...es-for-Myanmar
Myanmar normalized relations with the west (obvious calculus: China is overbearing, we are looking for new friends)

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-...ns-to-escalate
China-Vietnam relations take a hit

... among other developments that signal growing unease in the region with an assertive China.

The alternative to the countries in the region to Chinese hegemony is... the US, and to some extent, India, also not a Chinese stooge.

China can be more assertive, but the costs for them of pushing it... are greater than one might think on the face of it, and their leaders are acutely aware of it.

They are nervous for very good reason. I still do not see what that has to do with the geographic reality. They have plenty of bases in Japan which have more strategic importance than ones in the southern hemisphere. But the Myanmar Navy is not going to make any difference.

There is a geographic reality. Logistics being what they are is a huge factor. This is not going to be Iraq where we flex and the opposition melts. If it becomes a matter of attrition, China is in a much better geographic position to control areas in their immediate vicinity.

I would also counter with Russian-Chinese relations. China has been pretty much in step with Russia as pertains the Security Council decisions. I think that Huntsman is spot on; isolating China is not a good thing.

[RandomGuy]

Economist debate on this subject, FWIW:
http://www.economist.com/debate/debates/overview/227

[RandomGuy]

They are nervous for very good reason. I still do not see what that has to do with the geographic reality. They have plenty of bases in Japan which have more strategic importance than ones in the southern hemisphere. But the Myanmar Navy is not going to make any difference.

There is a geographic reality. Logistics being what they are is a huge factor. This is not going to be Iraq where we flex and the opposition melts. If it becomes a matter of attrition, China is in a much better geographic position to control areas in their immediate vicinity.

I would also counter with Russian-Chinese relations. China has been pretty much in step with Russia as pertains the Security Council decisions. I think that Huntsman is spot on; isolating China is not a good thing.

Not saying Myanmar's navy is going to make a difference, and over the long term, I mostly agree with you.

I just think the hand-waving over Chinese acendency is a bit overblown.
http://www.economist.com/node/21553056

[EVAY]

It was my impression that China's claim to the oil reserves in the South China Sea has been edging closer and closer to armed assertion for lots of years.
That is the sort of thing that can really get people antsy.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Not saying Myanmar's navy is going to make a difference, and over the long term, I mostly agree with you.

I just think the hand-waving over Chinese acendency is a bit overblown.
http://www.economist.com/node/21553056

China has had positive economic growth for decades and you want to talk about handwaving of ascendancy? Its just been the reality in Asia since the 1960s.

They've been lending us money to help keep our fiscal policy afloat since the 1980s and still run massive surpluses on their own fiscal agenda. One of my biggest concerns when we almost defaulted was going to be China's reaction. the typical reaction to default is seizing assets.

It makes sense that they have more to lose then gain by military aggression. All I am saying is that we should endeavor to keep it that way. They are the single most significant foreign power outside of NATO atm. Dismissing it out of hand as 'hand waving' is foolish. I normally do not see you as one that just dismisses things out of hand like that.

[Nbadan]

It was my impression that China's claim to the oil reserves in the South China Sea has been edging closer and closer to armed assertion for lots of years.
That is the sort of thing that can really get people antsy.

Elsewhere, Beijing's conduct is hardly more comforting. Earlier this month, a Chinese general said the Philippines was facing its "final chance" to resolve territorial disputes in the South China Sea—presumably on terms favorable to China. Beijing then initiated a standoff with the Philippine Navy, which had tried to evict Chinese fishing boats operating illegally in Manila's exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Last May, Chinese patrol boats damaged a Vietnamese oil survey ship in Hanoi's EEZ. Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan have also recently been in the crosshairs of Beijing's diplomats and warriors.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/...sj_share_email