they're not all crazy!

[nekrenas]

Last week, via the Google Reader, I shared Matt Welch's article about the more strident reactions to some of the crazier conservative elements at health care town hall meetings. Welch argued that evocations of widespread and growing violent racist (and also nazi) sentiment from middle America are harmful exaggerations. I thought this was

Comments

How do you identify a leader?

[hyperblazer]

Actually, first question -- better to have the conversation here or on gReader now that it has shown up in my feed twice?

Now, onto the main point: how do you identify the leader(s) of a movement/group? There's room for argument, but I'd say a good first approximation is that the leaders are the individuals who the group identifies as speaking for them. And with that definition, I go back to that 538 article where self-identified Republicans (including leaners) volunteer Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, and Newt Gingrich as the main people speaking for the Republican Party.

You know conservatives gone through a wormhole when Newt Gingrich is the voice of fairness and reason. [Apologies to Jon Stewart: the original quote is cited hereThe left has certainly had its violent revolutionaries (and if you're looking for historical examples of calling for violence, I think the left is probably more guilty -- to quote Allen Ginsberg, "You should have seen me reading Marx!") But my question: when, in our lifetimes, have the people who self-

Re: How do you identify a leader?

[nekrenas]

Seems like an okay definition of leadership. I guess I'm talking about simple opinion-makers too. People with audiences. As per my next post.

Yes, I'd like to keep the fringe the fringe. I assume you're mostly kidding when you point out that keeping the Republicans nutty is good for Democrats, but I wonder if some people actually think this way. In the end, it's a very anti-social attitude. In a two party system, if you have one party that is just completely wild-eyed, there is nothing to encourage the more reasonable party to run a tight ship. Democrats would be better democrats if they had better Republicans to squabble with.

Re: How do you identify a leader?

[hyperblazer]

Actually, I'd love to have the Republicans alienate the middle for a period of 4-6 years, during which time the Democrats can develop a strong incumbency advantage. Then let the right-of-center world pull its collective head out of its collective ass and find a reasonably compelling argument for their election. Basically, I agree that policy will be better if there's room to fight in the marketplace of ideas, but I'd like my guys to have the advantage going into that fight.

But really, even more than that I'd like to see the discourse get a little more reasonable, and to see more fair debate and less fear-mongering and falsehoods. I could imagine being governed by John McCain or Dick Lugar or Mitt Romney. I wouldn't vote for them (actually, I may have voted for Lugar one time, though probably not), but I wouldn't be devastated to see them in power. Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, or (gods forbid) Sarah Palin, on the other hand....