Invasion of the Party Snatchers

[nancylebov]

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/06292007/watch2.html

Bill Moyers interviews Vic Gold about his new Invasion of the Party Snatchers: How the Holy Rollers and the Neo Cons Destroyed the GOP.

This is mostly the same old, but it's a same old I'm fond of and it has a few highlights--for example, that the few candidates who are capable of giving straight answers are portrayed in the media as kooks, and some surprising "What happened? Cheney used to be a good guy".

If you want to read a Republican who's so disgusted that he wants his party to lose, here it is.

Link thanks to Unqualified Offerings.

Comments

[harmfulguy.livejournal.com]

Watched the show while making chili last night. The segment with Moyers going off on Rupert Murdoch was great too.

[madfilkentist]

I started reading Buck Wild, which is in a similar vein, and got so angry I couldn't finish it. At the Republican Party, that is, not at the author.

BlogSwarm Against Theocracy

[beatnikbetty.livejournal.com]

Just wanted to stop by and encourage you to participate in the BlogSwarm Against Theocracy going on now through wednesday.

More info linked on my journal here: http://enlightened77.livejournal.com/732247.html

Thanks!

[osewalrus.livejournal.com]

The Republicans are an increasingly disheartened bunch, except for the die-hard fanatics who remind me of Blake (of Balke's 7) assualting Star 1 "We will stick with this, because it is the only way to prove I was right."

Like the Ds, and like the Rs in 1964, they need to undergo a total defeat in '08 and rebuild again from the bottom up.

Meanwhile, the Ds may well splinter before '08. I continue to beleive that the relevant historic comparison is 1932 -- when the Republicans were on the ropes, the Socialists were attracting new members, and the Ds had a serious fissure between "traditional Ds" (who wanted tweaks at the edges) and "Progressive Ds" (who wanted radical changes under the banner of Huey Long). Roosevelt's great genius was to adopt enough of Long's platform to keep a solid block of progressives while reassuring the traditional Ds that he would not nationalize industry or take other steps to redistribute wealth.

Hilary Clinton is poised to play the Roosevelt role, but she lacks the charisma and willingness to reinvent herself that FDR had. She is also too well known a brand. Obama may be able to pull it out -- he being sufficeintly unknown to be both reassuring and radical as needed. Edwards would represent a triumph of the progressive wing, which might either keep traditional Ds home or send the wealthier/traditional segment of the Party to Bloomsberg (if he runs) or to McCain or Guliani (if either wins the nomination).