Do Conservatives Get a Pass?
How would a Democrat-equivalent of Rick Perry be received?
Kevin Drum wants to know, “Why Do Conservatives Get a Pass?”
Rick Perry would like to repeal the 16th and 17th amendments, hates the New Deal, thinks Social Security is a Ponzi scheme and global warming is a gigantic hoax, and would pretty much like to roll back America’s entire social welfare edifice “from housing to public television, from the environment to art, from education to medical care, from public transportation to food, and beyond.”
He points to a Ruth Marcus column looking at Perry’s 2010 book Fed Up! and sees several proposals that she believes, “are not mainstream Republican views — at least, not any Republican mainstream post-Goldwater and pre-Tea Party.” And I’d for the most part concur.
But in what sense is Perry–much less conservatives generally–getting a pass? Drum again:
Perry’s views are getting denounced by all the usual lefty suspects, but not much of anywhere else. And the reason for this is something very odd: in modern America, conservatives are largely given a pass for saying crazy things. They’re just not taken seriously, in a boys-will-be-boys kind of way. It’s almost like everyone accepts this kind of stuff as a kind of religious liturgy, repeated regularly with no real meaning behind it. They’re just the words you use to prove to the base that you’re really one of them.
Off the top of my head, I’d offer three answers:
1. First, the journalistic cult of savviness pretty much dismisses boilerplate sops to the base as same-old-same-old.
2. Because most political reporters are left-of-center, they’re not very good at differentiating mainstream conservative thinking from more extreme variants of the same thing. Which, again, renders a lot of what Perry’s saying as same-old-same-old to untrained ears.
3. It’s increasingly difficult to tell what’s mainstream and what isn’t. As the discussion spawned by my recent post on religious extremism in America demonstrates, large numbers of people hold views that are just shockingly out of kilter with bicoastal conventional wisdom. A lot of mainstream Republicans are highly skeptical of global warming; Perry’s “hoax” stuff sounds crazy to some but rings true to a surprising number of people.
Because of that last factor, I think Drum’s comparison here goes too far:
I’m not quite sure what the left-wing equivalent of this would be, but it would be something along the lines of Hillary Clinton writing a book that proposed repealing the 2nd Amendment and adding one that banned hate speech; limiting defense spending to 2% of GDP; raising the top marginal tax rate back to 90% on millionaires; instituting British-style national healthcare; and spending half a trillion dollars on new programs for universal preschool, two-year paid leaves for new parents, and an increase in the minimum wage to $15 per hour. But in real life, Dennis Kucinich wouldn’t support a platform like this, let alone a frontrunner for the presidential nomination. And if one did, they’d be instantly tarred as an insane nutball and would never see the business end of a TV camera again.
While I think Perry is too far outside the mainstream, I’d argue that he’s much closer to it than Dennis Kucinch, much less this hypothetical Democrat. Since Gallup began tracking the question in 1992, somewhere between 36 and 41 percent of Americans have self-identified as conservatives, compared to somewhere between 16 and 21 percent as liberals. In recent years, more people actually identify as conservative than moderate:
From Kevin’s standpoint–and, frankly, even mine–Perry is well to the right of center. But he may well be much closer to mainstream thinking than either of us fully appreciate.
That said, though, I’m not sure that Perry will ultimately get a pass at all. Not only are reporters already challenging some of his more outlandish statements, so will his opponents. As Doug noted yesterday, Mitt Romney’s plan of attack against Perry is precisely to highlight some of his more extreme views and point out the consequences that would flow from implementing his policies.
Yes, many Republicans are frustrated with Social Security and Medicare. But, no, Democratic scaremongering to the contrary, they don’t want to get rid of either program. Aside from the much-lampooned Tea Party rallying cry of “get your government hands off my Medicare,” the fact of the matter is that older voters skew Republican.
When Kevin Drum asks if conservative get a pass, I assume he is speaking tongue-in-cheek, correct? Either that, or he’s new to the US.
Then that whole Paul Ryan “Roadmap to Prosperity” was just a complete lie?
Speaking of wingnut boilerplate.
@OzarkHillbilly: When I say “Republicans” I don’t mean to include every single person who is somehow identified with the GOP but rather the median view of the group. Note how far Ryan’s roadmap got in terms of policy implementation despite GOP control of the House.
@ponce: There’s zero controversy that most reporters at major media outlets are left-of-center or even Democratic-leaning. What’s in question is the degree to which that colors their reporting.
>Perry’s “hoax” stuff sounds crazy to some but rings true to a surprising number of people.
Polls show that a majority of the public has doubts about global warming; a majority of the public, however, does not have reservations about Social Security.
@Kylopod:81% think Social Security will be in serious trouble absent reforms. But most people want to save it.
A standard wingnut debating tactic to stifle debate on one of their cornerstone myths.
Having recently watched “Meet the Press” for the first time in years, I would say the average national reporter is now far to the right of Ronald Reagan.
@ponce: Survey after survey after survey demonstrates that reporters self-identify as center-left and Democratic–which, as noted in the post, is sharply divergent from the American people as a whole.
@James Joyner: The point is that calling SS a “Ponzi scheme” is bound to offend far more Americans than statements doubting the existence of global warming.
I don’t know, having never worked in the industry, but I rather doubt that reporters drive the content. The people with actual power probably don’t skew liberal (or, necessarily, conservative. I’d guess they skew toward “making as much money as possible off the rubes”).
@Kylopod:
I don’t know about that.
I’ve been hearing the “ponzi scheme” accusation thrown at SS all my life, from tons of normal right-of-center people.
Take my parents. They will vehemently assert that it’s a ponzi scheme. They will also take every cent they can get, because they figure they might as well. My mother, who generally refers to the government as “those bloodsuckers” is always of the mind that she should take as much as she can from the government, because they’re obviously screwing her 24/7.
That’s the mindset. They want their SS benefits, in full, but think the program is illegitimate.
While at the same time, the national press has been defining “the center” further and further to the right.
James, do you have any idea what a real left wing politician sounds like?
James……. Every single Republican Congress critter in the House of Representatives, voted for it. But that is not the median view of the party? Pray tell, just exactly what is????
I could add: “Talk about giving Republicans a pass….”
@James Joyner: James, Ryan’s plan got 97% to 98% percent of all Republican votes. You are flogging a red herring here as the reason why Ryan’s plan did not get implemented is that Democrats held two veto points against a frontal assault on their core work for the past centry.
Do conservatives get a free pass?
Do conservatives get a free pass??
Wow.
Honestly, the left-wing media and its close cousin left-wing academia are tantamount to parallel universes. Day is night. Up is down. Black is white. Right is wrong. 6 = 9.
Just for shits and giggles, this Kevin Drum character might want to put down the crack pipe for 10 minutes and then compare and contrast the respective treatment afforded by the mass media / academe / chattering classes to and among the following sets of individuals:
George W. Bush vs. Barack H. Obama.
Karl Rove vs. David Axelrod.
Trent Lott vs. Robert Byrd.
Paul Ryan vs. James Moran.
Strom Thurmond vs. Al Gore, Sr.
Scott Walker vs. Jim McDermott.
Michelle Bachmann vs. James Clyburn.
Sarah Palin vs. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
Rush Limbaugh vs. Al Sharpton.
Eric Cantor vs. Steny Hoyer.
John Boehner vs. Nancy Pelosi.
Clarence Thomas vs. Alcee Hastings.
Robert Bork vs. Sonia Sotomayor.
Samuel Alito vs. Elena Kagan.
Bill Janklow vs. Ted Kennedy.
Bob Dole’s chest of medals vs. John Kerry’s chest of medals.
John Ashcroft vs. Janet Reno.
David Petraeus (2006-2009) vs. David Petraeus (2009-present).
Then for additional shits and giggles Drum might compare and contrast the following events and things:
Iran-Contra vs. Military secrets to the Chinese in the 1990’s.
Valerie Plame vs. Fast and Furious / Gunrunner.
Kent State vs. Seattle ’99.
Panama ’89 vs. Kosovo ’99.
L.A. riots in 1992 vs. Watts ’65.
The “unemployment crises” in 1991 vs. the “tepid recovery” in 2011.
Reaganomics in 1982 vs. the “recovery summer” of 2010.
Guantanamo Bay (2001-2009) vs. Guantanamo Bay (2009-present).
Thanks for that long list of false equivalencies and BS, Tsar.
Years ago, I defined myself as a “militant moderate.” I’ve examined my beliefs on many issues, and I haven’t really changed my position. Yet I’ve ended up downright conservative.
My own theory: the left kept moving more and more to the left. Consequently, they pulled the “middle” point further towards their end, and the traditional “middle” is now rather solidly on the “right” side. Think of it as a rubber band: loop it around two pins, then mark the middle point on both the band and the table. If you pull on the left side, then the band’s midpoint will move to the left — but the table mark, while not moving, becomes part of the “right” side of the band.
J.
@Rob in CT: Let’s just single out one of those “false equivalencies,” Rob — General David Petraeus under Bush vs. under Obama. (Personal stake here — he’s got a home here in NH, about 30 miles down the road from me.)
He was “General Betray-Us” to Moveon.org, who got a heavily-discounted ad from the New York Times to smear him the day he gave his testimony before Congress. In other words, this force from the left called him a liar before he said word one, and the Times subsidized it. (They later had to ask moveon.org for more money, as the discounted rate counted as a contribution in kind.)
How’s the General treated now? And how, exactly, did he change in those five years?
J.
I think you are a bit off here James. Perry wants to do away with Social Security and Medicare, two of our most popular programs. Wouldnt that be much the same as the mythical Democrat who wants to raise top rates to 90% and cut defense spending in half? Shouldnt you be comparing to the political center and not the norm for the GOP?
Steve
Considering the fact that Democratic party reps can say that the Tea Party wants to lynch people and no one in the media bats an eye…I would say that there are a lot of people on the left who get a pass. All the time.Every day.
Perry might seem too far right for a lot of people, but remember until 1989 the man was a Democrat. It was not all that long ago that he was hanging out with Al Gore and apparently Al did not think he was a wacko.
Perry is not my first choice, but I think a lot of what he says about social security is not as odd as some people think. I don’t think the program should be ended or anything, but I do think that it has morphed into something that will bankrupt us if there are no changes in the system. Look at all the people who just assume it will not be there in the future. Most people think the program is at the very least unsustainable as it is. Some people might even say it is a Ponzi scheme.
@steve:
Has Perry actually said he wanted to do away with those programs? I don’t think so. He may not like the programs, but I am not sure he actually wants to do away with them. People said the same thing about Reagan, but when push came to shove he raised the social security tax to save the system.
@OzarkHillbilly: Actually, Paul Ryan’s plan would save medicare, it would render it solvent. The Democrats on the other hand want to let it collapse without offering any real reform. So it seems to me that it is the Democrats who want to destroy the program…probably so they can create another one.
I’ve lived in a wide variety of locations throughout this great country of ours. I’ve talked to thousands of people about their beliefs and their lives. The one trend that has held true is that people are terrible at self identifying their political beliefs. In large sections of this country the term Liberal has been so successfully demonized that even flaming liberals refuse to label themselves as liberal. So naturally there’s a rather large group of people who label themselves as conservative yet support gay rights are pro choice and generally support liberal positions.
So forgive me for not putting much faith in a poll that asks people to self identify..
I think TN basically showed the intellectual bankruptcy here…..Jan not even required.
@James Joyner: The political leanings of “reporters,” as such isn’t as important in this context as the political leanings of the Washington press corps, I would say. Has anyone ever determined their ideological makeup?
@Tsar Nicholas:
I’ll take that challenge:
George W. Bush vs. Barack H. Obama.
The first started 2 wars he could not finish, and did not pay for. The 2nd hasn’t fixed these colossal screw-ups yet. (also W blew up the budget, BO has not yet found a way to fix that either)
Karl Rove vs. David Axelrod.
The first is a lying corrupt assh*le called “turd blossom” by his former boss, the 2nd is actually a rather likeable liar.
Trent Lott vs. Robert Byrd.
The first was an unrepentant racist, the 2nd repented.
Paul Ryan vs. James Moran.
The 1st is a lying thieving SOB who wants to take money out of grandmas purse and put it into the pockets of the richest people in Americas (also hailed as a genius by his fans), the second is a rather unremarkable congressman I had to google to jiggle my memory.
Strom Thurmond vs. Al Gore, Sr.
Hmmmm…. a wash. about the same
Scott Walker vs. Jim McDermott.
Ummmm, You lost me her Tsar, the first is an ideologue who thinks “collective bargaining rights” are for corporations (not the people who work for them), and the other is another under the radar congress critter (nicknamed “Baghdad Jim” by his more conservative critics) who predicted in 2002, “that President George W. Bush would “mislead the American public” to justify military action and that no WMD would be found in Iraq.”
Hey, this is FUN… somebody else pick up with Michelle Bachmann vs. James Clyburn.
Thanks for my laugh of the day. I believe you’re actually describing Faux News.
No, Ryan’s plan would essentially do away with Medicare and replace it with a voucher plan that’s based on the notion insurance companies will actually want to insure seniors at less than exorbitant rates. I think that qualifies as killing Medicare as we know it. Moreover, there’s no reason to think this program would be solvent. Ryan’s budget is based on the notion of five percent GDP growth over the next ten years, something that’s never happened in the past and isn’t likely to happen in the future. In other words, it’s a farce.
@Terrye:
Terrye: How delusional are you that you think turning Medicare into “Vouchercare” is saving it? This is another handout to the insurance companies with decreasing returns to the elderly who are living on a fixed income, the whole while giving yet another tax break to the rich.
Wake up Terrye… that “thump thump” you feel is the bus driving over you.
@Jay Tea:
A few years ago, I would have identified myself as a militant moderate as well. I have examined my positions pretty closely as well and I am more conservative today than I was then. Today, however, there is not a Republican politician in the US that I would vote for. There are all so far to the right I can barely see them from here.
@Tsar Nicholas:
You left out the part where the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor. Senator Blutarski, we need you badly.
@Fiona: Actually Fiona, you explained it better than I.
@Terrye: Just because stupid people assume something, that doesn’t make it true.
@OzarkHillbilly: Don’t bother. Terrye spreads this lie on forum after forum, and when she’s called on it she runs away. She can’t defend this lie and she knows it, but she hopes if she keeps repeating it enough some gullible people — Hey,, JT! — will parrot it back.
Don’t know what is up with the reply buttons this eve, they come and they go.
So what you are basically saying is that you are poorly informed, not very bright, or both.
@OzarkHillbilly: Well done Fiona. Terrye and others also neglect to mention that if the ACA is overturned, then private insurance companies wouldn’t accept the vouchers under any circumstance. Being old is a preexisting condition.
james:
This is an example of a popular meme that’s based on exceptionally weak evidence. See here.
Well, certainly not in the GOP, where critical thinking is a sign that one is a communist, or that they hate America, or ____________ (fill in the blank).
As a centrist, I would say no. I’d guess that his more radical positions aren’t quite registering yet, but when it does, people will say “wait a minute, you can’t un-say this stuff.”
@James Joyner:
Some built-in opportunity for selection bias there, with “most reporters at major media” … as opposed to say “a statistically random sample of tax-filers with occupation ‘journalist.'”
@john personna: The surveys of journalists as a whole show a marked leftward bias. But a handful of outlets, most notably NYT and WaPO, absolutely dominate political reporting. It doesn’t matter if the staff at the Troy (Alabama) Messenger is overwhelmingly conservative, since their impact is isolated.
@James Joyner:
“The surveys of journalists as a whole show a marked leftward bias.”
Sorry bud, as I comment there, you do not read charts correctly.
While it is true that the center of the distribution is left of center, that does not mean that “most people” are left of center. It isn’t just the center of the distribution, it is also the width of the distribution.
The correct way to read that chart is that “while 30% of journalists are centrists, slightly more lean left (40%) than lean right (30%).”
The most critical error in “media bias is left” is that the “left” journalists are easily outnumbered by the center and right.
Let’s pretend for a moment that every journalist wore their bias on their sleeve and wrote a story today. What’s the chance that a random story your read would be left-tilted? 40%
Those less-than-even odds are exactly opposite of what you are trying to prove.
james:
As john has patiently explained on this thread and the other thread, the claim you originally made (“most reporters at major media outlets are left-of-center or even Democratic-leaning”) is falsified by the data you cited (“40% of journalists described themselves as being on the left side of the political spectrum”). 40% is not “most.”
@Jay Tea:
1 ad from MoveOn (with which they embarrassed themselves) is what you have?
Petraeus is probably the best you’ve got in that list of yours. He was viewed with suspicion by the Left (though not, in my memory, by the media in general) but Obama kept him on and so that’s largely quieted down. I recall the media coverage of the General being largely positive under Bush.
Michelle Bachmann vs. James Clyburn.
Is James Clyburn running for POTUS?
Sarah Palin vs. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
A partial-term governer of AK who ran for VP and was widely expected to take a shot at running for POTUS, who has embarked on a pundit career making herself tons of money pumping out “red meat” for the GOP base vs. a 6-year member of the House of Reps who is very liberal. Apparently Allen West thinks she’s vile & despicable. Having read what she said (and when she said it) and having read West’s response, I see no equivalence. She should have said it “to his face” as it were, yes. But she still should have said it. His response was over the top.
How are these people equivalent?
Rush Limbaugh vs. Al Sharpton.
You have to be kidding me. Even if their rhetoric was actually equivalent, the difference in influence is massive.
Eric Cantor vs. Steny Hoyer.
Steny Hoyer (who I admit I had to look up) is the minority whip. He’s a Dem member of the House since 1981, from MD. He opposed Cantor in the debt-ceiling debates. Both appear to be extremely pro-Israel.
Cantor was in the news for his role in the debt-ceiling negotiations & other policy positions. So was Hoyer. Their statements & rhetoric was there for people to see. What is your problem with the coverage, exactly?
John Boehner vs. Nancy Pelosi.
Huh? Pelosi is utterly reviled in the Right Wing media – they rip her constantly. The media does its usual “he said she said” thing, just like in the above examples. Lefty pundits rep Boehner and Righties rip Pelosi. And?
Clarence Thomas vs. Alcee Hastings.
I have no idea who Alcee Hastings is. edit: looked him up. House of Reps. Corrupt. Smacked down for it, but not forbidden to run for office again… which he did and won. What’s your issue, exactly?
Thomas was put through the wringer largely because he appears to have harrassed his female clerks. He’s also been accused by lefty pundits of being dim. Hastings… well hell, I had to look him up.
Robert Bork vs. Sonia Sotomayor.
Is it your contention that Sonia Sotomayor’s legal philosophy is as lefty as Bork’s was Righty? All I recall of the Sotomayor nomination was wide discussion of “wise latina” and “empathy.”
I am too young to remember the Bork hearings. From what I can tell, however, Bork had some seriously out-there views that would’ve made him – by far – the most conservative (one might say “radical”) member of teh court. I’m too young to remember media coverage of Bork. Sotomayor was ripped by RW media. Perhaps the difference is that if Bork was nominated now, Fox, Limbaugh, RedState, etc would all lavish praise on him.
Samuel Alito vs. Elena Kagan.
I didn’t pay much attention to either, honestly, but I did see some lefty bloggers ripping Kagan (from the left, of course).
What was your problem with media coverage of Alito?
Bill Janklow vs. Ted Kennedy.
Had to look up Janklow. According to Wikipedia:
“On December 8, 2003, Janklow was convicted by a Moody County jury of second-degree manslaughter… On January 22, Janklow was sentenced to spend 100 days in jail. After 30 days, he was able to leave the jail for several hours each day in order to perform community service. He was released on May 17, 2004.”
Seems to me your beef is with the legal system. One guy got convicted. The other walked. The situations seem roughly comparable. Kennedy’s career continued for decades (with the Right referencing Chappaquiddick all the while – which is totally fair, mind you). Thus, it seems to me that if there was a failure here, it was in the courts.
Bob Dole’s chest of medals vs. John Kerry’s chest of medals.
What?
John Ashcroft vs. Janet Reno.
Based on hazing memory, my inclination is to agree you on this one.
@OzarkHillbilly: “Then that whole Paul Ryan “Roadmap to Prosperity” was just a complete lie?”
Well duh! More seriously, while Ryan may actually believe in the snake oil he’s peddling (after all, the most influential book of his life is “Atlas Shrugged”), he may also actually know that many of his advocacies are free shots–they won’t really happen, but it doesn’t hurt to try. (Unless the opposition actually says, for example, “go ahead, plunge the country into potential default. Fortunately for the Congressman Ryans of the world, the other side blinked instead.)
I don’t need to read charts just listening to the effete media tells me plenty. Their questions and the attitudes they exhibit when asking them and then their follow ups paint a vivid picture.
In the 70’s they simply implied certain points of view now they take sides.
Some, though very few, have admitted their bias.
The reason the country is going into the shitter is manifested in the “only 16% to 20% call themselves liberal” stat.
I am a child of the New Deal. 30 years after its passage in the mid 60s, I entered elementary school and the future was a dazzling palette of unfettered opportunity.
30 years after the Reagan Revolution and look at what a kid now entering school faces.
A future wrecked by 30 years of “conservative’ ideology run amok.
The Liberals ran the show in Congress for 60 years with only 4 years of Republican majorities in the House…the glory years because conservatives were literally exiled from holding the reins of power (Ike was a war hero) since that “liberal” generation remembered that when conservatives did have the power in the 20s, America almost went down in flames.
All those voters are now dead and instead we have the morons running the asylum…just look at the disaster that is Perry and Palin and Romney and many of the right wing nut cases who post here.
Conservative doctrine is popular with the selfish, me oriented baby boom generation whose only claim to fame is how to avoid being caught and not taking responsibility for anything.
We have become inured to the idiocy of the right and it would be a big joke if not for the real world effects of their unhinged philosophies.