A couple of actions by Congressional Republicans hours apart this past Tuesday night and Wednesday morning demonstrated how the Republican Party is in open warfare with itself. First, House Republicans were sharply divided in their vote to avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff.” Republican House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, atypically, did not make a speech on the House floor in support of the vote. Boehner’s second in command, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia, not only voted against his speaker and the fiscal cliff deal, he spoke out against it for all to hear. The Republican fiscal cliff vote tally in the House went against Speaker Boehner, with only 85 voting “yea” and 151 voting “nay” (the bill passed due to the overwhelming Democratic “yea” vote). This follows an embarrassing failure by Boehner to bring his own fiscal cliff “plan B” bill up for a vote in the House on December 20.
Author Archives:
Two Conservative arguments for gun control
The tragic killings of children in Newtown, Connecticut seem to have set off a noisy political debate over gun laws, perhaps more than previous mass shootings such as those in Aurora, Colorado and Tucson, Arizona. However, many of the arguments are likely to fall along the same lines as always, which could lead to the usual gridlock and inaction. To break this gridlock, advocates for stronger gun laws might benefit from two frames long used by conservatives:
1. “Law and Order”
Conservatives (and the Republican Party that they dominate) have long tried to claim the mantle of the party of “law and order.” Then-candidate Richard M. Nixon successfully ran for and won the Presidentcy on a “law and order” platform in 1968, as America was being roiled by anti-Vietnam War protests and the killings of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy. The death toll from the mass shootings of recent years far exceeds that of the events of 1968, thus we have more of a “law and order” problem today.
Likewise, the flip side of “law and order” is the charge that Republicans leveled against Democrats for years, i.e., that they were “soft on crime.” Also, note that being for “law and order” precisely fits framing guru George Lakoff‘s “strict father” paradigm which dominates among conservatives and Republicans, and which includes adherence to the “rule of law.” The “soft on crime” charge can be leveled against conservatives who fail to support reasonable steps to reduce gun crimes and maintain “law and order” in our streets and our schools.
Those who want to advocate for sensible gun laws (e.g., reinstating the Assault Weapons Ban, closing the “gun show loophole,” and establishing an effective database to prevent persons who have been ruled mentally incompetent from purchasing guns) are usually thought of as liberal. The “law and order” approach can turn this stereotype on its head, and maybe even attract a few conservatives or independents to the cause.
2. “Right to Life”
The Declaration of Independence contains the famous phrase: “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Likewise, the Constitution contains references to the right to life. Conservatives have glommed onto the “right to life” phrase to push for the outlawing of abortion. They strongly stand for the right to life — of fetuses. Once those fetuses are born, not so much.
However, advocates for sensible gun laws can argue for such laws based on the “right to life” of children and other would-be victims of mass shooters. This is especially apparent in a case like Newtown, where such a large portion of those killed were small children, gunned down in their classrooms. If you make the argument that these kids and their teachers and principals had a “right to life” or even a right to “freedom” — another favorite conservative word — from crazed gunmen with easy access to military-style assault weapons, the good Christians and other conservatives who advocate for the “right to life” of fetuses could have a hard time explaining why kids who were fetuses just a few years earlier don’t deserve the same protections.
Based on the lack of results on gun control over the past decade under the traditional approach, there’s no harm in giving these arguments a try and reporting back here as to what kind of reaction you receive.
President Obama creates fiscal cliff bumper sticker on Twitter
President Obama (or, presumably, one of his underlings) has created the equivalent of a bumper sticker phrase on Twitter, using the hashtag “#My2k“ to spread the message about the consequences of inaction in the so-called “fiscal cliff” situation. Specifically, “#My2k” refers to the tax increase of about $2,000 that the typical U.S. family would face if Congress does not extend the Bush tax cuts for incomes up to $250,000. President Obama and his staffers want Tweeps to use the “#My2k” hashtag to discuss (and tweet to their members of Congress) what that $2,000 means to them, in terms of paying their bills, paying for medical care, food and other necessities, etc.
The “#My2k” hashtag, not coincidentally, harks back to the “Y2k” (i.e., Year 2000) scare in 1999, when many people thought that the world’s computers would crash due to the impending date change, and many companies, government agencies, organizations and individuals took extraordinary steps to try to avert what could have been termed the “century cliff.” So the Obama administration is using fear to try to influence public policy. Tactically, therefore, they are taking a page from the Republicans, whose playbook regularly involves the use of fear tactics, from “mushroom clouds” to “Sharia law.” Once again, however, the Democrats’ scare tactics, unlike the Republicans’, are based in reality.
The “#My2k” hashtag is a good start. However, since not all American voters use Twitter, the Obama administration needs to use more traditional forms of communication, such as crashing the Sunday morning news shows, to push a coordinated “fiscal cliff” message.
UPDATE: The video above, posted on the White House website and at YouTube, demonstrates that the White House staffers are grasping this concept, and running with it.
Republicans, embroiled in civil war, cave on revenue frame
It has been Republican dogma for the past several years or longer that “we don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.” Kowtowing to private citizen Grover Norquist and his “no tax increase in any form, under any circumstances” pledge, Republicans in Congress and elsewhere have heretofore rejected any kind of balanced approach to shrinking the U.S. debt and deficit that involves raising revenues in any way. In one famous moment at their August 11, 2011 debate in Iowa, the Republican presidential candidates all rejected even a hypothetical solution that consisted of a ten to one ratio of spending cuts to tax increases. However, in the wake of their considerable defeat in the 2012 elections, the Republican wall against raising revenues is now crumbling.
Climate change is the new Internet
Want to know the dirty little secret that may cause many Republicans to believe in climate change? The secret is: there’s lots money to be made. Indeed, climate change a/k/a global warming could unleash economic opportunities on par with the Agricultural Revolution, the Industrial Revolution and the Information Revolution that kicked into high gear with the Internet. Here are some ways in which capitalists may capitalize on climate change:
The Republicans’ Hurricane Sandy problem
Multistate disasters like Hurricane Sandy, which is currently battering the Northeast, present a big problem for the Republican Party and its anti-government ideology. Here’s why:
Four debate pointers for President Obama
With the second Presidential debate between Barack Obama and Willard Mitt Romney around the corner and the third debate just six days later, President Obama should follow these four time-tested principles of successful political communication to gain the debate advantage:
Interview with Nicole Belle of Crooks and Liars
Nicole Belle
“Mom, Wife, Media Critic/Political Analyst, Blogger, Austen Fanatic, Unapologetic Liberal.” That’s Nicole Belle‘s bio at the Crooks and Liars progressive political blog, where she is Senior Editor and a regular contributor. Nicole has also written for Firedoglake, the ACLU blog, and elsewhere, and has been a frequent guest on political talk shows (including one where the author is a co-host).
With the 2012 presidential election just weeks away, and the campaign season in full frenzy, Messaging Matters spoke with Nicole to get her take on the political landscape:
The One Thing Democrats Should be Saying but Aren’t
At the Republican National Convention and elsewhere during this election season, the Republicans’ principal attack against President Obama is that he hasn’t fixed the economy or significantly lowered the unemployment rate. The Democrats have failed effectively to call the Republicans out for not lifting a finger to work with them and with President Obama to solve these economic issues.
The story is a simple and compelling one for the Democrats, if they would only tell it:
Republican Ideology Collides with Tropical Storm Isaac
Republicans hate “the government,” especially “the federal government.” That ideology has run through the Republican Party for decades, including opposition to regulation of financial markets, opposition to Medicare, calling for the elimination of the Departments of Education, Commerce, etc. President Ronald Reagan once famously said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.'” Ask residents of New Orleans how that Republican hands-off approach worked for them during Hurricane Katrina. This Republican ideology is being sorely tested again now by Tropical Storm (soon to be Hurricane) Isaac.
