Today's conservatism is a caricature of that movement: It embraces pointless wars, runs up a vast debt, and trashes the Constitution. Selling out their principles for power, abandoning deeply seated American values and traditions simply because someone on "their side" demanded that they do so, conservatives have made a deal with the devil that has reduced their movement to an empty, ends-obsessed shell. How did the party of Lincoln end up marching under the banner of Tom DeLay and Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney and Ann Coulter?

And the vast majority of the population of the United States are missing this very valid point because...?

"And the vast majority of the population of the United States are missing this very valid point because...?"

We have become a nation of looters. We are worried someone else is getting more government services than we are, so we madly grab all the candy bars we can from the poorly attended display rack.

How did the party of Lincoln end up marching under the banner of Tom DeLay and Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney and Ann Coulter?

The rise of the fundamentalist Christian right, particularly in the South, as the backbone of the Republican party. No national GOP candidate can win without them, and they represent the worst thinking of the American right. Electoral college math is important to this, too, because it depends so heavily on manipulating small-to-moderate size groups in otherwise inconsequential states, rather than attempting to reach out to the American people as a whole.

I think organized labor plays a similar, counterproductive role for the Democrats, except that organized labor as a whole is waning greatly in power while the Christian right is still at or near its peak, with a few cracks starting to appear in its support.

I also think that a big part of the problem is that with 9/11 President Bush was thrust into a position he wasn't prepared for; he hadn't done much thinking at all about big geopolitical issues (recall that during the 2000 campaign, he had no idea who was president of Pakistan). He just wanted to come in, lower taxes, and appoint judges to overturn Roe. He (and quite frankly, most of the U.S.) didn't give a bit of thought to the rising challenge of Islamism. His approach to that strikes me as reflecting a short-sightedness borne of the desperation to do something in the face of a problem he had no idea he would have do solve in a serious fashion.

Or, as I sometimes call Matt Welch and myself, "common-sense moderates"

Personally, when someone asks me what my "political affiliation" is, I reply: "I'm a pragmatist".

I love it, because it drives BOTH the radical feminists and bible thumpers crazy simultaneously.

If there is one thing that ALL extremists can't stand, it's the word "practical".

Why do we need pat labels at all? Though if we must, I'll just go with "evil". Deconstruct that, you pomo lamers!

> the backbone of the
> Republican party.

They're not the backbone any more than any other set of voters is. They're just an important bloc that modern Democrats have forsaken, irrevocably. Without a sexpot rockstar like Clinton on the ballot, there's no way Dems can appeal to those voters. Rather than review their principles and win elections, it's easier to demonize and mock religious voters as being too naive to see all these important truths. Calling them a "backbone" pretends that they're so integrated into the right's organism that they can't be repurposed. It's defeatist and snotty.

Presumably everbody here is a political sophisticate who believes that identity politics is the enemy (Justin seems to imply this above). So what reason is there to give yourself a description at all? I'm a lifelong Democrat who voted for Bush twice. When you're giving yourself a name like that, all you're doing is making it easy for the Carville of the world to package and sell you.

That's Paul's a bright young fella!

"in otherwise inconsequential states"
Now Justin, the country farmer delegates who showed up at the first Constitutional convention sat at the back, hoping to wrap things up quickly so they could get back to their fields. Then they heard the term "otherwise inconsequential" and they moved their chairs up to the front. They argued long into the night over what "inconsequential" meant and they decided it meant that farm states get two senators and two electoral votes even if there's only one guy living there.

You know martin, that phrase "otherwise inconsequential states," was actually Crid-bait. He didn't step up, but you did, and I must say that your writing style there echoes his.

I still stand by it, though. I find it annoying that our national politics get held hostage to the whims of states that lead the U.S. in nothing per capita except farm subsidies (I'm talking to you, Iowa!).

So this person at Salon is telling us we're fools to support a GOP candidate? "If you're a real conservative/libertarian, you wouldn't touch these guys." How novel. It's like the left atheists telling me, if I'm a Christian I should support them, because they want to give money to the poor and don't I know what Jesus taught? "If I were a Christian, I'd be a better one than you, not that I personally believe any of that shit."

More wedge politics BS. It's more than just a checklist of positions. I never thought GWB was a conservative, not like Reagan, because he is Poppy's son, and he eventually started acting more like him too. But I voted for him (the second time) because, on balance, I agreed with him more than with Kerry.

No, the GOPers are not all Reagans or Goldwaters but who ever said they were.

I still stand by it, though. I find it annoying that our national politics get held hostage to the whims of states that lead the U.S. in nothing per capita except farm subsidies (I'm talking to you, Iowa!).

It's set up that way because we're supposed to be a Federal Republic. The individual states are (originally) more like sovereign governments that banded together to achieve certain common goals. The imperial federal government has become such a concentrated power that state governments have effectively been reduced to being provincial administrators.

Amy, what I know about SoCal geography could fit on the head of a pin. Are you and Gregg doing OK? What about Maia Lazar?

Aww, thanks for asking Jessica. I'm not near the fires, just got back from French after a long day on deadline. Gregg is fine, too, as is Lucy.

Maia is at UCSD, and I'm guessing they have evacuation plans if it gets dangerous.