Meet The Press: Broder Says You Just Can't Please The CPAC Crowd
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Heather)
On Meet The Press, Dean David Broder either carefully gives the McCain naysayers in the GOP the opening they need to come back into the fold, or dismisses their importance outright by saying that even the Patron Saint of Republicans, Ronald Reagan, was not embraced by this same CPAC crowd.
I had an interesting conversation with Frank Fahrenkopf who was the Republican National Committee Chairman when Ronald Reagan was President. And he was recalling that exactly the same people who were raising hell with John McCain now at CPAC and these other conservative conventions were doing the same thing with Ronald Reagan when Reagan was in the White House. And he said there is an element in that conservative wing of the Republican party that are just “agin-ers” and these folks have a limited constituency.
The corporate, repiglican, media pimp/ hemmroid speaks yet again ........ someone please pass the preparation h ... and 'liberally' spread on this hemmroids 'head' .. problem solved
Probably the one time I'll ever agree with Broder. The rabid anti-McCain voices represent only a small part of the activist Republican base. Every election cycle, they grouse about how their candidate is not Conservative enough, it's called working the ref. In the end, they're that 30% that continue to support Bush no matter what. After the primaries are over, they'll all be goose stepping in line right behind McCain. What you must understand about the Republican base is that their enthusiasm isn't based on liking a candidate, it's about their hatred of every step forwards for humanity and democracy from the Enlightenment to the Civil Rights movement.
Ronald Reagan is God. Broder is just reminding us of that.
John McCain was thoroughly booed by the CPAC, Ron Paul got cheers.
Youtube has both speeches. correction
RP http://youtube.com/watch?v=nWdtMftHTtQ 30 results
JMcC sorry couldn't find any
I love the smell of alienation within the Republican Party in the morning.
Broder says you just can't please the CPAC crowd.
Broder ought to know. Phony centrist wanker.
Broder making sense; haven't seen that in a long time.
I thought no one ever opposed St. Reagan. Wasn't he Jesus?
People are just learning NOW that CPAC types can't be pleased? I could've told you that if I was around in the late 50s/early 60s before their BS-based movement gathered steam. Hello! It's been said! Christian Taliban!
Snowball @ 2:
Absolutely dead-on.
BTW, for those wondering why these CPAC Nazis love Ron Paul; it's because they fantasize about a weak, almost nonexistent federal government that would allow them to freely pursue their goal of a fascist pseudo-theocracy.
OT, but:
Sorry, candidates: Waterboarding works
By Bill O‘Reilly
The Boston Herald was never a good paper.
Yes, Broder doesn't like the furthest right of the CPAC crowd. But the only time you'll hear that from him is when his boy McCain is threatened by them. I say, keep nattering, CPAC! You'll drag McCain down and lower the vote! Then my second-favorite Democrat, the one who speaks well but says nothing, will beat him!
Snowball @ 2:
Yeah, like you said.
I'd also add that they don't seem to get that their views are in the minority. When voters reject conservative candidates (Bush Sr. and Dole, for instance) blowhards like Limbaugh say it's because they weren't conservative enough, which makes no sense at all.
Isn't this AssClown Majorus dead yet?
CoIntelPro @ 13: prior thread
I was listening to Mike McConnell a right wing radio buffoon last night. He was already trying act like he had been more to the left all along. "Why do people trash liberals when the real problem is apathy?" A month ago he was more than happy to trash liberals. The conservative movement is showing signs of rigor.
As Jeeves would have said it's all about the psychology of the individual. If you gather together a group of individuals who are by nature intolerant of any view that is not their own there cannot be a perfect candidate other than themselves. I think the closest any historical figure has come to the perfect arch-republican candidate for this segment of the Republican party is Stalin. Stalin was prepared to tell all citizens under his control what they could think, who they could love, where they could live, even if they could live. As the ultimate control freak he is person they could really get behind.
Snowball @ 2:
Excellent statement. These are also the same people who are multi-millionaire/billionaire's, yet their most pressing issue is getting another tax-cut, paid for by people who make $40,000 a year. In short, the scum of the earth!
Aw Jeez, Nicole, As if they'll need an opening to get back into the fold. When push comes to shove, sometime by September at the latest, they'll all be claw in claw singing of the same sheet of neo-con composed music - you know, something like "Onward Christ-John Soldiers" or something like that. Right behind Mr. hated Maverick. Until then, I'm gonna have some fun regularly needling my Kool-aid bathing LDS neighbor who wasted breath trying to tell me that I "should have voted for McCain - he's the most liberal candidate in the race right now." With no more Mittens in the race, can't wait for her to hoist her Hillary sign, yaknow?
i kept wanting to straighten his tie...
broder is a punk.
talk about a manufacturer of opinion and consent.
hes a bullshit artist with a multi colored and textured pallet!
arnold benedict @ 4:
They also cheered Bush, screaming "4 more years!"
And then don't they realize that Bush = McCain = Bush?
All the things they are pissed at MCcain for, Bush supports.
These people ARE morons.
If the people at CPAC were mostly supportive of John McCain, then David Broder would be telling us that they're wonderful people who represent America.
Since they're mostly against John McCain, Broder describes them as extremists who can't be pleased.
The myth of Ronald Reagan as a strict conservative is being imploded. As some have pointed out, Reagan would have a hard time meeting the conservative litmus test if he were running for president today, given his positions such as raising taxes (the two biggest tax increases ever were his) and amnesty for illegal immigrants. Near the end of Reagan's second term, Howard Phillips of the Conservative Caucus even charged Reagan with "fronting as a useful idiot for Soviet propaganda."
Joementum @ 13:
Not really surprising, since it's pretty much the same for progressives as well. They thought that by voting for Nader, even if it led to Bush being elected, people would be so shocked at how horrible a Bush presidency was that a progressive would be elected next time. Instead we not only had (briefly) 70% approval ratings for Bush, not only was he re-elected, but McCain is still given a chance at winning this time around.
More importantly (and loudly), progressives seem to think that everyone would be pro-environment, pro-choice, pro-civil rights, anti-torture, etc. if only it wasn't for the evil right-wing media conspiracy spinning the news, and that the left-most candidate would win all the elections if it wasn't for the massive vote-rigging going on (cf. Kucinich in NH). They can't seem to get around the fact that most people in the US, even Democrats are pretty conservative, and you win in the long run by moving the position of the center (just like the Republicans did between 1964 and 1980), not by having a sudden radical shift in the thinking of 60% of the population.
wtf is an aginer?
Just the corporate owned losers of the punditocracy trying install grampa munster as the next presnit.
"You Just Can’t Please The CPAC Crowd" Why would anyone want to "please" the CPAC crowd.
Jeff @ 26:
Someone who takes a kneejerk position ag(a)in(st) things. "I don't know what he means by that, but I'm agin' it."
Comments are closed on this entry