Burch: Dinosaur Demographics

Thursday, November 8, 2012 at 10:05pm
By Michael R. Burch

Barack Obama’s victory over Mitt Romney may have saved the American middle class, depending on what Romney may or may not have done after assuming the presidency. Now we’ll never know. But Romney was gracious and conciliatory in defeat and hereafter the focus falls squarely on President Obama and the obstructionist GOP — a rudderless, captain-less ship rushing headlong toward destruction by an immense iceberg called Demographics.

The GOP’s main appeal is to aging white Christian alpha males — the kind who go to church, read the Bible, sing a few hymns, then try to chauvinistically dictate how other people should live their lives. Thus the GOP has lost all appeal for the majority of women, gays, minorities and increasingly liberal-minded young people. The GOP’s problem is obvious: the American public is becoming more diverse and tolerant, so racism, sexism and homophobia increasingly alienate voters, driving them to Democratic candidates, even in tough economic times.

Because the economy has been in the doldrums for Obama’s first term, this should have been an election in which the GOP won back the presidency and picked up seats in Congress. But an interesting thing happened on the way to the quorum: women, gays, minorities and young people didn’t vote for economic saviors. By resounding margins they preferred life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Some of them stood in line until the wee hours of the morning to make their voices heard. And they voted for equality and progress, even if it means paying higher taxes to help the less advantaged. In the end, there weren’t enough white men voting their wallets and narrow-minded parochialism for Republicans to win. And there will be fewer and fewer white patriarchs voting in each new election.

Voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington said “yes” to gay marriage. Minnesota voters rejected an attempt to ban gay marriage. Wisconsin voters elected the nation’s first openly gay senator. Voters in Colorado and Washington approved the recreational use of marijuana. So the handwriting is clearly on the wall for backward-looking Republicans: “You have been measured and found wanting ... .”

Tea Party types who were fired by voters included Joe Walsh, Richard Mourdock, Todd Akin and Allen West. Even Michelle Bachmann was in danger of losing to a Democrat in a heavily Republican district, despite outspending him by a factor of 12 to 1. Is there any doubt that lunatic-fringe “crackpottery” was a major cause of voter displeasure?

Romney was obviously not the main problem. The blowout would have been even worse if the Republican presidential candidate had been an arch-conservative like Santorum, Bachmann, Cain, Perry or Palin.

How can we be sure? Well, the GOP had 17 viable Senate candidates, most of whom ran far to the right of Romney. In 12 of the 17 states in question, Romney outperformed the more conservative Senate candidates, often by wide margins. The five candidates who bested Romney in their respective states all ran as moderates. So voters rejected conservatism and the presidential race was only as close as it was because Romney ditched being “severely conservative” by morphing into Peace Butterfly Mitt in a carefully calculated and orchestrated Etch-a-Sketch campaign. But he lost credibility in the process, a victim of his party’s medieval worldview that required him to play a warlike hayseed in the early going.

The handwriting may also be on the wall for the pro-Israel war hawks and neocons. (Ironically, the majority of Jewish voters also rejected conservatism.) Sheldon Adelson was 0-7 on the night as all the candidates he funded — George Allen, Shmuley Boteach, Adam Hasner, Connie Mack, West, Romney and Pat Ryan — were defeated. Since the hawks tend to be wildly regressive on social issues, their plans to ally Israel and the U.S. in new Holy Wars may be going down the tubes, thanks to Demographics.

Demographics also suggest that the GOP will have trouble winning elections as long as nearly every plank in its platform remains a creaking anachronism: anti-equality, anti-choice, anti-progress, anti-peace. If the economy continues to improve, and the Democrats are seen as being better on both economics and social issues, Republicans may go the way of the dinosaurs, plodding inexorably toward extinction. If they want to survive, they need to admit that it’s now the 21st century and start to evolve.

Michael R. Burch is a Nashville-based editor and publisher of Holocaust poetry and other “things literary” at www.thehypertexts.com.

Filed under: City Voices
Tagged: Michael Burch

206 Comments on this post:

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 10:03

pswindle,

I agree with your friend's son. Tennessee is being run by a bunch of hayseed theocrats who read the tea leaves of ancient religious texts and try to divine the will of an invisible God. They don't believe in women's rights, gay rights, global warming, evolution or basic science if a verse in the Bible claims God said otherwise. But the Bible is full of verses that have been proven wrong by scientists and historians.

By: jvh2b on 11/9/12 at 10:04

Kenyan contient eh? Which one of the 7 is that again?

And more entitled...what a chock of pure bs...coming from the lead producer of bs on this board though...not really a suprise.

By: pswindle on 11/9/12 at 10:04

Yogi, saying over and over again that President Obama is not legally the president, does not change the facts that he is legal and president.You are beginning ti sound like Trump.

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 10:04

BenDover,

Do you believe that if you son gets sick and can't work, he should suffer and die without medical care, in a land of plenty?

By: bfra on 11/9/12 at 10:14

mIKE - Isn't that the way most teapubs think?

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 10:14

BenDover,

I meant to ask ...

Do you believe that if your son gets sick and can't work, he should suffer and die without medical care, in a land of plenty?

Jesus Christ, the apostles and Hebrew prophets all clearly said that people "with" should help the people "without." Jesus did not make this "optional" but a requirement for his disciples. When he was asked specifically what his disciples should do, Jesus said the FIRST thing was to help the poor, after which people could follow him.

Jesus died with only the clothes on his back, setting an example for his disciples. This is why monks took vows of poverty and dedicate their lives to helping other people. They were following the example of Jesus and the apostles.

Jesus and the early Christians were not conservatives, but flaming liberals. If you read the history of the early Christian church, recorded in Acts, people who joined the church sold all their possessions and the proceeds were shared equally by the church. They lived and ate together, in a commune. They were communists.

So it is beyond bizarre for people to claim to be Christians and oppose aid to the poor. Anyone who has actually read the Bible knows that one thing it is very consistent about is the need for people of faith to help the less fortunate, by SHARING. But conservatives are like spoiled brats who want to keep everything for themselves.

By: bfra on 11/9/12 at 10:15

Sorry Mike - I hit the cap lock.

By: BenDover on 11/9/12 at 10:17

That's not what I said Burch. Your comment was necessarily indiscriminate. '47%' says that roughly half are responsible for the other half. Is that your position or not?

The single mom struggling to get by... everyone's OK with that... and, in fact, has little trouble with private charitable sources. I've got an old friend though who is perfectly healthy and chooses a life as a sofa vagabond... swings a hammer a couple of days a week for beer money. He, too, is in your 47%... likely more like in the lowest 10%.

Does you gracious act of stealing money from those who have earned it in order to provide for the needy in the way YOU see fit extend to him? That is what indiscriminate progressive taxation does. That is what needs based housing, welfare and health-care does. is this your grand model upon which you wish to build a thriving nation?

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 10:20

BenDover,

Conservatives want to keep everything for themselves, even if it means killing other people. If you are not a super-wealthy man, and your son gets sick and can't work, under someone like Romney you would have to watch him suffer and die, as one of 47% who are not worthy of food, housing and healthcare because they can't pay taxes.

Never mind that Bishop Romney himself did everything possible to avoid paying taxes he could easily afford.

Personally, I don't think pure communism can work in the real world. But neither can pure, unbridled capitalism. The system we have is actually pretty good for a highly imperfect world: encourage hard work by letting people keep most of what they make, but use taxes to help the elderly, the sick and the poor.

Rather than giving welfare handouts, we should use modern technology to let unemployed people provide labor to the government, at minimal rates. That will encourage anyone who is able to find a better-paying job to do so.

I think an "everyone works" system is better than a welfare system based on handouts. Even mothers with children can work from home these days.

But the Romney-Ryan "plan" is basically to "rescue" the rick from less fortunate people, by letting them die off or shipping them to the glue factory.

By: BenDover on 11/9/12 at 10:22

Here's the original question you have not yet answered again, Mike.

"Burch... do you honestly believe that one free healthy man is obligated to pay for the food, housing and healthcare for another free healthy man?"

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 10:28

bfra,

Unfortunately, that is the way most teapubs and Neanderthals think ... except that Neanderthals did care for their sick and elderly.

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 10:31

BenDover,

If your son's house is on fire, should healthy men put themselves in danger's way to try to rescue him? Of course they should.

So why should healthy men not help people who are not healthy, at no risk to their lives or health, by paying part of what they make in taxes?

Do you want cops, firefighters and soldiers to risk their lives for you, if you are unwilling to help other people at no risk to your own life?

That makes no sense to me. If one person has no obligation to anyone else, we should let people die in fires. But we don't.

By: BenDover on 11/9/12 at 10:32

What excuse to you plan to use when our vast diversion from our core principles as a nation continue to drive the economy into the dumper, Mike. Do you not realize what has made the US exceptional.

Obesity is a leading indicator of poverty in this country, Mike. Even the poorest among us have color TV, Air Conditioning and Cellular Telephones. The ones homeless and destitute on the streets are either temporary cases who have not taken advantage of the social safety net available to them; or are situations of mental illness or counter-culture lifestyle preference.

But that's not enough for you... you want to kill the engine that provides the excess necessary to fund our bloated government and our public and private charitable safety net. You aim at a flawed numerously dis-proven society that punishes success and rewards failure... and sadly it is the people you purport to help who are and will be harmed the most by it.

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 10:36

BenDover,

My answer is yes, we should help our brothers and sisters when they have legitimate needs for help, whether it is facing death due to fires or starvation or disease.

I agree with Jesus, the apostles and the Hebrew prophets that we do have an obligation to help each other. Many conservatives have become Pharisees, who go to church, pretend to believe in God, and yet ignore the main ethical teaching of Jesus, the apostles and the Hebrew prophets, which is to practice compassion and help the less fortunate.

If you disagree with me, please take the matter up with God, Jesus, the apostles and the prophets. According to the prophets, God was not pleased with prayers or sacrifices, when religious people refused to help the poor and needy.

By: BenDover on 11/9/12 at 10:40

What kind of ridiculous strawman are you trying to construct that has me against firefighters and policemen Mike. What kind of a contortion is it to call me UN-American to want to keep a uniquely American form of a work/reward economy so that we can pay for the well being of heroes who choose these professions and not let our economy be eaten away by the cancer of the sofa vagabonds you wish to indiscriminately reward with progressive taxation and by having the work of others fund the health care of slackers?

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 10:43

BenDover,

It's not just poor people who are overweight.

You seem to be a victim of right-wing brainwashing, which claims that our system "punishes success" when in fact the system is tilted wildly to favor the wealthiest 1%. Look at Bishop Romney, with his 137 offshore shell corporations and his $100 million IRA.

The main impediment to our continued success as a nation is the accumulation of most of the nation's wealth by a few super-rich individuals. They use their money to get politicians elected who will help them get even more money, by rigging the system to their advantage.

If the system was more fair, and more balanced, and put more spending money in the pockets of the middle and lower classes, everyone would benefit. But the system is not fair and balanced, and that more than anything threatens our solvency as a nation.

By: BenDover on 11/9/12 at 10:47

I sometimes have to wonder if the idealistic liberals I often debate with have ever been poor or even know anyone who is poor. The absurdity of policy that indiscriminately rewards people simply because they do not have at the expense of others who do have is in absolute contrast to the work / reward formula that has made this country so exceptional and has provided all of the excess with which we can deal with real destitution and poverty.

By: Captain Nemo on 11/9/12 at 10:50

Rasputin you are grateful that Romney cleared up the matter about the 47%

“Clearly in a campaign with hundreds if not thousands of speeches and question and answer sessions, now and then you’re gonna say something that doesn’t come out right,” Romney said in an interview Wednesday night with Fox News’ Sean Hannity. “In this case I said something that’s just completely wrong.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/romney-says-he-was-completely-wrong-about-47-percent-comments/

By: brrrrk on 11/9/12 at 10:55

BenDover said

"There's no other way around it... the champions of divisiveness won the election by a small margin. Driving wedges and exaggerating differences based on gender, sexual preference, union affiliation, public/private sector, age, race and class spooked enough people into supporting Obama and the 24/7 weather channel commercials of Bill Clinton, of all people, touting the idea of Obama as President Thrifty for 4 more years just was the icing on the cake."

Obama won every demographic but white men..... and the Democrats were divisive? Do you even understand the definition of "divide"?

By: Captain Nemo on 11/9/12 at 10:57

yogi you have no entitlements or rights you are a troll.

By: slacker on 11/9/12 at 11:01

Ben, those dreamers have always been around, just not as many.The politically correct dogma, that has infiltrated schools & universities, is churning these guys out by the thousands.
Its not going to change, you're wasting your breath.

By: bfra on 11/9/12 at 11:04

Romney also did a flip flop on FEMA & said he supports it. Nothing new there, he flip flopped on just about everything he said. What ever he "thought" would get the votes. It backfired!

By: BenDover on 11/9/12 at 11:09

Then, Burch, why didn't you support Romney who supported a plan to eliminate the loopholes and cronyism deductions in favor of a simpler tax structure that would eliminate much of the compliance and avoidance costs and put America on par with other nations with respect to the Corporate rates.

Romney didn't make the rules but he played by them. He suggested reform that would certainly have been harmful to him personally with respect to taxes.

Yet you backed the guy who made Immelt his Jobs liaison after GE paid no taxes whatsoever on $14Billion in revenue. GE's income tax filing was 57,000 pages long, Burch. How does that add any value to society?

And you support President Crony Capital himself who signed legislation and regulation that puts a foot on the throat of businesses, presumably to use the mire of contradictory rules and regulations to shake down dissenters; all the while taking the assets from first position GM bondholders, tossing in Billions in taxpayer dollars, and then giving the company to the labor unions.

Do you see this as some kind of financial reparations? Cronyism stinks at all levels and the only guy on the ticket with a plan to start to reduce it last election was Mitt Romney.

By: BenDover on 11/9/12 at 11:11

I know Slack... but I figured I'd bust Burch's balls one more time though before I pack it in for this election season.

By: slacker on 11/9/12 at 11:20

Those poor souls unable to work, will somehow find the energy to riot in the streets, when the perks start disappearing. Perhaps a super secret plan to fight obesity?

By: brrrrk on 11/9/12 at 11:20

Mitt Romney Campaign Aides Had Credit Cards Canceled Late On Election Night

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/09/mitt-romney-campaign-cancels-credit-cards-staffers-aids-election-night_n_2099916.html

Mitt Romney, keepin' it classy right up to the end......

By: Captain Nemo on 11/9/12 at 11:26

bfra-

Romney’s flip flopping was one of many issues that caused him the election.

Ben I doubt that this will be the last time you try to bust His balls. So far I think you might have tickled him.

By: brrrrk on 11/9/12 at 11:29

slacker said

"Ben, those dreamers have always been around, just not as many.The politically correct dogma, that has infiltrated schools & universities, is churning these guys out by the thousands.
Its not going to change, you're wasting your breath."

Has it ever occurred to you that the reason kids become more liberal in college is because they are exposed to other ideas.... and that once exposed to those other ideas they realize that the policies of the right just don't hold up? But of course, it's much easier to blame someone else for the inadequacies of your own political leanings rather than even consider the fact that you just might be wrong?

By: bfra on 11/9/12 at 11:30

Nemo - Burch is probably tickled enough to really be laughing at Ben right now.

By: bfra on 11/9/12 at 11:31

Arrogance goes along with the yogi phobia!

By: yogiman on 11/9/12 at 11:31

pswindle,

It would be great if you and your fellow posters here simply did a little research on Obama.

I'm going to give you just a few quotes of his from his autobiography (believed being worded for him by his neighbor Bill Ayres where he started his campaign). You know, that guy that tried to blow the government up the USA? These quotes are from "Dreams from My Father". Consider that title Dreams FROM my father. Not just dreams of my father. Hell, you don't have to buy a copy. Just borrow it from the library.

1. "I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites".
2."I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race".
3. "There was something about her that made me wary, a little too sure of herself, maybe and white".
4. It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names".
5. "I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself: the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela".

And read this Number 6 closely: "I WILL STAND WITH THE MUSLIMS SHOULD THE POLITICAL WORLD SHIFT IN AN UGLY DIRECTION".

If he's your man, good luck... unless you're black.

By: Captain Nemo on 11/9/12 at 11:32

LOL brrrk

By: Captain Nemo on 11/9/12 at 11:35

yogi has no rights brains and is full of crap.

And you don't like what I say about your miserable troll life, then tell it tto my face.

By: yogiman on 11/9/12 at 11:37

One more thing, pswindle. He claims to be a Negro. He only has a small portion of Negro blood. I believe about 5%. He, of course, has 50% Caucasian from his mother and 45% Arabian blood from his paternal ancestors.

By: slacker on 11/9/12 at 11:38

brrrrk.. the pseudo-intellectuals in Greece would probably agree with you.

By: Captain Nemo on 11/9/12 at 11:39

African and Arabia or different you stupid old fool.

By: slacker on 11/9/12 at 11:40

yogi.. go to the bathroom and stay there the rest of the day.
I mean it mister!

By: yogiman on 11/9/12 at 11:43

pswindle,

Aren't you familiar with the rules of a race where you must be eligible to enter the race in order to win it?

I hope you all aren't too shocked when Barry fully exposes himself. I shouldn't take too much longer now. He's got you by the blls now.

By: Captain Nemo on 11/9/12 at 11:43

I hope you are enjoying your time in the spotlight yogi, because the (clicks) (Flush) and (fails) or about to return. The National smack the troll time is coming to a close.

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 11:48

Nemo and BenDover,

It is amusing to hear BenDover blaming Democrats for the problems of a system created by the super-rich to benefit the super-rich, with the help of their political lackeys like Bishop Romney and Lyin' Ryan.

BenDover, Romney wasn't going to "close loopholes" for the super-rich because that wouldn't come close to making his $7 trillion "rescue plan" for the super-rich balance.

Romney is an LBO expert. An LBO is a way to transfer lots of money from working people to "investors" who don't have to do any work to get millions or billions in "easy money."

If Romney wanted to help the economy, he would put MORE MONEY in the hands of people who would spend it, which means increasing taxes for the rich and preserving tax cuts for the middle class. That is the Democrats' plan.

Romney's plan is to transfer even more money to the wealthy, by getting rid of mortgage deductions, medical deductions, etc., for working people. He knows most Americans are so ignorant of basic economics that they can't see who the real losers will be. But all the experts agreed that Romney's plan would either greatly inflate the national debt or cause economic suffering for the middle class, in the form of higher taxes or lost deductions.

This is why Bill Clinton pointed out that simple arithmetic was Romney's doom. He is either lying deliberately in order to rob the middle class, or he is ignoring basic math.

By: brrrrk on 11/9/12 at 11:53

slacker said

"brrrrk.. the pseudo-intellectuals in Greece would probably agree with you."

Seriously, is that the best you got?! Lame Slack, lame.....

By: Mike Burch on 11/9/12 at 12:01

BenDover,

I don't think Romney had a fiscal plan, really. His goal was to get elected, then figure out things later. His voter base has a rigid ideology that the federal government is the root of all evil, that state government is always better, and the private business is even better.

This is a wild mythology. The federal government is better able to some things than the states. The states can do some things better than the federal government. Private businesses need to be able to make money, but history shows that drug companies, tobacco companies, cigarette companies, gun companies, etc., will gladly let people die in order to make a few more bucks.

The GOP just tells the lunatic fringe what it wants to hear, in order to get votes. But its fiscal, regulatory and social policies are an utter shambles.

By: Captain Nemo on 11/9/12 at 12:05

Mike this is a big reason why the Republican Party is where they are today. Instead of looking at themselves they are always looking to blame someone else for their short comings. Along with seeing that the only people that count or Old White Men, they are doomed. I don’t see them changing anytime soon to correct this flaw system of theirs.

By: brrrrk on 11/9/12 at 12:07

Mike Burch said

"Private businesses need to be able to make money, but history shows that drug companies, tobacco companies, cigarette companies, gun companies, etc., will gladly let people die in order to make a few more bucks."

To that end, read Wendall Potters' book, Deadly Spin, about insurance companies and how they manipulate public opinion in order to protect their obscene profits. There is no question that they readily sacrifice lives for money, and not just for survival, but for outrageous profits.

By: Captain Nemo on 11/9/12 at 12:18

brrrrk-

That reminds of something I was thinking about the other day, brrrk. I was looking at all of the cabs in New York floods from Sandy and I thought about the insurance companies would resale these watered damage cars to the unsuspecting citizens to make up for the lost.

By: yogiman on 11/9/12 at 12:34

Mike,

You seem to believe Mitt Romney should simply pay income tax even though he can legally avoid paying it.

Tell me, do you not look for any deductions on your taxes? If you don't, I'll admit, you're highly unusual and something special. But, heck, do you pay any taxes at all?

You Obama fans think Romney should show his taxes of 11 years but it's okay that Barry doesn't even show his birth certificate and school papers for any 4 years.

So let's look at his income tax report: Under what name is he filing under? What SSN did he use? How about fair and equal requirements.

By: yogiman on 11/9/12 at 12:44

Your face is too damned ugly to look at, dumba$$. I don't want to vomit by looking at you.

And to bring a little memory to your feeble mind: I agreed to meet with you before at the truck stop in Gordonsville. I was there early and waited for 30 minutes after the agreed time but you never showed up. Why should I take the time to see you again?

By: Loner on 11/9/12 at 12:53

Another fine missive from Nashville's own Mike Burch...the lonely voice of reason in the wilderness. The essay is insightful, thoughtful and well-written.

I would caution those liberals who schlep in the Hebrew Bible and the NT to justify, authorize, sanction and/or promote government programs that benefit the poor, the sick, the homeless, the infirm, infants, children and the elderly.

The "promote the general welfare" language in the US Constitution's preamble is sufficient grounding in the law of the land...promoting such programs is within the purview of our government....in fact, creating and promoting these programs are the duty of government.

By: Loner on 11/9/12 at 12:59

We should pity the confused and bitter old man, not bully him...he is a pathetic creature and his ilk are an endangered species...bless their twisted little hearts. Just ignore his hate-filled commentary.....he digs the (click)...so I installed the Silent Sentry system...it works for me.

By: Loner on 11/9/12 at 1:02

Yogi is old enough to have been one of the Southern Democrats who flipped over to the GOP after the Civil Rights Act was passed....he is a relic from the past...he was tricked by Tricky Dick...and remains clueless to this day.....pitiful.