Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Guy Whitey Corngood

(26,482 posts)
Sun Sep 9, 2012, 11:22 PM Sep 2012

Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo)



Paul M. Weyrich (October 7, 1942 – December 18, 2008)

Paul Weyrich, "father" of the right-wing movement and co-founder of the Heritage Foundation, Moral Majority and various other groups tells his flock that he doesn't want people to vote. He complains that fellow Christians have "Goo-Goo Syndrome": Good Government. Classic clip from 1980. This guy still gives weekly strategy sessions to Republicans nowadays. The entire dialog from the clip:

"Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome — good government. They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

chknltl

(10,558 posts)
1. Yes but, which speech was this taken from?
Sun Sep 9, 2012, 11:48 PM
Sep 2012

A Republican friend of mine would like to hear or at least read this entire speech so he can have it in it's 'true context' as he puts it. Does anyone have any idea where this originated?

Btw, as is noted in your post, P. Weyrich is dead. Furthermore, the job of dead advisor "still giving weekly strategy sessions to Republicans" would have to go to Ayn Rand not Paul Weyrich. I suspect they use an elderly lady in a turban with a Ouija Board at those sessions.

Guy Whitey Corngood

(26,482 posts)
4. I couldn't find the whole thing. If he's so interested in the full speech. He should look it up.
Sun Sep 9, 2012, 11:57 PM
Sep 2012

It's not up to you to do his research. I can't imagine what in possible context could those words be uttered that would mean something other than depressing the vote. He may not be advocating anything explicitly illegal. But the idea is there. Given that he was a founding member of ALEC which has had a disastrous and corrupting influence in our system and the fact that he just died less than 4 years ago. I'd say his influence is very much alive.

chknltl

(10,558 posts)
6. I tried looking it up but no joy there.
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 12:17 AM
Sep 2012

A brief bit about my friend who is a Republican. He is a WWII army vet. He is a devout Christian and an ex Republican Precinct Commander. I Otoh am none of the above and much younger, and yet we are dear friends. It has been my goal for many years now to get him to admit that his party has gone off the deep end and deserted all that he believes in. Obviously time draws short as WWII vets pass on into history quite frequently these days.. My friend will be greatly missed by our community when he goes and I will greatly miss our political chats....I will flat out miss him period. Truth be told, he is not tech savvy enough to look up the requested information-information that I can not find either.

Guy Whitey Corngood

(26,482 posts)
7. Even before posting I kept trying to find a longer version or even a transcript. I've been
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 12:23 AM
Sep 2012

curious about listening to the entire thing ever since I heard it on Thomm Hartmann. If I come across something more complete I'll pass it along. In the past I've enjoyed having conversations with older folks on the right about some of these topics but i have to admit it gets harder and harder.

chknltl

(10,558 posts)
14. Sounds like you get where i am coming from, they can be hard to talk to.
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 01:37 AM
Sep 2012

Not drinking a lot of coffee beforehand helps. Patience helps too.

Here is a whole lot more about my elderly friend Raymond Seick:

I know I will never turn my friend away from the dark side. He
knows he will never change me either but we do cherish our time together. We can generally be found at a picnic table in a grove of Gary Oaks at Ft. Steillacoom park. He sells discs for frisbee golf there. He designed much of our disc golf course, taught hundreds of us how to throw our first discs and if I have anything to say about it our course will be named after him when he passes on. We were once ranked 9th best disc golf course in the nation thanks to his efforts! He is genuinely loved by hundreds within our community.

He knows I have as a goal to get him to admit, if just one time only, that the GOP is wrong. I have used this Weyrich vid in my arguments with him. The fact that he was willing to fight for our democracy is my most recent angle of debate with him. I have presented him that video plus details of how the GOP is scrubbing millions of votes. His response was two fold, one was to ask me what I had against voter ID, which I easily countered, (or so I thought), the other was anecdotal evidence, something I could not counter.

He informed me that back when he worked as a volunteer at a polling station, he was told by the Republican party to accept votes from ANYBODY with a voter ID card. They did not then nor do they now have a photo on that card. He asked me what was stopping someone from voting multiple times with that card by going off to different precincts, and reminded me that the GOP told him he could not deny such a person the right to vote. When I pointed out that this sounded like a GOP ploy to commit voter fraud, he looked me square in the eye and asked; "How do you know those fraudulent voters weren't Democrats?" Right there he dismissed my earlier dismissal of the GOP push for the newer voter I'D cards.

So far, the Paul Weyrich snippet video has him partially stumped. He says he would like to fully see and understand the entire context of it before passing judgment.

He truly is a dear elderly friend, his son in law is about my age, another right winger, (who refuses to talk politics with me because things get heated), is also my friend. We enjoy debating my atheism vs his Christianity but that is a whole different can of worms. I suppose in his eyes my going to hell has no bearing on how I vote.

One day, I may bring my elderly friend into the DU for a chat, he is quite the talker and I would love to see his reactions to the thoughts of our fellow DUers. He is just a typical middle class product of an era that is almost gone. If we put our anger aside, I think there could be much to learn from him and who knows, maybe he might learn from us....which of course would be my goal.

If you or anyone else got this far with me, thanks for reading about my friend Raymond Seick. Regarding the Paul Weyrich video, I'll thank you ahead of time for any research you may choose to do in locating the entire text and setting of that speech. I have looked around a bit but so far found nothing.

Indpndnt

(2,391 posts)
12. Convince your friend to post on Freeperland.
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 01:27 AM
Sep 2012

The lunacy that is spewed back at him there should make him realize what's what. If he won't post, then show him some hot topics on there. When anyone dares to make a comment even resembling reality, they are virulently attacked and accused of being spineless/stupid/provocative/traitorous/infiltrating.

Guy Whitey Corngood

(26,482 posts)
13. But make sure he gets vaccinated afterward. I don't recommend approaching that
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 01:30 AM
Sep 2012

cesspool without taking some precautions.

chknltl

(10,558 posts)
16. That is not a half bad idea! As a matter of fact...
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 02:07 AM
Sep 2012

I just may have to do that. Truth be told I won't sign him up over there, not only because those idiots would chew him up and spit him out, (hell I would never rec. that place to an enemy much less a friend) instead my primary reason is I would never sign myself up there either.

That said, letting him ghost through there with my so called smart phone is a truly great notion! I will definitely take him on that trip through insanity and let him see the face of .....well not sure what to call those guys, they ARE to the right of the current GOP, (they hate Romney). Yes, this is a grand notion. Thanks Indpndnt (cool name, a little short on vowels though.... )

alp227

(31,961 posts)
11. Ran a search on google books,
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 01:19 AM
Sep 2012
http://books.google.com/books?id=g0tCwOhyl7MC&pg=PA257&lpg=PA257&dq=%22Paul+weyrich%22+%22We+have+no+responsibility,+moral+or+otherwise,+to+turn+out+our+opposition.%22&source=bl&ots=XCjkD1M_Dc&sig=xZm77cdHCEbewG2f3uGtBPXc_RM&hl=en#v=onepage&q=%22Paul%20weyrich%22%20%22We%20have%20no%20responsibility%2C%20moral%20or%20otherwise%2C%20to%20turn%20out%20our%20opposition.%22&f=false

This book "Invisible Hands: The Businessmen's Crusade Against the New Deal" by Kim Phillips-Fen has an account of the Weyrich speech. Can't find a full video though.

PFAW described this event as "a 1980 training session for 15,000 conservative preachers in Dallas."

The part cut off from the PFAW's clip of Weyrich (available on Youtube) and the clip of Weyrich that Thom Hartmann plays a lot is Weyrich saying: "We have no responsibility, moral or otherwise, to turn out our opposition," bolstering the connection between Weyrich's words then and the voter ID laws now.

chknltl

(10,558 posts)
15. both of these links are good!
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 01:47 AM
Sep 2012

This add much more than I had, the second link even describes an interesting context in that the speech is specifically designed to be one of voter suppression!

At the very least I will be bringing this to my debate with my friend the Republican. Thank you very much alp227.

metalbot

(1,058 posts)
3. What about here?
Sun Sep 9, 2012, 11:56 PM
Sep 2012

Do you think anyone on this site is thinking or saying "You know what, I hope the fundamentalist Christian right shows up in droves in November!"

He's got a valid (but sad) point no matter which side of the aisle you sit on.

Obama wasn't elected by a majority of eligible voters. He was elected by about 30% of eligible voters, which was sufficient to beat McCain who got about 27% of eligible voters.

I suspect that a high voter turnout in November is probably bad for Obama, as he's unlikely to pull the level of enthusiasm that he did in 2008. A high turnout this year probably means more people coming out to vote against Obama.

Guy Whitey Corngood

(26,482 posts)
5. Bullshit. No one here has any influence on the Democratic party. So saying in an anonymous web
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 12:04 AM
Sep 2012

site. "I hope these bible thumping so and sos stay home". Is not the same as having a founding member of ALEC (the group who's coincidentally been designing all these voter suppression laws) advocate for low voter turnout. This man was Reagan's top contact with the religious right. When one of Obama's (Clinton's or Carter's former) advisers makes similar statements then come talk to me. With all due respect your last sentence is just nonsense. High turnout wouldn't necessarily indicate one thing or another. The only way of knowing would be by Nov. 7. had the turnout been higher in 2010 the Teabaggers wouldn't have had such a great night.

Obama’s silent, non-voting majority

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/08/15/obamas-silent-majority/

Silent Majority: Obama's Smart Get-Out-the-Vote Strategy

http://assets.usw.org/action-center/voter-headquarters/2012-voter-suppression-toolkit/voterSuppression-legalsize.pdf

metalbot

(1,058 posts)
8. Voter turnout was very high in 2010
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 12:36 AM
Sep 2012

In fact, it was the largest jump between non-presidential national election years. 2010 saw 90 million votes over the 80 million that were cast in 2006. The high turnout in 2010 definitely helped the Republicans. You can see a similar jump in off year participation in the 94' election response to Clinton. The fact that turnout was low in 1996 helped Clinton. I have a hard time believing that a high turnout is good for Obama in 2012.

The fact that nobody here has influence in the Democratic party is irrelevant. I'm 100% confident that in internal discussions, Obama's closest campaign advisers are working on trying to figure out better ways to get fundamentalist Christians to stay home and not get off the couch to vote for Romney. They'd be insane not to. They know they aren't going to pull the far right over to vote for Obama, so a significant portion of their messaging needs to be tailored around getting people NOT to vote for Romney (which isn't as good as a vote for Obama, but is half as good).

Guy Whitey Corngood

(26,482 posts)
9. Young Voter Turnout Fell 60% from 2008 to 2010; Dems Won't Win in 2012 If the Trend Continues
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 12:44 AM
Sep 2012
http://www.thenation.com/blog/156470/young-voter-turnout-fell-60-2008-2010-dems-wont-win-2012-if-trend-continues

So my point stands.

"I have a hard time believing that a high turnout is good for Obama in 2012." Is as you said above irrelevant.

"The fact that nobody here has influence in the Democratic party is irrelevant." Let me know when you find Democratic officials making similar comments. Until then this is nothing more than the same ol' "both sides do it" false equivalence.

"I'm 100% confident....." When you have something other than your gut on this. Even if this is true which neither of us know. How many laws are being pushed by Democrats to achieve this? Political strategy is one thing. Rigging the game using legislation and the courts is another. This isn't even redistricting we're talking about here. It is the fundamental right to vote that is being tampered with. So I'll call bullshit once again.

abumbyanyothername

(2,711 posts)
10. A high level of turnout is good for Obama
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 12:54 AM
Sep 2012

I would link Nate Silver's analysis, but I am banned from the New York Times website until next month unless I break down and pay for it.

If every eligible voter voted in every single election, democrats would win every time.

And if we stopped disenfranchising young African American men through the criminal "justice" system, the numbers would be even higher.

 

ErikJ

(6,335 posts)
17. Founder of Voter Suppression strategy.
Mon Sep 10, 2012, 02:20 AM
Sep 2012

Thom Hartmann plays this tape everyday almost. This is THEE guy who started the voter suppression movement on the right.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Paul Weyrich - "I do...