Those damn Hollywood types!

I watched Real Time with Bill Maher last night, and as a moderate Democrat, what got me was that neither Bill Maher (who I really think is funny a lot of the time) or any of the other Liberals "got it". When Andrew Sullivan talked about making fun of the Religious Right hurting the Democrats' chances, Bill argued about the intellectual defendability of what he was saying, but that's not the point!

Here, I think, is the crux of the matter:

We saw Michael Moore all over the place campaigning for the left, but why didn't we see Judge Roy Moore campaigning for the right?

Simply, we didn't see that because it would have severely damaged the right in the eyes of the people IN THE MIDDLE, and the Republicans managed their wackos a lot better than we did.

If the Democrats are to win in 2008, they have to field a candidate who is religious, unsullied by scandal, respectful of Social Conservatives and tough on defense. Michael Moore and his ilk need to be kicked to the curb, at least publicly. If the far left wants to migrate to the Green Party that would be great, then Democrats would more than replace them with millions of middle of the road voters.

I am not being a disloyal Democrat by saying this. There are millions of Americans who will gladly vote for a candidate who stands up for the working people, is in favor of protecting Civil Rights, and wants affordable Health Care. They are all mainstream Democratic principles, and they will win elections for us. We cannot allow ourselves to be marginalized into APPEARING to be a radical, angry mob, and that is exactly how we ended up looking, to millions of voters who otherwise would have voted for us.

Look, most voters are not very far away from the middle. Most voters who voted for Bush aren't even very Republican. They didn't vote for Bush because they want to prohibit Gay Marriage, they voted for Bush because he seemed more comfortable with them. You don't have to be a Social Conservative to feel uncomfortable with Garofalo making fun of Southernors. Incidentally, whether Southernors deserve to be made fun of is NOT THE POINT, and that's what Maher and others of his ilk do not understand.

Susan Sarandon and her ilk have got to realize that their very public presence is hurting their party. I will not argue that Hollywood liberals have nothing of consequence to say, but at this point they have been successfully caricaturized by the Right.

So, Susan Sarandon, Ben Affleck, and all the rest of you Hollywood types, if you want to work for the Democrats next time, do it behind the scenes! Stay out of the damn spotlight, you're killing us!

Lets just become Republicans.

I have no problem with "managing" our whackos, but Pat Robertson was all over the place and that didn't stop anyone.

My belief is the far-right is motivated. The far-left has a sense no difference exists between the two parties so they sit it out. Many got into the game this year as an anti-Bush effort.

If I love guns, hate gays, love war, hate government and a Democrat comes to me and says he is for that...but a Republican says he is for that and has the proof, I'm voting for the Republican.

They have managed to turn politics into fringe and wedge issues...

Respectfully, my point is that Bush didn't win on intellectual grounds (what a hilarious concept!), he won on Karl Rove's' succesful characterization of Democrats as a bunch of angry radicals who hate Middle America. I know that is not true, but again, that is not the point.

As for Pat Robertson, he wasn't much of a factor with the Middle. Realize that we're never going to get the Social Conservatives, but that the vast majority of those who voted for Bush were NOT Social Conservatives!

Did you see that the percentage of voters who actually approved of either Gay Marriage OR Civil Unions was almost SEVENTY PERCENT? That is proof to me that we didn't lose on the issues, but that we lost because iof how we were percieved by mainstream voters, and that was my point.

On the contrary, we need a a Hollywood type to run for office, like Ahnold did...how about Ben Affleck? :)

coulter, limbaugh, savage, falwell, robertson...and endless list of very public rw wackos. the problem here, again, is beleving what these people keep telling you...

Don't believe the RW editorials you've been reading. Nobody decided to vote for Bush because they were turned off by these people. Their prejudice goes back a lot farther than that.

As a person of Jewish and Italian heritage, I understand that Franken and Garofalo are EXACTLY the wrong poster children to win Democrats votes. But it's not because of what they say. It's because the "nice, normal" average non-fundie Bush voter is deeply chauvinistic about his Anglo-Saxon or Germanic roots and culture.

Hollywood = Jews = Democrats The only way to escape this equation is to become bigots ourselves. Or yourselves, because you'd lose me.

Why should performers or anyone else be muzzled anyway? It is, for the time being at least, a free country.

if they give up Rush, O'Reilly, Coulter and Hannity.

But no one left the repub party because him or Coulter is too far to the right. Indeed many repubs consider them "moderates".
I have no idea who they would view as "too far to the right".

When the Democratic party moves to the right, Ralph Nader gains support.

Move to the right and the party (I'm green) will really be out on its' ass.

We need a propaganda machine; something comparable to Fox News. And the party needs to quit bringing rubber chickens to mustard gas brawls. The right never lets up on ANYthing. John Kerry was turned into a traitor and no one can say shit about Bush because he's a 'swell guy' or too popular or undecideds or this or that or this or that. Sure.


We need passion; no more eggshells. We have to at least TRY and fight with the SAME passion as they do for OUR vision of the world. That means we go for THEIR throat, turn THEM into the monsters. Do everything that works for them.


Do that, see if it works. If it fails, then I'll be the first one to send Joe Lieberman to the '12 convention.

The Wrong hate intelligence. Intelligent and popular? Oh lord, can't have that!

This is another irritating call to Dems to be more Republican than the GOP!

So sick of calls for Dems to abandon the principles for which the party has stood for--and should stand for again!

This isn't too far from what ex-idol of mine, Bill Clinton, said very recently:

"It's the IMAGE, stupid!" (or something to that effect).

And the anecdote about John Kerry (bless him) spurning Clinton's advice to go against gays in order to win the Southern vote just highlights Kerry's strong principles.

So IMAGE trumps PRINCIPLES, right, Bill?

What's wrong with being pro-labor, pro-Civil Rights and pro-health Care? They are not Republican issues.

Excuse me, but I don't think that seeing that making fun of Southerners will not get votes in the South is a Republican concept, and that was my point. Look, if someone is a mainstream Christian there are many reasons to vote for us, but if they are made to feel like the left thinks they are kinda stupid it's not really the best way to get them on our side.

If you are trying to say that moderates don't belong in the Democratic Party, then I would have a very vocal disagreement with you. If you are saying that the millions of moderate, lunchbucket workers in America are not Democrats unless they agree with the far left, I would have an even bigger disagreement with you.

this "far left" you speak of. i think you just might get your wish.

but not anymore) and co. on most people's perceptions of the Dems. MM, however, is an asset - a more down-to-earth and very funny, if abrasive, leftist. MM did more to jumpstart the anti-Bush movement with his imperfect but powerful "Fahrenheit 9/11". We need more, not less, vocally powerful people on our side than more of the milquetoast ones. Passion never hurt a movement.

Now if people are so moderate, though, why did so many agree with the far right-wing agenda as one might deduce from the (tainted) results of this election?

Just curious.

Perception is more important than reality. People buy stuff all the time that they don't need and won't use. Why? Because they think otherwise. Politics in inherently practical not idealogical.

that's how the rw gets people to vote impratically...against their best economic interests. they use crap like "hollywood liberals" and "east coast intellectuals" and "the far left" to divide and conquer. too bad some on our side do the exact same thing.

It is the perception that it important. And they will do whatever practical thing is required to sell it.

The easiest way to sell God, family and morality is to demonize the alternative rather than prove your own claim to righteousness. It is a smear campaign. Liberalism is not the enemy - it is the perception of what liberalism is that turns conservative fundies away. Right wing fundies focus almost exclusively on issues they can sensationalize and use for emotional appeal. Logically it is impossible to prove a negative which leaves us liberals in a difficult position to appeal to fundies. We must make the economy, employment and the Iraqi quagmire spiritual, moral and emotional issues.

Faith based actions and choices will only change for faith based reasons. The fundies have been well taught to expect criticism and persecution. They view it as a badge of honor - confirmation that they are right. But many of them are open and receptive to new revelation and insights into how best to live their lives. The thing about religious seekers is that many of them continue their spiritual search throughout their lives.

On edit: Fundies buy into the "christian" agenda even though it does not serve their interest and tey do it for faith based rather than rational reasons. Rational reasons will not change that behavior. Faith based reasons may prove to be quite successful. At various times throughout our nations history it was the church that was responsible for social reforms. Practically speaking, faith is a weapon to be used to influnce voter behavior.

to meet people where they are at, if you want to reach them. i think our side needs to articulate a better vision, one that is stronger than the fear-based vision of the rw, which is reinforced by fear-based religion. if someone believes in a vengeful, punishing god, i can see how that would affect their view of the world.
i agree that faith is a weapon, and it is a powerful one. our side should get better at using it, and not just in an empty symbolic way, e.g., whitewashing and homogenizing our image, as the poster who stated this thread suggested.
i absolutely agree that the church has a role to play, especially churches that do not preach that god is vengeful and punishing, and that the world is a dangerous and scary place.
as i've often said, our real problem in this country (and in the world) is spiritual in nature, and until we address the real problem, there will be no real change.
thanks for the conversation :D

when you say the real problem in this country is spiritual.

I saw the Bill Maher show last night. Unbelievable.

Senator Simpson from Wyoming went absolutely nuts on Bill Maher for no reason whatsoever. He was very defensive and attacking every attempt of Maher to make a light joke of the election (Maher, after all, is a comedian). Simpson kept screaming that Maher was "insulting Christians," and making fun of the people of the South and Midwest. Maher could not get the guy under control. It was an amazing "Zell Miller" moment, and I'm glad I taped it.

Then, in the discussion panel that despicable Andy Sullivan picked up where Senator Simpson had left, and spent the entire show shouting down the rest of the guests, screaming foul, shrieking that Maher was making fun of Christians and the good people of red states. They sure got their marching orders right.

Then Sully went on a barrage of unnecessary attacks against Michael Moore, calling him unpatriotic and traitorous. Let me remind you that Sullivan is a British national, resident in the USA. (It's great to get lessons on patriotism from a guy who isn't even a citizen).

Both Simpson and Sullivan seemed to be in the same page, spreading the same propaganda and nasty vitriol, which leads me to believe that worse than a "sore loser" is a "sore winner."

It's going to be along four years.

PS: I think Sullivan's little hissy fit was a way to backpedal big time his Kerry support. A few weeks ago he was in the Bill Maher Show, endorsing Kerry, attacking Bush and the anti-gay agenda of the Republican party. He was convinced Kerry was going to win.

Since Bush got elected again, the rat Sullivan put all the guy stuff on the side and started backpedaling like nobody's business, showing his wingnut base that he's a Bush supporter, to erase all that silly stuff about endorsing Kerry and such. What a despicable twit.
I think he's scared of the troglodytes that read his blog.

but thank goodness for Noam Chomsky.

He'will always be one of my heroes.

...I have heard it on AAR, and it's not surprising.

Maher depends on the idea that anyone on his show is willing to discuss the issues and have a little "fun" with the audience. I remember on his old "Politically Incorrect" show, he would get blindsided by people of strong opinions. The worst I remember was Sister Souljar, who would simply not be a human being, relax, make her point and then shut up.

He also likes to have people of opposing viewpoints on the show to create arguments, a talk show gambit as old as Joe Pyne. But Maher doesn't have the capability of keeping a determined haranguer under control.

one thing that was proven was that just because you're gay doesn't mean you can't be a FASCIST. Sullivan made fool out of himself. He kept arguing that the Mahre (or the left in general) and the dems lost the election because they insult(ed) religious voters. Sorry, that isn't what happened. If he thinks that upholding the separation of church and state, and not wanting ANY religious group to force their so-called "morals" on the rest of us is "insulting" religion, then he just doesn't get it. Does he think these yo-yo's need to be treated with kid gloves just because they base their views (supposedly) on their religion? If so (and that's what he sounded like) he lacks a basic understanding of what America is all about.

??????????????????????:wtf:?????????????????????

Kinda weird that the Republican Party isn't being killed by it's own Hollywood supporters -- not to mention the wacko fundamentalists (Falwell, Robertson). You don't mention anything about moderate voters being scared of these nutcases, or any of the many political nutballs is the party.

I guess the "Moderate Dem" position is to tell people to shut up.

Now, I'm going to tell YOU to "stay out of the damn spotlight", because I don't even believe you're a Democrat -- as you so frequently feel the need to point out that you are. If you wish to be believed as a Democrat, you're going to have to stop espousing Republican talking points and attacking the party of which this forum takes its name.

The Democrats need to offer a clear alternative to the Conservative
agenda. The Democrats did too much attempting to appeal to Conservatives
in this last election.

By the way, if Ben Affleck etc. is killing us, why isn't Arnold S. killing the
Republicans?