GOP’s Answer to “Charting a New Course”: Name Calling

Meantime, Haley Barbour supports the right of the government to take private property and give it to private developers.

Sigh.

Ronni, do a Google on Bopp and Norcross.

I read about this the other day, and then, as now, I found it absolutely mind-blowing that the GOP thinks it can with all credibility simply rename the Democratic party.

In retrospect, however, it's what can be expected from those who call waterboarding an "enhanced interrogation method" or "unpleasant thing" instead of torture.

The Party of gimmicks strikes again. If it's not "joe the plumber","sarah palin", "drill baby drill", "I'm suspending my campaign to go back to Washington", then its this name calling.

Colin Powell and other prominent Republicans recognize that they need change. They continue to listen to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter (entertainers).

The Party of Lincoln is turning into the Party of Decline.

The link to the AP story redirects me to a page on the AP stating the story can not be found... Anyway, the first three stories from doing a "Google" were these:
http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/content/news/opinion/stories/2009/05/21/052209_4A_name_edit.html
and
http://www.examiner.com/x-11326-Charlotte-Liberal-Examiner~y2009m5d22-Republicans-should-reflect-on-their-own-name-change-to-suit-their-identity
and
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/the-happy-funtime-super-r_b_206328.html

None of which offer much more than this story does... What I was hoping to find (in the story that should have been linked from here, or even in here) was a list of who (or rather how many) actually supported this measure to begin with and/or the amount of support needed to hold their special session. In the various clubs and organizations I belong to, I can call a "special session" all by my lonesome. I hope that a party that is considerably larger than what I belong to would need more than one person to call such a session, but you never know. I am sure it wasn't 99% against the proposal and 1% for it, but in this story + the three others (the last two doing a bit of naming calling themselves, but of course that is alright since they didn't start the name calling.) all I am reading is about the republicans that thought it was a dumb idea (the chairman being one of them).

Anyway, the heart of the matter is that people ask what is in a word or a name. If I am going to call you a name, you would say the name means nothing and if you are going to call me a name, I would say it means nothing. The reality is that it does mean something. The changing of the name to the "Death Tax" vs the "Estate Tax" swayed a lot of peoples opinions or, on a lighter note, Pretty Woman was almost 3000. Of course, the RNC deciding what the DNC would be called is sorta silly, seeing the the DNC would call itself whatever it wants outside of the matter that names catch on, official or not.

I put Google in quotes above because it was used as a verb earlier, which, if we are talking about what is in a name, is a prime example of how a name changer (per se) can be interpreted. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/the-happy-funtime-super-r_b_206328.html

Anywho, I didn't really mean to get up on a soap box about things! Promise. I really just came to the JFP to check out the "Best of" section. A story about name calling and the subsequent denial that a name (official or not) doesn't matter just grabbed my attention and then I just get irked when a link to a story (that really isn't much of a story to begin with when used in this context, but, I understand that it is a slow news week) that is only 4 days old is no longer valid (tip, don't use a Google link from Google News, link directly to the story).

Now, onto navigating to the Best of 2009 section (which means running an internet search, oh, I just added to my favorites! Good idea *pat on the back*).

Baron, I've fixed the link... coding error, my bad. Thanks for linking the Huff Post story. I saw it earlier, and it's hilarious.

Of course, Republicans (and Democrats) know exactly that people read into the names we call each other. Whether that's "liberal," "progressive," "conservative," "wing nut" or "socialist," they are all loaded terms that can be used to denigrate. It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt, like my mama used to say.

"It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt, like my mama used to say." So true, Ronni.

My G-MA use to say: What goes over a mule's back, buckles under his belly.

Translation: What goes around, comes around. The GOP is really taking a beating on this one and just know that all of their "communist, Socialist" crap has truly backfired!

Wow this is pathetic. I have changed my views to be more towards Libertarian-Socialist/Left-Libertarian, and I honestly don't think socialism (non-statist socialism) is a bad thing. The thing I find humorous about the Republicans saying this is that they take pride in supporting the Military, though we all do, but I don't think they realize that the US Military is a a socialist program. As is the post office, police department and fire department. Before attempting to call a party names, they should look into what they are funding.

JOK, I agree that the U.S. has a number of "socialist" programs, a fact that conservatives would like us all to forget. Nonetheless, they recognize that many Americans remain ignorant of that fact, and that there's a certain amount of knee-jerk fear reaction to the word.

It's all based in ignorance, the same ignorance that shows some 20 percent of Americans still believe Obama is a Muslim (as if that alone should make them afraid).

It's plain old political sleight of hand: if you can't convince them with facts, dazzle 'em with bullsh*t.