Coop's Corner
November 2, 2009 5:45 PM

Dems Ready to Face Real Conservatives?

(AP Photo/Joe Burbank)
The Philadelphia Inquirer on Monday prematurely ran a Macy's advertisement congratulating the Philadelphia Phillies for winning the World Series. The New York Yankees, who still lead the series, may have something to say about that. Maybe there's something going around, but the Democrats and their amen corner in the blogosphere are similarly acting as if the game is in the bag before a single vote in Tuesday's elections even gets counted.

Even if they lose a few seats, some liberals are carrying on as if this would suit their Master Plan just fine. The thinking is that the more that right wing elements become the face of the Republican Party, the less that Democrats have to worry about in the long run.

Hubris? Yup. And at this point, any thumbsucking post would be remiss not to mention the familiar warning about being careful about getting what you wish for. So it is that surveys from Public Policy Polling as well as the Siena Research Institute put conservative Bill Hoffman ahead of the Democrat Bill Owens in the highly-watched New York Congressional 23rd District special election.

Win or lose, though, it seems that Democrats are overjoyed at the prospect of facing Hoffman as the Republican Party's nominee. The GOP's erstwhile candidate, Dede Scozzafava, faded after a pantheon of Republican heavyweights - including Sarah Palin, Dick Armey, Michele Bachmann, and Dick Armey, among others - threw their weight behind Hoffman. Fox News' Glenn Beck also got into the act. (Here's a clip of Hoffman praising Beck as his "mentor.")

With her support taking a hit after activists trashed her for not being a "true conservative," Scozzafava suspended her campaign over the weekend. But even before her pullout from the race, the prospect of a mainstream New York politician getting pilloried by some in her own party as a radical offered proof to some that the Republican Party was about to head off a cliff. Writing in Sunday's New York Times Frank Rich said he hopes the trend picks up. His calculation is that the more rightists winning Republican primaries, the greater the Democrats’ political chances in 2010:
...it’s even better for Democrats if Hoffman wins. Punch-drunk with this triumph, the right will redouble its support of primary challengers to 2010 G.O.P. candidates they regard as impure. That’s bad news for even a Republican as conservative as Kay Bailey Hutchison, whose primary opponent in the Texas governor’s race, the incumbent Rick Perry, floated the possibility of secession at a teabagger rally in April and hastily endorsed Hoffman on Thursday.
There's no doubt that conservatives feel this could be their moment. With Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck leading the charge, Hoffman has become the cause célèbre for the party's base. The hard right activist, Richard Viguerie, went so far as to put the Republican establishment on notice and declare that ascension the "tea Party activists" now represent the face of "the New GOP." Like Rich, he's reading much into the moment.

No disrespect to the inhabitants of Watertown, but that rural outpost is only important to so many right now because the contestants have become proxies for bigger forces. So it was that Vice President Joe Biden paid a visit on Monday to stump for Owens and urge voters to teach a lesson to conservative "absolutists" in the special House election.

After getting assailed for months by activists associated with Beck's 9/12 Project, Biden and the rest of the Democratic leadership would like nothing better than to flip things around and promote the image of hysterical radical right wing Republicans, raging at minorities, government and hidden left-wing conspiracies. For the liberals, that's the equivalent of a hanging slider. What we don't know is whether they're good enough to handle that kind of heat.
Tags:
coop's corner ,
charles cooper ,
elections ,
democrats ,
beck ,
conservatives
Topics:
In The News
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx

More from Coop's Corner and Opinion on CBSNews.com

Add a Comment See all 25 Comments
by hakori November 8, 2009 10:12 AM EST
Uh, Owens WON! The far right candidate lost, and the only thing anyone in the media could talk about was the whomping the dems got in VA and NJ. Governors don't vote in Congress, and these seats the dems won were in conservative districts--NY23 since the 19th century. So who is talking about the significance of this: no one. I think once health care is passed, the economy recovers and unemployement is down the dems will do just fine in 2010 and 2012.
Reply to this comment
by noloyalisti November 3, 2009 7:58 PM EST
The liberals of the Democratic Party are actually the mainstream. The more conservative Dems are actually corporatists and are right of center. And the Republicans and conservatives are so far to the right they can't even see the field. Radical, violent, frightened, racist extremists are the conservatives.
Reply to this comment
by zhynaryll November 3, 2009 3:48 PM EST
And the Dims aren't out on the left fringes? Seems like the libs of the Dims are just hoping that people will fall for their garbage and actually think conservatives are part of the GOP. I doubt there will be a GOP in a few short years, unless the leaders of the party wake up and quit trying to steal Dims. Conservatives make up the largest single segment of voters today, and will only grow with the right leadership and candidates. I would definitely feel better with "Teabaggers" in charge than I do right now with Pelosi-Reid-Obama in charge! Times will get better soon!!
Reply to this comment
by quatermass2 November 3, 2009 4:35 PM EST
Uh, no, the Democrats are NOT out on the fringes. Neither are the GOP establishment types. YOUR definition of "conservatives" include the biggest collection of kooks, cranks, and outcasts in society. Your Tea Party types are nowhere near the cohesive group of "conservatives" your fantasy life apparently has lead you to believe. And forget winning any NATIONAL elections with your brand of ideological purity. Your "conservatives" are going to be demographically squeezed into a regional (as in Old South) party of ever-dwindling numbers.
by quatermass2 November 3, 2009 2:01 PM EST
Once upon a time, you could say "conservative intellectual" and not crack up the room. But what passes for "conservative" today was Bush Senior's "CRAZIES". Bill Buckley knew what he was doing when he purged the Birchers. When will someone in the GOP purge the Birthers?
Reply to this comment
by noloyalisti November 3, 2009 12:53 PM EST
Everything about the extremist conservative agenda is a complete failure. Yes, I think we are ready.
Reply to this comment
by levsmith November 3, 2009 12:24 PM EST
Someone just tell me what a "real" conservative is. Do you mean the radical Evangelical conservatives who want to rewrite the Bible and the Constitution to fit their beliefs? Do you mean the "new" teabaggers who don't want to pay lower taxes under Obama but were comfortable paying taxes for George Bush's big government and wars? Do you mean the minimal government Libertarian conservatives who believe all our soldiers should come home now and that government should let banks and car makers fail and let citizens use drugs if they want to or legalize prostitution? Do you mean big deficit conservatives like Dick Cheney, or the new anti-deficit conservatives who backed the Bush administration blindly? There is no such thing as "conservative" anymore and no one on the right wants to proffer a definition because they would define a whole lot of people out of the club. So c'mon, righties. Give me a definition...if you have one.
Reply to this comment
by Harden_Tar November 3, 2009 1:00 PM EST
Conservative:
1. One who believes in the Constitution as it is written.
2. One who believes in small, limited government at every level, along with individual responsibility, without the interference from a bloated, self important centralized federal government.
3.One who believes taxes should be levied for the purpose of financing the limited responsibilities of government such as providing for the common defense, catching and incarcerating criminals, minting money and filling potholes.
4.One who believes taxes should not be levied for the purpose of redistributing wealth.

THAT IS IT. Nimrod.

Pretty simple stuff without all the name calling and typecasting, which is a typical Democratic response. You know I haven't seen nearly as many "commie pinko, bleeding heart, Socialist whack job, MSNBC Kool-Aid drinking, race baiting, tax and spend, ACORN loving, living in the hippy past terms in these posts as I have seen tea bagger, et al.
by levsmith November 3, 2009 1:25 PM EST
OK, harden_tar nimrod. IF you were a conservative as you defined it, where were you during the Bush administration? Where is your voice when the Evangelicals want to rewrite the Constitution? Because, see, I agree with you - that's what conservative used to mean. Those people, I respected. Those people, if they're able to reclaim the Republican Party, will continue to belong to a viable party. But from what I can see, they're the minority on the right.
by jimbom121 November 6, 2009 2:28 PM EST
Harden

Too bad that is not what conservative means in practice. In practice it means giving tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans, de-regulating corporate America and giving them more tax breaks without creating jobs, allowing Government into every aspect of your life--Terri Schiavo, Patriot Act (So much for small government)
by hakori November 8, 2009 10:24 AM EST
Harden_Tar...If you believe the Constitution as it was first written, then you believe in slarvey. It's an evolving document, but then again you probaly don't belive in that word "evolution". If it were meant to be written in stone the founders wouldn't have allowed it to be amended. I think they may have been a bit wiser than you, don't you think? As for redistributing the wealth, you obviously don't have a problem as long as it is redistruted upward away from the middle class as happened under Bush. That's a FACT! Look it up blowhard!

As for a typical democratic respones---I can't believe you actually said 'democratic' not 'democrat' response---what do you call the long chain of nagative slurs you made against democrats. I know what I call it: the typical republican demonization response.
by rockcutr November 3, 2009 10:00 AM EST
How many Dick Armey's are there. Why is the Jerry Springer poster child of Alaska given any time in the press anyway? Quitter!!! Actors and posers. Polyticks another word for having a job where you don't actually have to do anything. The fed's head has gotten way too big. Is it possible that the separation of Church and state is the real problem? Why is ethic a 4 letter word? Doing the right thing in spite of your personal feelings, now that is honor....seems there is a lack in this area for our lack-of-leaders.
Reply to this comment
by stillwaters6 November 3, 2009 6:50 AM EST
Let me get this straight...

"Glenn Beck and Sara Palin leading the charge of the Republican Party?"

Y'all we have got to do better.

Do we have anybody with the ability to think and reason without the use of wayward entertainment television?
Reply to this comment
by proudscot November 3, 2009 7:05 AM EST
what's the difference between a pit bull and Sarah Palin?
You can put Sarah Palin down without any sense of guilt
by donkeylips November 3, 2009 5:11 AM EST
Glen Beck is his "mentor" ??? Wow
Reply to this comment
by billpl-2009 November 2, 2009 10:14 PM EST
fact is...both the right and left wings have flown the coop

time to say good-bye to both
Reply to this comment
by Harden_Tar November 3, 2009 11:51 AM EST
I agree. Congress, on both sides of the aisles is nothing but the same big government, spending the country into oblivion people. A pox on both their houses. True conservatives are ticked off just as much at the corporate Republican party as they are at the left wing Democrats who have hijacked their party. They are all in bed together and sucking at the same public teat. Term limits spring to mind here. 2 Terms for Senators and 3 for Represenatives. I hate them all. The American people need to fire the whole bunch.
by Kev117 November 2, 2009 10:13 PM EST
Just weeks ago, a spokesman for congressional Republicans had charged that Hoffman didn't even live in the district and that he "lacked the integrity and qualities needed to be elected to anything, let alone Congress."

Hummm.... lacks integrity, eh.
Reply to this comment
by Kev117 November 2, 2009 10:12 PM EST
Just weeks ago, a spokesman for congressional Republicans had charged that Hoffman didn't even live in the district and that he "lacked the integrity and qualities needed to be elected to anything, let alone Congress."

Hummm.... lacks integrity, eh.
Reply to this comment
by William_Harris November 2, 2009 8:44 PM EST
The truth of the matter is that the liberals are scared to death of facing real conservatives, which is why they keep trying to label them as "ultra conservative" "extremists' or "tea baggers". The liberals would love nothing better than for the GOP to continue to put up candidates of a "Democrat light" nature like Scozzafava. Why vote for a "Democrat light" when you can have the real deal. However, put the Democrat up against a Conservative, and now the voters have a real choice and a real distinction on principles.

If this was really good for the liberals they wouldn't waste one second "informing" the GOP about how bad this is going to be for them, now would they?
Reply to this comment
by Kev117 November 2, 2009 10:13 PM EST
Unless they wanted to gloat. But Liberals wouldn't want to gloat, would they?
by hakori November 8, 2009 10:34 AM EST
William_Harris , WOW! There's one thing you don't get: the "real" conservatives you speak of really are "ultra-conservative", "extremsits", racists, xenophobes, homophobes, thoecratic, undemocratic radicals. So, when those on the left cheer for those on the far right to put up more of these types of candidates, they're serious! They know those on the far right won't listen to anyone other than other radicals. That's just how insanity works. If you believe one word of your post, then you have to be a "bagger" yourself. I say, MORE POWER TO YOU!
by abarafi November 2, 2009 7:59 PM EST
Boy, talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. Owens was a long shot in District 23. It's a rock-solid Republican district. So, if he loses, it's no big deal. If the GOP hardliners succeed in disenfranchising their moderates, it would be like the Dems chucking out all its moderates and ending up with a radical left-wing party. Guess what? That's a sure loser. The GOP has been shifting hard right since Reagan, and in its embarrassment at losing ground in 2006 and even more in 2008, instead of moving toward the center - as the democrats did with Clinton -it has been becoming even more extreme. I think the independents would be as likely to shy away from a right-wing GOP as the would a left-wing Democratic party. So, it's no wonder that some Democrats are gleeful at the prospect of a Hoffman rather than a Scozzafava. It just reinforces the extremist bent of a spent GOP.
Reply to this comment
by Kev117 November 2, 2009 10:21 PM EST
Here, here.

Abarafi hits the nail on the head. After watching the tea bag crowd on TV who would feel comfortable allowing them to govern? And the Republicans in Congress have decided that they aren't interested in governing either. They just say no to everything.
by hakori November 8, 2009 10:36 AM EST
The voters of NY23 REJECTED the far righty! Bye bye GOP!
See all 25 Comments

About Coop's Corner

Still searching for a no baloney point of view to put the daily stream of news headlines into their proper context? You've come to the right place.

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn
  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. Obama, GOP Clash over cure for Economy

    (327 recent comments)