The ecology of CPAC: What is the big deal?

Filed in National by on March 5, 2007

For conservative “thought” to prevail (as it has over the past 15 years) conservatives need to create and constantly reinforce a what some have called, a “high-maintenance pseudo-reality”. As liberals, tied to reason and logic, we were slow to take up the fight against conservatism because it seemed so unworkable and frankly absurd. After all, who could bother working to refute something as absurd as the idea that earth is only10,000 years old, or as laughable as the idea that George Bush should be President of the United States? It was like trying to create a movement to lobby in favor of the wetness of water.

Recently, however a change is in the air. Coulter’s comments at CPAC have exposed the reality of how the conservative movement really works to a slightly wider audience.  Additionally,  liberals and other sane people who once thought conservatism would collapse under the weight of its own absurdity are now more fully awake to the reality of how the conservative movement works.

A Kos diarist puts it this way:

“The reason right-wing propaganda is so effective is because they’ve built up an interlocking network of think-tanks, media venues, and grassroots political organizations — some of the latter in the guise of legitimate, mainstream churches. The think-tanks take ideas that would normally be considered revolting if presented in the nude (Take from the poorest and give to the richest) and craft it into appealing, clever sounding deceptions (It will stimulate the economy and help the poor!). Right-wing media spreads the deception, nurtures racism, and demonizes opposition (Liberals want to give your tax dollars to welfare queens!). Wingnut clerics dress it up in pleasant sounding bits of religious doctrine and beat it mercilessly into the heads of their congregations week after week. It’s a seamless, well-oiled, machine.”

About the Author ()

Comments (9)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Or, conservatives are just right, and you just can’t wrap you’re head around it.

  2. doctornick says:

    I think you confused being “right” with being “successful”. A common mistake.

    Being good at hammering home an evil message does not imbue the message with truth and goodness. Nobody denies that conservatives are good at messaging.

  3. There hasn’t been a liberal president in 27 years. That’s not all messaging.

  4. kavips says:

    In fifth grade we were taught that conservatives looked to the past for values and guidance and liberals looked towards the future for their inspiration.

    If that definition holds today, I have no choice but to consider myself and my associates as being solid conservatives.

    I often find myself looking backward fondly to the Clinton administration when everything ran much better, and looking forward to two more years of the Bush administration and the liberal misuse of my rights and liberties, scares me.

  5. anon says:

    How does one look towards the future for values and guidance?

  6. anon says:

    I like how conservatives claim Bill Clinton when it suits them.

  7. Bill Clinton was no conservative. But he wasn’t a liberal either. Or are you willing to admit that the balanced budgets, welfare reform and DOMA were GOP Congressional achievements?

  8. Mike Protack says:

    Say what you want about conservative thoughts and policies but you have a better chance at boiling the oceans than you do making liberal policies and thought work in America.

    The very thing which you need to fund all the dreams of liberalism is what you hate the most-capatalism.

    FSP is right about Pres. Clinton. Welfare reform, NAFTA, budget restraint etc.

    Drive carefully.

  9. anon says:

    The very thing which you need to fund all the dreams of liberalism is what you hate the most-capatalism.

    This is a Coulter-ism from Mike Protack. Capitalism actually does much better when tended by Democrats.