By Patrick O'Hannigan
Election 2012 is shaping up as a Catch-22 for Republicans. Its outcome depends on whether "more of the same" can out-point "new and improved," but those labels do not always adhere to incumbents and challengers in predictable ways, which is why even people at the levers of power often pretend to reject the establishment they represent. When Rick Santorum made news by alluding to what he called "phony theology" behind policies advanced by President Obama, a cadre of Democrats accused Santorum of playing the "Other" card. For these Democrats, the maladroit comment was a despicable attempt to marginalize President Obama as different, foreign, or alien. They pounced on Santorum's assertion by calling it "dog whistle racism" or dismissing it as stupid.
Some of the umbrage was sincere, and some of it was manufactured as a warning to other Republicans who might be thinking about the personal attacks that we're forever being told distract voters from the "real issues."
Read more: http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/24/catch-22-revisited
Election 2012 is shaping up as a Catch-22 for Republicans. Its outcome depends on whether "more of the same" can out-point "new and improved," but those labels do not always adhere to incumbents and challengers in predictable ways, which is why even people at the levers of power often pretend to reject the establishment they represent. When Rick Santorum made news by alluding to what he called "phony theology" behind policies advanced by President Obama, a cadre of Democrats accused Santorum of playing the "Other" card. For these Democrats, the maladroit comment was a despicable attempt to marginalize President Obama as different, foreign, or alien. They pounced on Santorum's assertion by calling it "dog whistle racism" or dismissing it as stupid.
Some of the umbrage was sincere, and some of it was manufactured as a warning to other Republicans who might be thinking about the personal attacks that we're forever being told distract voters from the "real issues."
Read more: http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/24/catch-22-revisited
No comments:
Post a Comment