Posted on 10/17/2006 9:32:13 AM PDT by DeweyCA
What does the "N-word" racial epithet and the pollster term "values voter" have in common? According to Newsweek columnist Jonathan Alter, by some elastic calisthenics of the brain, the word "values" needs to be drained of its poison, deprived of its "sting" against liberals, deflated of any political advantage, so that liberals can be seen as just as morality-oriented as conservatives. In describing his latest column, on MSNBC's Imus in the Morning program on Monday, Alter said this "values voter" term is "driving me nuts," that certain people have a "monopoly" on "so-called traditional values." Alter also displayed an intense desire for the "demise" of "values voters" in the fall election.
[This item, by Tim Graham, was posted Monday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: http://newsbusters.org/node/8363 ]
In his phone interview with Imus in the October 16 6:30am EDT half hour, Alter told Imus: "You see my Lenny Bruce reference? I try to work him into Newsweek whenever I can. Remember the old routine that he did where he'd use the N- word over and over and over again and then he'd say if we can just say it all the time, it will lose its meaning?...You know, no little black girl can be made tor cry any more, say it so much it becomes meaningless, well. That's what I want to have happen with this word 'values,' 'values voters,' which is just driving me nuts. The idea that somehow certain people have a monopoly on values and that, you know, if you are not with them on these issues, that you somehow [mock expression of horror] 'you don't share our values.' And you're not just wrong, but someone morally inferior if you're on the other side. And I hope this election is going to mark the demise of the values voters, this idea that people who feel so strongly, you know about these so-called traditional values, that they don't determine the election the way were seen to have the last time around."
Whoa. That's an interesting use of words. "Demise" might sound like 'decline,' but it primarily means 'death.' Is he wishing death on social conservatives? Or is he just verbally clumsy? (Don't tell me Alter would let Sen. George Allen off the carpet with a verbal miscue like that.) On the one hand, Alter wants to declare that social conservatives will not win out as they did last time, but then he has to claim not only that their traditional values are "so-called," but that they were merely "seen" to have been decisive. So if they weren't decisive, why is Alter so "nuts" that they might influence the election again this year?
He wrapped up: "And the indications are they have less clout this time out. You know, there are a lot of reports that they are going to stay home which is bad news for the Republicans."
You can clearly hear through his irritation, saying social conservatives, go home. Religious right-wingers, get out. Stop ruining our liberal utopia, where abortion is widely available and gays getting married is the highest expression of our societal progress. Here's Alter's festival of wishful thinking in the Newsweek column suggesting that Republicans will stew in their own disgusting social-conservative juices: "Now fallout from the Mark Foley story is giving the GOP establishment a taste of its own sanctimonious medicine, as Democrats tsk-tsk their way back into power. While it's hard to imagine many incumbents losing their seats over the Foley issue alone, the lingering subtext will likely dampen conservative turnout and could help tip close races. Publicity about an influential gay Republican subculture in Washington makes the GOP's pandering on gay marriage less persuasive. And the story adds to the overall sense that the current congressional leadership has failed to offer oversight on a series of moral issues, from corruption to burdening our children with debt to protecting minors from predators in what is supposed to be the 'Daddy' party. "More likely, the word will turn into a political football pulled so hard by each team that it finally deflates. Good. That could help lead us back to the hard policy choices we face and the values we have in common...'Values' should be a slice of American apple pie, not a wedge. When all voters are 'values voters,' the term will lose its sting, just as Lenny Bruce would have wanted."
For Alter's piece in the October 23 edition of Newsweek, "The Myth of the 'Values' Voter: The term is loaded and unfair. It implies that people who 'do not share our values' aren't just wrong but morally inferior," go to: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15266550/site/newsweek/
Liberals like Alter profess that religious liberals have a different agenda to press, to shame conservatives into realizing they also have a biblical duty to assist the poor, a different set of values to vote on. But isn't it obvious to them that this is exactly the "wedge" that they've applied against conservatives since, mmm, the Great Depression? That conservatives didn't share their "values" of assisting the poor? That they cornered the market on virtue and compassion? Alter isn't sick of "values" having a definition. He's sick of it having a conservative definition. The liberal media want to rewrite the dictionary so that everyone uses their language with their meaning, and they can't stand it when conservative rhetoric wins with voters.
If you have to caveat "traditional values" by calling them "so called" traditional values, you don't support them.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
Nah, we're talking five notches below unscrupulous...
A new world record...
Yes. This report brought to us by so-called journalist, Jonathan Alter.
But if lefties aren't with me on values issues, then they don't share my values. And I don't share theirs. That's what disagreements are made of.
They want us to pretend we don't disagree with them. But we do. And we disagree about values.
With a last name like Alter, and a good Christian name like Jonathan, he also probably hates his own name.
If libbys were ever to pray for anything, this would be it. Surrender your Congressional districts!
Thank you for the time to post and bring understanding to this other course.Truly our strengths are to be turned against us as wedges. If folks were not not hauled off to prison for merely listening what the 'rats and lawyers talk in their dens we would have more view of their tactics.These meetings are held higher than National security issues. Fact.
Precisely. The left is doing exactly what we do, all the while claiming that we are illegitimate for doing it.
We reason from our value set; they reason from theirs. It's called politics and is at the heart of our democratic system. But the left won't recognize the other side as at least legitimate. It is a formula for the long term disruption of our democracy.
He's just a alterBOY carrying water for he RATS he must have been molested by a priest, there must be some reason for the hate./s The name Alter gives meaning to the need for ALTERnative media and why we should all find ALTERnate sources for our news.
This is fun. We should start a contest.
I would say that you are incorrect for the left Does Not do what we do but in context, okay. The ramifications are different of course which is why the outing of Foley works well. Were he a dem they would have rallied around him. All the homo wing and nambla wing and every other pervert dem voter would have defended his service. So we have to rip him out because he's not pure enough for us and we must be sparkly pure towards dems while they spit in our wounds.
Well, I have no problem with tossing out Foley. It may have been more than what the Democrats would have done (though in this political climate today they may have been forced to throw him out) but Foley did the right thing in resigning. While true that Republicans tend tohandle these things better than Democrats, complaining about a double standard is whistling in the wind. We are the values party, and will be held to that standard.
Odd, I've always thought of the word 'values' as a liberal weasel-word.
It's what sociologists call things other cultures regard as virtues so they don't have to take a stand on whether they are virtuous or not.
It's what Nietzsche called virtues and vices so he could transpose the two in his 'transvaluation of values' to call charity vice and cruelty virtue.
I hate it when conservatives use the word. We uphold VIRTUE, not 'traditional values', and should not be afraid of the word.
True.{ and as the donkey said(..whistling in the wind) the person asks "did you consume these nuggets"the tail lifts slightly, fffewwwwwwww..} How do you argue that? If it were up to me I would separate the Country and dems of thieves could all live in a pile governed by dems.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.