Hardball’s “Rise of the New Right” Documentary

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Media, Republicans, tea party, Video

Say what you will about MSNBC, but the following by Chris Matthews and the Hardball crew is a good look at how this new movement has sprung up and why it seems to continue to grow.

Of note, watch Part Six about how the “death panel” meme started with Sarah Palin and kept on rolling from there.

Part One


Part Two


Part Three


Part Four


Part Five

Part Six


By the way, for those of you who think I’m one sided, well, I doubt this will do much to dissuade you, but I’d suggest you watch Michael Moore Hates America, a documentary about how the filmmaker purposefully distorts the truth. That one is a must watch as well.

UPDATE:
Another great documentary is Manufacturing Dissent, which talks about how Moore deliberately misleads people.

Here’s the first 10 minutes…



This entry was posted on Saturday, June 19th, 2010 and is filed under Media, Republicans, tea party, Video. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

8 Responses to “Hardball’s “Rise of the New Right” Documentary”

  1. Tweets that mention Donklephant » Blog Archive » Hardball’s “Rise of the New Right” Documentary -- Topsy.com Says:

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Justin Gardner and Johnny's Tavern, Donklephant. Donklephant said: DONKLEPHANT: Hardball’s “Rise of the New Right” Documentary http://ow.ly/17OcyU [...]

  2. Chris Says:

    For some reason embedded videos never play for me on this site using Chrome.

  3. kranky kritter Says:

    The rise of organized right wing political groups is something that, while I don’t find it cxheering, I think is actually best viewed as balancing out.

    Prior to the advent of the internet and modern networking technology, left wing political groups had the advantage of preaching to large and easily accessible populations, many of whom are at their most communitarian. In other words, the left was able to take advantage of college campus dynamics and urban dynamics.

    Modern networking has made it possible for previously marginalized rural and conservative leaning Americans to band together.

    What the conservative groups have in common with the liberal and progressive ones is a tendency to stay stuck on the level of simplistic opposition to things they don’t like, without much willingness to dig into the complexities and find some appreciation of what it really takes to address modern problems. You just see something you don’t like, and you get to righteously blame someone else.

    Wew on’t solve our problems until we transcend things like blaming corporations or illegal immigrants while holding ourselves personally blameless while constantly re-electing folks who tell us we can continue to consume more than we produce as a nation.

  4. Nick Benjamin Says:

    The reason I worry about these groups is they seem so divorced from reality. For example our long-term deficit problem is, largely, a problem with Medicare. The problem is that medical costs are rising faster then taxes. Which means to actually solve the deficit problem you have to a) cut Medicare benefits, b) increase Medicare taxes, or c) implement cost controls that somehow save money without cutting benefits.

    But if you try a) the right-wing groups go crazy because they’re on Medicare. Raising taxes is the devil to the right, so b) is out. Which implies the only way to solve the deficit problem is through cost-controls, but their whole reason to exist is opposing Obama’s attempts at cost-control in healthcare.

    We’ve got some pretty crazy guys on the left, but they have very little clout. Pelosi doesn’t talk about frankenfood, or question S11. But Boehner and McConnel are quite happy to repeat crap about death panels.

  5. kranky kritter Says:

    No disagreement from me on the existence of a realism deficit. The alienated right is as batshit today as the alienated left was in the wake of the Iraq invasion. So it goes, when the white house changes hands.

    But while I agree that medicare is a big problem for the primary reason that you state, I think the extent of the problem goes well beyond medicare.

    The problem is more demographic and actuarial. As a nation, we’ve overpromised ourselves when it comes to medicare, social security, pensions, and so on. And I think there’s an awful lot of antipathy from different groups depending on what each NOW foresees as what they are likely to get. We might be able to place social security back into balance over the intermediate term by raising retirement age, the cap, and trimming payout growth. But the demographics suggest the trend is towards a worse and worse problem with the ratio of payers in to takers out. People collecting SS aren’t dying quick enough anymore, and the population of younger folks paying in isn’t growing fast enough.

    Also. I don’t agree if you’re suggesting that cutting medicare is something that will make only or primarily right wing groups go crazy. There are WAY too many people who are counting on medicare to think that opposition to cuts is somehow not a broad mainstream position.

    I think healthcare cost growth WILL begin to flatten because it has to flatten out. Rationing is already routinely occurring, just not in the blatant ways that would make it obvious. This will continue. So will more shifting of actual costs onto consumers so that they self-ration. IMO that’s not the end of the world. Currently, health insurance is much more than insurance. It also incorporates financing of expenses we know are not ifs, but whens. We can expect to see more evolution back towards the usual idea of insurance, to protect you from big unexpected catastrophic occurrences.

    We’ve got some pretty crazy guys on the left, but they have very little clout. Pelosi doesn’t talk about frankenfood, or question S11. But Boehner and McConnel are quite happy to repeat crap about death panels.

    Sure. You’re convinced the right is much worse. No interest in replaying that debate. I don’t think it’s productive to focus my interest in politics on deciding which side is worse. My mileage varies from yours.

    But do notice that under the current dynamics, the right is splintered. Conservatives will have a big challenge finding a 2012 prez candidate that appeases the far right without alienating moderates. Until the gen election comes, appeasing the far right is job 1. Is there any surprise then that conservatives pander to the tea party/palin bloc? Not in my mind.

    Democrats OTOH are much more able to take the left wing for granted. And that’s sort of a good thing, because they have the majority and need to, you know, lead and govern. When Obama got elected, I told everyone that THAT would be the crest of the tide, and triumphant liberals told me I was an idiot and that conservatives were irrelevant, etc, etc, etc.

    Now we see that Obama used his political capital along with his majority to make one major change, healthcare reform. And IMO anyone sane can now see the pendulum swinging back, the tide going out, pick your analogy.

    Is it really hard to imagine say a 2016 election where a conservative sweeps in to office and horrified progressives march off into a kooky wilderness whilst whining that Obama and his majority lost their way and strayed from the progressive principles that got them elected?

    Supposing something like that happens, will you fail to notice the parallelism to current dynamics, because you have sympathy for liberal disappointment and alienation, but no sympathy for conservative disappointment and alienation?

    We’ve seen more than murmurings of liberal disappointment and alienation already. AND we know that in 2012, Obama, as the sitting President, won’t face mainstream democratic opposition, at least not if the past is ANY guide. That means that any primary opposition he faces will come from a progressive standard bearer. At that point we’ll be well into the dynamic of the sitting President trying to reinvigorate his base at the same time as he most needs moderate support. Thereby setting the stage for liberals, if too disappointed, to abandon mainstream democratic party support.

    BTW, I would not be surprised to see Biden swapped out in 2012, either for Hillary Clinton, or for someone else who can at that time deliver the interest group most needed to shore up the re-election effort.

  6. Nick Benjamin Says:

    But while I agree that medicare is a big problem for the primary reason that you state, I think the extent of the problem goes well beyond medicare. The problem is more demographic and actuarial.

    That’s part of the trouble. But it’s not the major cause — Germany and France have much worse demographic and actuarial problems, but their long-term deficits are peanuts compared to ours. Short term they’ve got problems as big as ours, but if you look at the deficit projections for 2030 they’ll be about where they are now and we’ll be totally screwed.

    That’s because their costs per person are stable. Ours aren’t, so even if you doubled the Medicare budget by magic today in 8 years we’d be back in the same place.

    Also. I don’t agree if you’re suggesting that cutting medicare is something that will make only or primarily right wing groups go crazy.

    That’s not what I meant to imply. Nobody likes cutting Medicare benefits. If anything the left is more protective of Medicare then the right because it’s the single-payer system we want for every American. What makes the Teapartys special is they oppose fixing Medicare’s balance sheet, and then they claim to be deficit-hawks.

    There are conservatives who understand the reality. Rep. Paul Ryan wants to replace the entire thing with vouchers. As the vouchers are lower-cost then the current program it’s a massive cut in benefits.

    Also several GOP Senators who were active in negotiating HCR until the teaparties got to them in August.

    Is it really hard to imagine say a 2016 election where a conservative sweeps in to office and horrified progressives march off into a kooky wilderness whilst whining that Obama and his majority lost their way and strayed from the progressive principles that got them elected?

    That’s not hard to imagine at all. What is hard to imagine is Pelosi et al. following them. Most Senate Dems actually voted for all the stuff Progressives hate Bush for doing.

    OTOH the GOP has managed near-unanimity in opposing the Obama agenda.

    The difference isn’t that one side doesn’t go into a corner, cry, and start spewing crazy shit. The difference is that one side’s “leaders” follow the crazies into the corner and repeat the crazy shit.

  7. kranky kritter Says:

    @Nick

    Time will tell. I don’t find it hard at all to imagine democrats opposing a Republican President with unanimity.

    And I’m certain that plenty of democrats seeking re-election in 2010 and 2012 will pander to whoever it’s necessary to pander to. Will that mean precisely “following” the crazies? Nope. But will it mean adopting their crazies’ rhetoric in some cases for applause line in speeches and bashing figures that lefty crazies particularly despise? You betcha.

  8. Lee Thomas Says:

    Nick wrote…….”"”The reason I worry about these groups is they seem so divorced from reality.”"”

    This might be true. But remember when you hear a Right winger talking and they all sound alike, just remember that the same is equally true when those on the right hear a left winger talking and they say to themselves…..”They all sound alike.”

    I can only point out this in response to the lefts continued angst at the Tea party…….

    http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=612

    Nowadays I don’t see to many people griped with reality when it comes to politics.

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: