The Ridicule Gap

GOP presidential hopefuls are providing an early preview into what promises to be the most cliché-ridden, cartoonish campaign in modern history. From their point of view, it's a preview of necessity. Weighted down as they are by a disgraced party, a despised president and depleted vault of ideas, there's no appealing Republican past or future to tout. So they treat us to little but taunting stereotypes about Liberal Loonyland.

Earlier this month in New Hampshire, for instance, Mitt Romney characterized Hillary Clinton’s economic philosophy as "out with Adam Smith and in with Karl Marx," adding that she couldn’t "get elected president of France with her platform."

This left me a bit nonplussed. I read the papers, but frankly I couldn't tell you what her economic particularities are. I know she talks a lot about -- heaven forfend -- community spirit over atomistic greed, and if that's properly Marxian, then Romney's corporatist mumblings are properly Mussolinian. But what the hell; such one-dimensional bombast excites and distracts the base.

He has also cracked that Barack Obama has "gone from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove," referring first to the senator's openness to unrestricted diplomatic warfare as well as unilateral U.S. military action against al Qaeda in foreign lands.

Someone should inform the governor that the latter happens to be current U.S. policy. Even jollier good fun would entail a member of the press informing him, and then asking if that makes the current White House occupant a Dr. Strangelove. See Mitt stutter. See Mitt launch into irrelevant talking points. See Mitt run.

Then there is Romney's all-inclusive, all-purpose broadside -- completely void, naturally, of any depth: "America is not happy with how the war in Iraq is going and is angry," he conceded in Iowa. "But America is not about to take a sharp left turn and put somebody in the White House who would turn America into a European-type state."

Now there's a base-tingling humdinger for you, with Orwellian word-processor Frank Luntz's fingerprints all over it.

Ever since Chancellor Otto von Bismark tried mollifying Germany's Social Democrats with worker health and disability insurance, old-age pensions and child labor laws, American conservatives have suffered night terrors over the prospect of a caring "European-type state" slithering its way across the stormy Atlantic. Though periodically beaten to a pulp -- especially in the 1930s and '60s -- this Bill Buckley bogeyman is still alive, and still radiating chills up the conservative spine. He's under your bed, ye of little notice -- but Mitt knows how to spook the impressionable.

Rudy Giuliani has joined in on the fun, too, forewarning the inattentive multitudes that rule by a Democratic president's "party of losers" would bring astronomically higher taxes as it foists "socialist" health care through a monstrous "nanny government." Meanwhile, the ghostly Fred Thompson amuses himself with YouTube videos ridiculing the 60-percent minority of Michael Moore Americans who, truth be told, wouldn't mind a nanny who writes the health-care checks one bit.

There are plentiful other examples of the GOP's bogeymen and hackneyed ridicule, of course, but you get the point -- as did The Politico in its coverage of these "exasperated, calculated and desperate" campaigns: "Frustrated at the constant drumbeat of negative stories about their president and party, [Republican] candidates want to change the narrative. But it’s too politically risky at this point to lash out against one another, let alone Bush. So the obvious and safe alternative is to tee off on the Democratic contenders."

And we ain't seen nothin yet.

In reaction, Democratic hopefuls might want to take a break from assaulting each other and instead get an equally early start at lampooning the modern-day protagonists of Gilded Age Republicanism. Closing the psy-ops Ridicule Gap would be so damn easy -- and electorally essential.

Comments

[Repigs playing checksers]

Let the Democrats beat each other silly. VP Gore is the main beneficiary. Watch Al run.

[Tom]

What about Ron Paul? Don't become like the MSM and censor his campaign. After all, censorship is becoming America's favorite past-time. The US gov't (and their corporate friends), already detain protesters, ban books like "America Deceived" from Amazon and Wikipedia, shut down Imus and fire 21-year tenured, BYU physics professor Steven Jones because he proved explosives, thermite in particular, took down the WTC buildings. Free Speech forever.
Last link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

[JPark]

Yeah, Ron Paul, that is the conservative answer to Ralph Nader. Or is it the liberal answer to Ralph Nader? I forget. Both of them are hypocrites that are marginal politicians for many reasons.

[jeffreydj]

No doubt Tom was reminding us that Rep. Paul is a never-ending source of campaign-trail mirth and ridiculousness, as per the article.

After all, what poster would dare show up 'round here touting that clown, now that we all understand Paul's determination to repeal Social Security and Medicare. Nah, I'm confident that Tom just wants to spread the merriment to where it is most hilarious.

[Ian McGarrett]

I think Saint Al knows what a debased thing the presidency is, although it would be interesting to see how the pundits would blather about a matchup of Al Gore vs. Fred Thompson (sortof like an Alien vs. Predator or werewolf vs. vampire kind of thing). For a real departure from the norms of American politics I would favour a contest that pits Ron Paul vs. Mike Gravel. As for the bashing of the Democratic hopefuls by the Republicans and by the other Democrats, I think Democrats should take comfort in the fact that the Republican hopefuls are such a sad, sorry, cartoonish lot that they aren't worth bashing.