Theocons got what they wanted: another "loss"

Remember this, in all the discussion over whether we got a good deal from the Senate situation (and, taking it of itself, I think kos' points are well-made: we did the best we could).

Theocons got what they wanted -- because they wanted to lose, as they always want to lose.

Huh? you ask. What are you talking about?  Reid casts this as a win for us, and casting a draw as a win, especially for the minority, is shrewd politics, right?  Frist is washed up, right?  Dobson is issuing fatwas in outrage.  How can we say this is what they wanted?

Because losing strengthens theocons.

Think about abortion and gay marriage.  Think about the politics of it -- how does a politician inspire theocon voters?

By losing.

The abortion issue has remained where it has because a completely committed core group of theocons will not accept compromise. They are constantly promised that their side is "near" victory, always to have their victory snatched from them.

It has been widely suggested (at least I think it has) that this is deliberate on the part of the poliicians on the theocratic Right.  If a 5-4 antiabortion majority ever appears on the Supreme Court, the Right loses abortion as an issue by which to get voters to the polls.

Hence the desire to fight very hard and lose, on these issues.

But if they're losing, does that mean we're winning?

If all we care about is whether abortion can be made out-and-out illegal, one can take comfort in this de jure constancy.  But of course that's an irrelevant sideshow.  Abortion rights are being de facto chipped away (even as the theocon voters remain convinced they're losing, because their politicians and ministers continue to tell them so), and meanwhile the far more damaging agenda of the aristocratic Right -- corporate power at the expense of governmental and individual power -- entrenches further.

And it all comes down to this: the theocon politicians wanted to lose.  Or at least to cast the result as a loss -- because all the theocon voters will remember this in 2006.

And here they have it.

•  I've head this before

  And I agree that the Republicans want to flame the fires of the culture war. But with each dent they make we come closer and closer to losing the privacy principle. I don't know how much longer they can continue to loose and win. I fear they will be forced to win.

  Then, maybe folks will really wake up!

  by oysterface on Tue May 24, 2005 at 02:59:59 PM PDT

•  True, but . . .

  Agreed that anger is the best GOTV tool the right has -- still they are too few to carry an election that is not already Roveishly close.

  The howling right will rally their troops to the less crowded battlefield of the midterm and presidential primaries, and they may be able to get extreme candidates into the big races. But in the general elections the outspoken extremists who appeal to the the theocons (Ta for the coinage!) lose. Bush's inarticulate affability -- the have-a-beer-with-the-guy factor -- has cloaked his radical agenda in a chuckle and a wink. Name a potential GOP presidential candidate who can do that. Frist can't. Santorum can't. Cheney (heaven forbid) can't. DeLay's a dead man walking, and maybe Frist is too.

  by OldYellerDog on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:01:33 PM PDT

•  They may have wanted a win

  but their whole approach is built on the whine and they know how to turn a loss into votes.  They are SO persecuted---they run all 3 branches of governemnt and have thoroughly cowed the media.

  by steveb on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:09:59 PM PDT

•  Oh good

  I went through that whole diary worried you were going to say something like, "hey, has anyone read What's the Matter With Kansas???" You didn't. Kudos to you.

  I don't think they wanted this loss (if you consider it a loss - I really don't, aside from showing them that their strongarm tactics can only go so far). They still have abortion and gay marriage to whip their flock into a frenzy in 2006. Those will be issues no matter what. But they have been shown as not being as powerful as they expected, and they will have a more difficult time getting judges through, so they probably are genuinely upset. They had plenty of other manufactured losses to use. This one I don't think they wanted.

  by JamesB3 on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:11:34 PM PDT

•  asdf

  The same can be said for Dems. but abortion is not the GOTV message for Dems. the problem for Dems is their such a diverse group its hard to find a hard hitting theme, barring the generic jobs,tax cuts and healthcare. The reich had a solid albeit small reliable hardcare block, Dems pro choice block seems less hardcore. Because noone wants to have an abortion Dem or Repug . Its just that the riech has framed it as pro vs con abortion. Dems need to re frame this as us all doing what we can to reduce the number of abortions has Howard Dean nicely put on Meet the Press on Sun.

  by FLS on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:15:25 PM PDT

  •  reframing

    doesn't seem to be getting much purchase at dkos, in fact it seems to be loosing ground. The Dean/Clinton/Feingold etc reframing of "safe, legal, and rare" is getting tested here and the tempers are white hot.

    by oysterface on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:37:58 PM PDT

•  I'll go you one better...

  I have been telling people this since the agreement was reached. I think, maybe not you, but I think - this has Rove written all of it. The party knows it has overeached, but it can't disinfranchise their crazy base - and they want a "SURE THING" for 08.

  I think this is a Rove/White House scam. Their deal makes McCain look like a hero, enticing moderates on both sides of the divide. They make Frist look weak, meaning, he needs more help! This energizes the theocracy by losing, agreed, and still Frist is their guy, he will bring them back to the table (and still take their MONEY!) no matter who is the nominee (they won't vote Dem).

  Meanwhile, they have Branded McCain "THEE Moderate", the very thing to counter all this PARTISANSHIP (vote McCain). We create the problem (Partisanship) and provide the solution (McCain).

  I think the white house approved or invented this agreement to secure its next generation for 2008 (McCain). They will expand this, McCain is the Moderate Branding/Frame over time, not for their republican friends - but for democratic votes in 08. First step in a larger plan.  

  The only questions is... did Frist accet his role, or will he grow into it over time - just like Lott.

  This, was a scam, a set up for "McCain 08".

  And when McCain is setup in 2008 as  "THEE only person capable of fixing the Partisan Problems, getting STUFF DONE, that can still protect us" our answer will be... what?... whom?

  Did this agreement just give them Step One in a larger strategy?

  by santoriello on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:34:11 PM PDT

•  That's Right

  Their whole strategy is that of losers. They don't know what to do with dominance. It's like one of those martial arts where the person is supposed to prefer to fight on the ground, on their backs, kicking for gonads principally,

  Well it won't work. We have to keep reminding the American people that they have totally and utterly one. And now they like the guys in front of you on the line who don't know what they want, aren't happy when they get it, and want everybody to respect their righteous indignation which no one, in fact, does.

  by NewDirection on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:38:35 PM PDT

•  Its a Win for us and gurantees us a future win.

  With this Deal on the filibuster in place 4 good things happen.

  1. We save the filibuster

  2. We save the filibuster fight for another day, one closer to the 2006 elections so that everyone can get a nice reminder of the
     

  events of early 2005. (shiavo ---> Nuclear Option).

  3. The Deal states in extreme cases right? well when we filibuster the bushes future radical nominees we can say "We warned
  you republicans that if you put one more nut job we would filibuster, you want it you got it."

  4. It gives Reid even more time to drum up opposition to a future Nuclear Option.

  by Houston on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:45:39 PM PDT

•  We live in Bizarro World

  Their party has the Executive Branch, the Congress, the Courts, Diebold, the corporations, the military, and a most of the media... Bush got all but a handful of his judges approved, even if they are only slightly to the left of Mussolini... he hasn't once had to veto anything... and in spite of all that, they are still whining and complaining like they lost something. They do make it their primary occupation!

  What? What exactly did they lose?

  by tiggers thotful spot on Tue May 24, 2005 at 03:50:46 PM PDT

  •  Well,

    Suggesting that they lost makes me believe that they are 100% focused on a Supreme Court seat.
    

    by starkness on Tue May 24, 2005 at 04:05:10 PM PDT

•  It's beyond my ability...

  but I would heart a diary with the major GOP strategies outlined.  The one above could be a start for the 2008 group.  But you know they also have a 30-year strategy as well, and I would look to fit them together to get that 30 year goal.

  Well, just asking!

  by clb8 on Tue May 24, 2005 at 05:01:52 PM PDT