Allies and Antagonists.

by on

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) usually defends conservative students against the PC left. The group's website notes:

At many of our nation's colleges and universities...students are expected to share a single viewpoint on controversial matters like the meaning of diversity, the particulars of racism, and the impermissibility of "hate speech." Mandatory "diversity training," in which students are instructed in an officially-approved ideology, is commonplace.

Now, FIRE is showing its evenhandedness by taking on Virginia's Hampton University, which for the second time in two years has denied recognition to students trying to start a gay and lesbian student group on campus. Good for FIRE!

Shifting gears somewhat, this Washington Post report looks at how the Democratic Party's leftwing "net-roots" are going after even moderate liberals who are pro-choice on abortion and support gay rights if they also happen to favor legislation to scale back the estate tax, tighten bankruptcy rules and promote free-trade agreements. It's very possible that the GOP will move toward the center as 2008 approaches, while the Democrats veer sharply into leftwing loonyland.

10 Comments for “Allies and Antagonists.”

  1. posted by thom on

    I saw the WaPo article a few days ago. What struck me about it is that the leftwing net-roots’ position towards Rep. Tauscher seems entirely based upon perceived slights in the past. Bitterness, not a sound analysis of policy or political strategy, seems to be driving these folks. That’s dumb.

    For years, the Democratic Party was a big tent, with unherdable cats inside it. It’s lack of party discipline was infamous. The WaPo article suggests that net-roots are finally herding those cats (with help from Pelosi, obviously). WIth this new found discipline, perhaps the Democratic Party will be able to accomplish something.

    On the other hand, the net-roots better be careful not to drive people like Tauscher out of the tent. (I know nothing about her, but she comes across well in the article.) Socially liberal, fiscally conservative candidates like Tauscher are important to moderate, swing voters like me.

  2. posted by thom on

    Some good points about extremism in political discourse in this commentary (and comments) on the WaPo article here.

  3. posted by Roy X. Penguin on

    Somewhat off topic. Another disconnect among the “gay left.” Fighting the estate tax should be a priority for gay activists. It comes back in 2011 with an exclusion of $1,000,000. Since the federal government does not consider same-sex couples to be married, whatever shelters a surviving heterosexual spouse would get does not apply. And if you’re in a state where your partnership is unrecognized by your state, you’re screwed too.

    Repeal of the estate tax is a good thing, especially for gays.

  4. posted by Greg Capaldini on

    Thanks, Stephen and commentators, for the article, links, and discussion. Perhaps it’s rotten of me to take pleasure in the internal troubles of the two prevailing parties, but I’m clearly not the only person who tires of their historically overextended dominance and the pressure they exert on their members — and ultimately, on the rest of us — to conform.

  5. posted by Brian Miller on

    Yep, it’s quite easy with an estate tax of a cap of $1 million to have a surviving half of a gay couple who are homeowners in a rapidly-appreciating market get screwed. Not only does the survivor lose his partner, but he/she also loses their home.

  6. posted by ETJB on

    (1) Nice to see a conservative interest group actually practicing what it preaches; It is a private University so the 1st Amendment may or may not apply.

    (2) The ‘net roots’ may or may not be a part of the Democratic Party. Often times they are just left or right wing activists. Both parties have their extremes online, so please dont pretend otherwise.

    (3) The political parties have little say in how individual candidates campaign on a particular issue. Yet, the idea that the GOP is going to give up on its conservative, evangelical base is rather silly.

    (4) Your assertion — based on some internet activits — that Democratic Party is in ‘leftwing loonyland’ is false, misleading and childish.

  7. posted by thom on

    ETJB ~

    If you look closely, you’ll see that Stephen Miller did not assert that the Democratic Party IS in “leftwing loonyland,” but only that it MAY veer that way as 2008 approaches. In light of comments made in the WaPo article, such as the net-roots’ desire to take out Tauscher (thereby removing a moderate Democrat), I don’t think Mr. Miller’s made a “false, misleading and childish” remark.

  8. posted by Carl on

    Many gay people are lucky to not be fired from their jobs or assaulted in the street – a tax on the rich isn’t their top priority.

    It’s nice that some conservatives disagree with anti-gay beliefs, but the major people in charge of the GOP, and most of the candidates running for President, still support homophobia and general stupidity. Mitt Romney is now so desperate all he can do is recite a nursery rhyme:

    http://365gay.com/Newscon07/02/022307romney.htm

  9. posted by dalea on

    I did a little research and found a dkos thread discussing this very subject. The url is: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/2/21/13587/4616

    The point made in the thread is not they the netroots are going after any and all moderate democrats. It is that she is too conservative for her district. In more conservatve places, the netroots cheerfully support much more conservative democrats. The netroots are not the club for growth, they do not attack any and all moderates. Only in very selective cases. Like this one: liberal districts should have a liberal rep. This does not strike me as odd or unusual. Now if only the conservatives could realize that Arnold is as socially conservative a candidate that is electable in California.

  10. posted by Brian Miller on

    For whatever reason, Democratic party partisans have been particularly shrill and hateful as of late. Pandagon, a major Democratic blog, ran a piece on how evil libertarians (not just LP members) are. . . and then two dozen posts later had the same posters demanding that libertarians who “really care” about libertarian issues join the Democrats.

    Hmmm.

Comments are closed.