If only the dems understood working stiffs like David Brooks

[Cocoa]

and Bill Bennett and Fred Barnes.

Once again, invaluable advice from these anthropologists of the regular schmoes... :sarcasm:

http://bennettmornings.com/pg/jsp/charts/streamingAudioMaster.jsp;jsessionid=DEENAnBNmP+eQYjdBHp77A**?dispid=302&headerDest=/site/preview?pid=31401

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/DN-brooks_13edi.ART.State.Edition1.1da6e5c8.html


If he'd been born a little earlier, Sam Alito would probably have been a Democrat. In the 1950s, the middle-class and lower-middle-class whites in places like Trenton, N.J., where Judge Alito grew up, were the heart and soul of the Democratic Party.

But by the late 1960s, cultural politics replaced New Deal politics, and liberal Democrats did their best to repel Northern white ethnic voters. Big-city liberals launched crusades against police brutality, portraying working-class cops as thuggish storm troopers for the establishment. In the media, educated liberals portrayed urban ethnics as uncultured, uneducated Archie Bunkers.

The liberals were doves; the ethnics were hawks. The liberals had "Question Authority" bumper stickers; the ethnics had been taught in school to respect authority. The liberals thought an unjust society caused poverty; the ethnics believed in working their way out of poverty.

Sam Alito emerged from his middle-class neighborhood about that time, made it to Princeton and found "very privileged people behaving irresponsibly."

more...

[AX10]

1. What the Hell is this crap?

"Big-city liberals launched crusades against police brutality" So Bill Bennett is saying that Police Brutality and abuse by the government is O.K. That is the right wing belief. Sick bastards! :argh:

[Cocoa]

2. real Americans approve of police brutality

the dems are "out of touch" for opposing police brutality.

[sandnsea]

4. What's police brutality

I think it's the definition of police brutality and the assumption to label the police that he's talking about. Certainly nobody would say they approve of police brutality, but the Rodney King jury is proof that what one sees as brutality another sees as good policing. That's what Brooks is talking about. It isn't a question of right or wrong, it's back to that framing thing and the fact that Democrats have rolled out the exact same line for 30 years. They would say Roe is settled and the country isn't racist anymore, so why do Democrats keep beating a dead horse. I disagree with that, but if the majority of the country thinks that way, then that is a fact as to why we're a minority party. Denying that this might be what's going on doesn't help us change it.

[AX10]

5. Would you suggest we reframe the arguement then?

....

[Cocoa]

7. not based on a David Brooks "analysis"

a fake analysis by definition.

The only way to respond to a David Brooks analysis is to figure out what Brooks's purpose is, certainly not to take it at face value.

[KoKo]

11. Reframe the argument on whether there was "Police Brutality" /Vietnam

Era? :rofl: PLEASE! Give us who lived through that time a break from the laughter!!!

[AX10]

14. I agree.

It seems to be that the right wing is pro-governmental abuse.

[sandnsea]

20. It's not 1970 anymore

We need to stop talking as if it is. That's the problem. How many times did we hear people say Kerry should stop talking about Vietnam. We need to figure out how to talk about the same problems that have always been with us, but make them relevant to today's workers. We're not doing that.

[sandnsea]

18. Well, yes, duh

We made mistakes in these hearings. People would have been much more sympathetic to the case of the mentally retarded man who was sexually harrassed than the CAP club from 20 years ago. Alot more than abortion is at risk now, we are being denied birth control in many cases. But all we focused on was abortion. We should have expanded the debate to make it relevant. We're stuck in the past while they're barreling along, wiping out our rights one after the other. Yes we need to reframe, rebuild, refocus, all kinds of re's. And in a hurry.

[KoKo]

10. You agree with this Brooks/Bennett Trash? You think that Dems got in

"trouble" and lost elections because of "Police Brutality?"

AYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY.......:puke:

[sandnsea]

21. I said I disagreed

But that the description of the white Republican voter is accurate. If you think they aren't voting for tough on crime over the bill of rights, then you haven't been paying attention.

[sandnsea]

3. That's actually a good analysis

That is the best analysis I've seen of the thinking behind suburban white votes. You can find reasons to disagree and arguments against this kind of thinking, but it doesn't mean that the Brooks piece isn't accurate. We talk about the authoritarian personality all the time. Brooks just put it its practical terms.

[Cocoa]

6. he's not even talking about suburban voters

he's talking about "ethnic whites", Reagan Democrats.

And it's not accurate, it's a myth. The same old bogus myth.

Yes, it's designed to sound true, but it isn't.

[AX10]

8. That I must agree with.

There is no such thing as a "white ethnic".

[sandnsea]

17. Explain Simi Valley then

It's baffling to me. There isn't a day that goes by that there isn't a post around here about racist white voters, but when David Brooks writes an op-ed about racist white voters, it's denied. This explains the thought process of a racist white voter, from THEIR perspective. Any white person that lives in the suburbs or rural America, and is HONEST about it, is totally familiar with these attitudes.

[Cocoa]

22. you're losing me

I think we're getting hung up on "suburban."

In Brooks's oversimplified formulation, suburban=bad and urban=good. The suburbs are part of the elite liberal world and the cities are the world of the regular guy.

[sandnsea]

23. You are, I'm not

I'm figuring that 70's voter he's talking about moved to the suburbs with the great white flight movement. Or all the way out to rural America. He's describing the racist white voter the way they see themselves. I'm suggesting it's beneficial to understand it, not agree that they're right or we need to be like that in order to win or anything.

[KoKo]

12. How old was David Brooks at the time he writes about..........huh?

[KoKo]

9. What is this Freeper Trash posted? Where's the link to a Dem Site for

rebuttal...Just posting a :sarcasm: emoticom doesn't allow you to post this crap without an easily defined link to a rebuttal...

That isn't David Brooks or bill Bennett's face in your post...Where's a link to the reality of Brook's totally bizarre BOZO mentality ravings.

I lived through that time...Brook's writes from a mentality of someone who does Google research without a background for perspective in any of his articles.

[Southsideirish]

13. Nice to see they aren't adverse to moronic generalizations when they think

they fit their argument.

Many college kids from blue collar families protested the war and there were a lot of us in school in the '60s with Defense Loan grants that could never afford to go today with the costs of school so high. Back then, aid to education had to be "hidden" as "military spending" in our always super militaristic country.

[Cocoa]

15. they're obviously playing the culture war game

for example the Springsteen nonsense.

I don't think the culture war stuff is as potent as it was in the 1990's though obviously they're trying.

[Ksec]

16. The way I see it.

The liberals were doves; the ethnics were hawks that made up reasons to invade countries that had nothing to do with 911. The liberals had "Question Authority" bumper stickers; the ethnics had been taught in school to respect authority and we all know authority is trustworthy and always have your best interests in mind.. The liberals thought an unjust society caused poverty; the ethnics believed in working their way out of poverty which is nearly impossible with wages dropping and the minimum wage stagnant for near decades, nevermind the millions of good jobs those ethnics have shipped to communist China while we get WalMart junk jobs to replace the real ones..

[Dr Fate]

19. So why didn't he fight in Vietnam then?

I mean, we are arguing that he was on one side of the original "culture war", right?