RNC abandons moronic resolution to rename Democrats the “Democrat Socialist Party”
posted at 6:57 pm on May 20, 2009 by Allahpundit
It’s Colin Powell’s first official act as the new titular head of the GOP.
The initial name-changing resolution had drawn criticism from Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele. Other party leaders called the idea “stupid” and “absurd,” saying it made Republicans look petty during a troubling time for the nation…
David Norcross, a committeeman from New Jersey, said it was a bid to raise awareness of the Democratic agenda so that Americans can be “properly fearful.”…
At one point during informal discussions of the name change, some attending the meeting of state party leaders and other party officials said the proposed name might also include the label “nationalist.” But Bopp said including “nationalist” was never proposed.
“Nationalist” as a reference to Obama’s de facto nationalization of GM? Or “nationalist” as in … er, the Democrat “National Socialist Party”? I hate to tell you, boys, but apart from the economic sense of the term, “nationalist” is pretty much the opposite of what the left has in mind.
The resolution they ended up passing instead condemned the Democrats’ for “pushing our country towards socialism.” Click here to read the statement from a relieved Michael Steele, an opponent of the “Democrat Socialist” resolution who’s now officially had himself two good days in a row. Ultimately I feel about this trainwreck the way I felt about the film “Dances With Wolves”: Happy with the outcome but disturbed that it took this long to reach it. Good lord.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
RINOs.
YYZ on May 20, 2009 at 6:59 PM
Good. The idea was moronic from the get-go.
amerpundit on May 20, 2009 at 6:59 PM
I don’t know about Moronic. But it wouldn’t have surprised me if it actually did happen.
upinak on May 20, 2009 at 7:01 PM
This was probably not meant for a vote. It was meant as a dig. It would be stupid to vote on it but maybe the way it all went down made a point that needed to be made.
petunia on May 20, 2009 at 7:01 PM
I don’t know, I think Democractic National Socialist Party would’ve been a very apt description for where the Dems plan to take us.
Although I guess transnational is probably a better description of their foreign policy, the national is meant to separate it from regular socialism, in the sense of removing the class-based nature of socialism.
apollyonbob on May 20, 2009 at 7:01 PM
Whew indeed.
promachus on May 20, 2009 at 7:02 PM
But elephants, don’t stop fighting. This is just the beginning.
promachus on May 20, 2009 at 7:02 PM
That would actually make an excellent motto for the entire site! Pretty much sums up the political analysis of most posters here.
petunia on May 20, 2009 at 7:03 PM
The problem isn’t offending Dems. It’s that you blunt the force of using the term “socialism” by attributing regular Dem policies to it. Far too many lemmings would assume, “Oh, socialism might not be that bad then.”
amerpundit on May 20, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Hey! Dances with Wolves was a good movie.
Yeah, this is a much better move than officially renaming the opposition party. Good for Steele.
cs89 on May 20, 2009 at 7:04 PM
Good…………
………….. now all he has to do is thank Gov. Palin.
Seven Percent Solution on May 20, 2009 at 7:04 PM
Instead, the Republican committee has decided to merely rename the Democratic party “Those A$$holes”
redshirt on May 20, 2009 at 7:05 PM
Steele wants to keep it free for the RiNOs to run with for themselves….
sven10077 on May 20, 2009 at 7:05 PM
Nothing to say. Just thought it should be repeated.
petunia on May 20, 2009 at 7:06 PM
I hope that this has all been a joke and that our national leadership hasn’t actually been devoting all this time to it.
Find conservative candidates.
Raise money (but not from me).
Deal with our primary system.
myrenovations on May 20, 2009 at 7:06 PM
No the left is very definately Interanationalists. They veiw socialism as the new world order.
William Amos on May 20, 2009 at 7:08 PM
Good gravy, but the Republicans are as stupid as the Democrats.
That is frankly what I have finally concluded.
AnninCA on May 20, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Although he’s trying to slip it all in under another guise
To all his fascist action most foul we must still be wise
In spite of all the Houdini lies
Dancing in Obama’s Mussolini eyes
MB4 on May 20, 2009 at 7:11 PM
It did seem redundant :)
Dr Evil on May 20, 2009 at 7:11 PM
The RNC is still too much a good old boys club.
Too much stupidity on display there.
William Amos on May 20, 2009 at 7:11 PM
More sophomoric than moronic. Doesn’t the GOP have any real issues to address?
Socratease on May 20, 2009 at 7:12 PM
Allah said “titular” again..*giggles
GoodBoy on May 20, 2009 at 7:12 PM
Thank the Lord. Just doing the “Paulie, Schmally” game isn’t going to win, especially after the RNC has showed its lack of testicular fortitude. “From the makes of McCain ’08: Stupid Name Calling!”
Now go out and hunt down another dozen Michelle Bachmann’s and Ted Cruz’s, Steele.
emailnuevo on May 20, 2009 at 7:15 PM
darn…..
>:(
strangelet on May 20, 2009 at 7:15 PM
Victory for Steele, his speech showed he’s not a lightweight afterall.
Daemonocracy on May 20, 2009 at 7:17 PM
If they can’t even acknowledge socialism when they see it, do you really think they’re going to do any of that?
AP is right, Colon Powell is, and has been, the de facto leader of the Republican party for quite some time now.
FloatingRock on May 20, 2009 at 7:19 PM
Bingo.
MadisonConservative on May 20, 2009 at 7:22 PM
RNC
FloatingRock on May 20, 2009 at 7:22 PM
They ought to move on and call the ‘rats what they really are.
Bishop on May 20, 2009 at 7:25 PM
There was no point to this. A couple of weeks have been spent on this. News items have been spent on this. Now they aren’t even going to do the “this”.
Calling the policies socialist when they get to appear on shows or write op-eds is fine. But why have a special RNC session to discuss this as if it were the best way to win seats in 2010?
myrenovations on May 20, 2009 at 7:25 PM
Colin Powell is just a tit, Allah.
HornetSting on May 20, 2009 at 7:26 PM
Why don’t they drop the Democratic part instead. Socialist Party Of America is more precise. SPOA.
2Tru2Tru on May 20, 2009 at 7:26 PM
You would be, yet once again, completely incorrect. You just don’t seem to understand what is really going on around you, which is kind of sad.
The term “nationalist” would refer (I assume) to the fact that the Democrats want to create a single Super-State, instead of the union of sovereign states that the Founders laid out. The Democrats do not like the idea of competing governments and would like Washington to hold all power and make all decisions. This is what they like (because they are too simple-minded to understand anythng else) and this is what they are working towards.
And stop calling ideas about truthful labels, “moronic”. That’s moronic.
progressoverpeace on May 20, 2009 at 7:33 PM
I am with you there. Maybe I’ll get over it by tomorrow. Maybe not. Every road begins with the first step.
petunia on May 20, 2009 at 7:33 PM
How about the International Socialist party? It could be called iNazi for short. I suppose Apple wouldn’t like my idea, but aren’t all those Mac people Democrats anyway?
thuja on May 20, 2009 at 7:35 PM
Yeah. No sense stating the obvious by a retarded resolution naming “the other” party what the accusing party is also guilty of.
Snooper on May 20, 2009 at 7:42 PM
Thank Goodness !! It would have made the party look…well like democrats
The_Lid on May 20, 2009 at 7:46 PM
The GOP abandons a pointless idea to spend more time on back-slapping, glad-handling and schmoozing their way into more lucrative committee positions.
Color me unimpressed.
spmat on May 20, 2009 at 7:49 PM
Let’s face it, the Republican party hasn’t learned anything from ’06 and ’08. They are continuing their race with the Democrats to the left, (but never mind, the Dem’s aren’t Socialists so have no fear), and they have no intention of returning to their roots. Even if they rhetorically lash small-government fiscal conservatism like a whip, if they ever regain the reigns of power they will no doubt shed all pretenses and return to the Democrat-lite party of big spending and government.
The Republican party is redundant and unnecessary.
FloatingRock on May 20, 2009 at 7:50 PM
The term socialist no-longer has any meaning to the government-schooled dumbmAsses, anyway.
-Dave
Dave R. on May 20, 2009 at 7:52 PM
I do not shy away from the word Socialism, and I do think it should be used when referencing specific Obama policies such as Cap and Trade, Nationalization of banks, taxpayer dollars to ACORN and the take over of GM with new emissions rules thrust on the car industry by the Department of Transportation. however, simply calling the Democrats Socialists when the Republicans have NO concrete message of their own comes across as nothing more than childish name calling. The Republcian party needs to be a party of ideas. Once they have some new ideas and some substance which stand in stark contrast to what the Democrats have to offer, then they can more effectively make the socialist argument about the Democratic and Obama policies.
Daemonocracy on May 20, 2009 at 7:53 PM
Because apparently a lot of Republican’s, including perhaps a majority here, don’t think the Democrats are socialists. It seems they think that those who think they are are just a bunch of extremist nut cases.
FloatingRock on May 20, 2009 at 7:56 PM
Personally, I’ve been telling people I’m an Independent since the McCain nomination. No signs of changing any time soon…
Bonus Question: What if a group of brain dead, elitist snobs had a political party and nobody showed up?
SuperCool on May 20, 2009 at 7:58 PM
Dumb idea to begin with. We’ve educated three generations of people to believe that socialism is a good thing.
Hell, I resisted the indoctrination as a public school kid of the 1980s, and nowadays I look at the term “communist” as kind of a humorous relic. As in I accuse my wife of being a communist when she turns her nose up at a PB&J sammich.
The Republicans win when they run as free-market, limited government individualists. Unfortunately there is a statist element in the party that hasn’t learned the lesson that you can’t marry socialism with capitalism. It’s going to be difficult to distinguish themselves from Democrats when they’ve been acting like Democrats for nearly a decade.
If they want to spend time ridiculing the Democrats, that’s fine, I suppose. But they need to come back to core principles and hit the Democrats with the truth. Slaves to the union bosses. Generational theft. The party of division. The party of the nanny state. The party of race-baiting. The party of troop demoralization. The party of centralized power over local power.
It’s going to be a difficult road back for them but they need to abandon the idea that government can be simultaneously large and responsible. And they need to do it now or they will continue to bleed support.
TheMightyMonarch on May 20, 2009 at 8:01 PM
So even though you yourself provided a list of socialist Democrat policies, you still don’t think they’re socialists, only the policies are? It’s not the Dem’s faults, blame the policies?
FloatingRock on May 20, 2009 at 8:02 PM
What is moronic is the failure to precisely define what is going on.
They are simply socialists and they are getting kickbacks from crony capitalists like Immelt at GE.
A multimillion-dollar grassroots campaign to define Obama is needed.
TexasJew on May 20, 2009 at 8:06 PM
If by “ideas” you mean reduce the size and scope of government, promote capitalism and trade and provide essential services such as national defense, I’m all for that. But if you mean we need to develop an alternative socialized medicine plan or a better cap-n-trade, screw that.
If the former, those aren’t new ideas. Freedom and liberty have been around since our nations founding. We just need Republicans to make the case, which they won’t—and they won’t call socialism by it’s name and they won’t close the primaries and they won’t put up conservative candidates.
FloatingRock on May 20, 2009 at 8:08 PM
…They won’t close the borders and implement employment verification and enforcement.
FloatingRock on May 20, 2009 at 8:09 PM
Good. They should start calling it
The Debtocratic Party
rockmom on May 20, 2009 at 8:09 PM
No more callers, please, we have a winner!
SuperCool on May 20, 2009 at 8:15 PM
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism,” said Norman Thomas, a U.S. Socialist Party presidential candidate in the 1940s. “But under the name of ‘liberalism,’ they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day, America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”
Star20 on May 20, 2009 at 8:57 PM
In his 1982 book, “The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism,” Michael Novak noted that many who have lived under socialism would find it hard to believe “that other human beings would fall for the same bundle of lies, half-truths and distortions. Sadly, however, illusion is often sweeter to human taste than reality. The last Marxist in the world will probably be an American nun.”
Star20 on May 20, 2009 at 8:59 PM
Dear goopers, you can call us Democrats anything you want. Makes no matter. We kicked your arse in 2006, we kicked your arse in 2008, and we will kick your arse in 2010. Any questions?
athensboy on May 20, 2009 at 9:00 PM
How many years will it be before you are a man?
Star20 on May 20, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Wow … you’re on a two year winning streak – grats. Hey I got a question – you guys own the shop now – when you gonna get the kahones to try the Bush crowd for torture? Why are you guys backpeddling on this? Are you girlymen or what?
Come on – we’re waiting – and DARING you do try the Bush administration.
HondaV65 on May 20, 2009 at 9:46 PM
Ohhhhhh snaps!
crr6 on May 20, 2009 at 9:56 PM
The Democrats should not be called the Democrat Socialist Party. They should be called the Socialist Party. The Democrats are not democratic.
What about “National Socialist”? That is what the Nazis were. The Democrats, however, are internationalist and class conscious in their socialism. So, “Bolshevik Socialist” would be a good fit.
Phil Byler on May 20, 2009 at 10:24 PM
Whew is right! This was the most moronic idea I have heard in ages. We need to fight, not retreat into puerile, sophomoric name-calling.
califcon on May 20, 2009 at 10:34 PM
The Democratic Commie Bastards Party: it has a nice ring to it. We could even add some exclamations points.
Axeman on May 20, 2009 at 11:18 PM
RINOs breathing a big sigh of relief.laughable
james23 on May 20, 2009 at 11:23 PM
Just a thought… Over the last fifty years, how many Americans have given their lives fighting Socialism, Marxism, Communism, or any other form of collectivism? How much of our national treasure have we expended defeating those socio-economic models? Remember when the words socialism, or communism brought images of poverty and loss of individual freedom?
Now, for many Americans, they’re cool.
Star20 on May 20, 2009 at 11:36 PM
Gotta love his liberal use of the word “arse”. I’ll bet he uses the term “bollocks” a lot too. Maybe even feigns an interest in soccer.
Here’s a hint; watching “Trainspotting” twenty-five times does not make you worldly.
TheMightyMonarch on May 20, 2009 at 11:49 PM
My guess is that athensboy loves to brag about his posts here. I mean during recess, of course.
Star20 on May 20, 2009 at 11:52 PM
Why do we proceed towards socialism despite myriad examples of its failure?
Because we as human beings lack the ability to learn until we’ve touched the stove, regardless how many people we’ve witnessed getting burned.
It will have to be dragged away from us, kicking and screaming. Our desire for the nanny state will bankrupt us and only then will we be forced to return to individual responsibility. The only thing that worries me is what kind of government will rise out of the ashes.
TheMightyMonarch on May 20, 2009 at 11:59 PM
I believe it’s a very valid issue, and point to make.
FACT…There are 58 members in the house of representatives that are card carrying socialists. They even caucus separately under the name “progressive caucus.” Progressives sounds less offensive than socialists. Progressive covers for who, and what they actually are and their agenda. So to label the democrats as socialists, isn’t as far fetched as it may sound.
byteshredder on May 21, 2009 at 1:25 AM
Yeah, really.
But, most Americans wouldn’t know what the Hell they mean by that anyway. Sorry, but we as a society are pretty damn ignorant. Somewhere along the line the American people abandoned the loftier goals of our Forefathers in favor of our most basic needs. We’re almost to the point where our ancestors would have been better off staying in Europe and continued being peasants on the estate of some lord.
We have no use for real knowledge nor real intellectual discourse. That’s boring. Only the basest stimulation and/or dulling of our central nervous system is important to most of us.
Dr. ZhivBlago on May 21, 2009 at 1:38 AM
Thank goodness wiser heads prevailed. Enough with playing to the nutty base. Time for the party to find ways to stay true to fundamental principles but reach out to the broader electorate.
Chekote on May 21, 2009 at 9:10 AM
Good. Now get busy and pass a resolution renaming them the “Anti-American Parasite Party”.
Buddahpundit on May 21, 2009 at 9:41 AM