Jay Rosen is Nostradamus. Or Machiavelli.

You know, this is what politics is about. They play everybody to get into power. We're not being played anymore than public school teachers are by the Dems. The question for us social conservatives is, are we getting enough in return? The rich got their tax cut, the hawks got their war, big business got both, plus some graft, and we got Sam Alito and (just barely) John Roberts.

Is that enough? Not for me.

I have never had the slightest doubt that you were sincere, Rod. In fact, that's what was so frustrating--to see you obviously convulsed by the emotion of it all, without even being able to see that you were being played. I don't know; maybe it's temperament. As I said, when I took that Asperger's test you posted awhile back, I was about three or four points short of a diagnosis, whereas as I recall you said on that post that you scored way, way down the scale in the super-emotional region. In any case, I deplore the emotionalism and gooiness and such that politicians use in cases like these. I never was into the Obamamania either, though I support him as probably a little less likely to screw things up than McCain. In any case, in an extremely important election such as this, we've all got to keep our heads.

I know how we social conservatives are being played.

I'm glad that you're getting it now, at least. If I were in your place, I'd be mad as hell.

But none of that erases the fact that class conflict, of which resentment of the mainstream media is a significant part, comes from somewhere, and somewhere real. It's not a figment of Karl Rove's imagination.

The real class conflict, as I think the Bageant stories pointed out, is between the top dogs of both parties who won't make any real changes to the system as long as it benefits them, and the rest of us.

However, I would point this out: When Democrats talk about the gaps between the rich and the poor, the way the rich have gotten much richer and the poor poorer, or when they talk about, say, more progressive taxation or keeping the estate tax, the Republicans scream "Class warfare!" in order to paint the Democrats as a bunch of crypto-Marxists who want to take people's hard-earned money (as O'Reilly did in talking to Obama, in fact), despite the fact that progressive taxation would not actually affect most of the lower- and middle-class members of the Republican base.

On the other hand, the Republicans are always ready to play the "down-home" ticket, portraying the Left as effete, out-of-touch elitists, and their own as "good country people" (to steal from Flannery O'Connor) no matter how elite they may be in actual fact and despite the fact that such cultural issues make not one whit of difference to actual governance. At least the "class warfare" of the Left is based on real issues, whereas that of the Right is all front, no substance. You and many of the other conservatives who have backflipped over Sarah Palin are not cynical--but the GOP is, to an almost fiendish extent. That's the problem we have with Rove.

Rod says,

But none of that erases the fact that class conflict, of which resentment of the mainstream media is a significant part, comes from somewhere, and somewhere real. It's not a figment of Karl Rove's imagination.

Yes, class conflict, and the resentment of mainstream media DO come from somewhere. Karl Rove's imagination. But, unfortunately, it didn't stay a figment. The feeling of class conflict and resentment of mainstream media have been sold to conservatives for the last couple decades. Just because the feelings are real doesn't mean that they are based on real phenomena....or anything approaching rational. Hell feelings actually aren't. The conservatives who believe that there's a class conflict between liberal elites and salt-of-the-earth conservatives, or who believe the media is the source of all their troubles (or that it's controlled by liberals) have been drinking just as much of the Kool-aid as liberals who worry about a coming Theocracy

This all works especially well with the blogosphere and its anonymity. I have always assumed that a small percentage of posters on active boards are trolls that stir things up for the opposite of whatever their side really is. A couple of really nasty posts here and there to move things along.

The most interesting part of this strategy is the, so far, effective use of blatant lying, such as the bridge to nowhere stuff. The base is in full culture war mode, so will not be bothered by this tactic. The far left thinks everything is a lie anyway. At some point it should affect the swing voters and independents. No sign of that so far.

Steve

Turmarion
At least the "class warfare" of the Left is based on real issues, whereas that of the Right is all front, no substance. You and many of the other conservatives who have backflipped over Sarah Palin are not cynical--but the GOP is, to an almost fiendish extent. That's the problem we have with Rove.

Exactly. As I've been saying...I literally haven't heard a single reason state to vote for Palin here except that she's pro-life.

And considering pro-life is a litmus test for Republican nominees, that isn't actually a reason for Republicans to vote for her any more than 'She's a human being.' is a reason to vote for her. Well, yeah, or Republicans wouldn't have nominated her. (Granted, you guys almost did end up with Giuliani for some reason.)

But, anyway, anyone who's voting solely because of abortion was already voting for Republicans. Um, duh. What are the other reason to vote for her? Seriously.

Let's have any previous decisions you like. Name some of them. Or how about some her policy positions. Any good policy positions?

Look, I'm not going to vote for McCain. We all know that. I think I wouldn't vote for McCain even if I was going to vote for a Republican. None of this really concerns me.

But it's very very odd to see two straight weeks of literal fawning over someone without any reason given for it.

The second she showed up, it was instant and total outrage, all the time, about how the 'left' were mistreating and slandering her, and none of her actually pluses except 'non elite', whatever we're pretending 'elite' means today.

Especially after having to put up with constant assertions that Obama was running some sort of cult. Obama actually has policies. He's stated them, he's debated about them, they're posted on his website. You can disagree with them, but don't pretend they don't exist.

There is, indeed, a part of me that wonders if some of the 'theories', especially the one posted by a random person on dK, were, in fact, part of a deliberate plan, and if, in fact, there weren't supposed to be more of them drawing the left blogosphere in, instead of what actually happened, where the reputable left mainly focused on actual scandals, or at least things that look like scandals (And still look like scandals.), and mostly ignored the bait.

But, anyway, anyone who's voting solely because of abortion was already voting for Republicans. Um, duh.

There's where your wrong, David. There are legions of religious pro-lifers who were so disgusted with the Republican party that they intended to sit this one out.

Palin brought those voters back to the tent. (Or at least so it appears now. If the Left wises up and quits attacking her, the religious conservative vote may yet again wane.)

"Drudge has linked to a Jonah Goldberg post on NRO regarding today's Obama ad mocking McCain's non-use of the internet.

"It turns out that as far back as the year 2000 both The Boston Globe and Slate had reported that injuries which McCain sustained during his POW experience make it difficult and painful (if not practically impossible) for the man to deftly work a keyboard."

On the one hand, the computer geek in me says, "So what? Hasn't he or any of his staff heard of voice-actuation? It's not perfect, but it works! It's not like he couldn't afford it."

On the other hand, there are so many better things to be doing with your day than farting around on a keyboard. Look at me -- I've children, books to read, dogs to play with, papers to grade, lectures to prepare... but what am I doing? Reading and posting to flippin' blogs!

Rod: Thanks for your kind words.

At the same time, the real loathing I've seen for people like me from liberals cannot be denied. I've seen it. I've heard it. I've felt it. I'm not whining about it, but I'm just saying that it's not a figment of my imagination, or something invented by the Republicans

True enough and fair enough; but as many others besides myself have pointed out here, the loathing that many conservatives feel for people like us is not a figment of our imaginations, either. We, too, have seen, heard, and felt it. Likewise, just as segments of the Left are willing to whip up resentment against conservatives, segments of the Right are quite willing to do the opposite, in spades.

But what choice to social conservatives have but to vote for [Republicans], and hope for the best? But what choice did an ardent anti-war voter have [in 2006 but to vote Democratic]?

There's the rub. We need to have a truly viable third-party movement in this country, one wherein a vote for a third party is not just a symbolic or wasteful act (e.g. voting Green or Libertarian). How we get something like that going, I have no clue. Meanwhile, I guess the options are: hold your nose and grit your teeth and vote for the lesser of two evils; vote third-party or write-in on the theory that symbolic resistance is better than nothing; or just opt out. I've done options one and two at various times; I haven't opted out yet. None are good options; which is why election years in this country are often so discouraging. Oh, well...maybe some day.