I'm not that old; I have just 30 years under my belt so far. My "formative years," as they say, were the late 80s and early 90s. My father has always had an interest in politics and he's never shied away from talking to me about the subject. This isn't necessarily a good thing--he was and is a batshit crazy right-winger free-market worshipper. I spent my 6th, 10th, and 14th years of life ('84, '88, and '92) thinking that a "Democrat victory would be the death of America" (that's a direct quote from my father). I was sorely disappointed with the results in '92.
I was an avid fan of Limbaugh--got his "news" letter, listened to his show (even during school, I'd listen between classes and then to the show which I had recorded for later), read both of his first two books (received as Christmas presents I'd asked for) and generally believed and agreed with everything he said.
There are a number of reasons for that. Except in this one case, I was never really a mindless follower. I questioned everything skeptically from the earliest age I can remember. I didn't believe in god, santa claus, or any of the other fairy tales our parents tell us, from a very early age. But I drank up the right-wing drivel like a parched desert wanderer who finds an oasis. Looking back, I think my willingness to follow was the way I channeled my emotional response to my family's predicament.
We were poor (impoverished, you might say, living in the poorest areas of town, with high crime and and a dangerous environment where the threat of violence was ever-present for several years). My mother (bless her; she's deceased this last March) was a bit over-protective, and my father cold and distant. He only really became engaging and animated when political discussions came up. Coupled with the one way I saw to bond with my father, and the view that everyone can live and be better than they are right now that the right-wing nonsense distorts and masks in a cloud of hatred and lies, I saw an outlet for my feelings about the world I lived in, and so I used it.
Then I went to college, thanks to scholarships and a federal government loan and grant program, far away from home. I was able, finally, to become my own person. I still listened to the Limbaugh-esque drivel I had become accustomed to, but I also interacted with my fellow students, my professors, and the people in town. I was exposed to new viewpoints. I was engaged by people who confidently pointed out howo ignorant I was. And I recoiled at what I found. I began to apply my intellect to the one area of my own personality that I had not before.
When I utilized the education I was receiving and applied it, I discovered that I was, to put it bluntly, an idiot. Not one single view I'd absorbed from the right was in sync with reality that I had observed (finally without the discolored lenses I'd donned as a youth). Not one. As my education was in the sciences and engineering, this appalled me. I had learned that our views, our hypotheses and theories about the nature of reality were to be governed by our observations and a rational, careful understanding of these observations. This isn't to say we should all behave as Spock-like quasi-automatons; only that we, as creatures with the capability to be rational, should not be shy or hesitant about applying a bit of reason when introspecting and when attempting to understand the events of the world around us.
And almost all of the right's views, hypotheses, and theories were and are "wrong" from this perspective. They don't pass the empirical test.
On the economy, it's clear that the freer the market, the less stable and more prone to recession or depression. In contrast, when sensible regulations are applied and enforced, the economy tends to be more stable, with shorter recessions that are less painful. Moreover, when tax structures favor the wealth so extensively the economy tends to do worse (compare the Reagan years versus the Clinton years versus the GWB years for example); so does the US Treasury, and therefore so do government programs that help the people who really drive this economy.
On foreign policy, it's clear that neither pure isolationism nor preemptive interventionism/imperialism is appropriate. America has always thrived when we have been engaged with the world rather than buried in our own shells away from it--but only when engaged positively. We allied with the world to halt the holocaust and Japanese imperialism, and the world is a better place for it. When we've engaged negatively, such as in Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq, our nation--and the world--suffers for it.
On social policy, it's clear that right-wingers are hypocrites. From drug policy to sex education and marriage, they one-and-all shout "legislate, legislate, legislate!" Of course, this is done out of the side of their mouths that isn't shouting "government isn't the solution; it's the problem." They're also self-defeating. When social policy fosters hatred and violence, the country suffers (cf slavery, Jim Crow and Segregation). When social policy is geared toward rigid authoritarianism (e.g. "abstinence only" sex education), undesired results (such as increased teen pregnancy, STD proliferation, and abortions) occur. On the other hand, when social policy fosters a sense of community and belonging, and when it promotes education and programs that reflect the actual reality of human existence, our nation is strengthened.
There's a common theme here: for right-wingers, "government is the problem" except when it's being used to force their ideology on others at gun point or when it's being used to redistribute wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy classes. For the true believers, facts don't matter except when they conveniently (and usually temporarily) bolster their argument. When mutually contradictory views are held, so long as they support a right-wing agenda, then all is well.
There's another theme, too: not all righties are lost causes. The ones that are I heap scorn on, as they deserve it. But the younger ones--the ones leaving home, entering college, and so forth--aren't lost. If you happen to know one, engage them. Be upfront and honest, forceful and confident. All it takes to get these people on board, those who have genuine intellectual curiosity in spite of years of brainwashing or family pressure, is to demonstrate the facts as they are. That's what saved me, and that's what can save (some of) the next generation of young would-be right-wingers. Hell, we've even seen that it can work on older ones, too, as the support for Obama indicates.
You see, I support Barack Obama because I believe he is acting on this second theme in a way politicians rarely do. Bill Clinton did it to some extent, but nothing like Obama has. He's a breath of fresh air in a climate fouled by divisive political absurdity. This country needs Barack Obama to be elected right now as strongly as this country needed Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Kennedy.