Just weeks ago, the Republican Party apologized for the Southern Strategy, a calculated efffort to use  the cultural upheavals that Brown vs Board of Education and the Civil Rights Act were creating in the South for political gains. For forty years, the Republicans and the Dixie Democrats touted "state's rights" and an anti Federalism to stroke that discontent. It stroked blatant racism under the guise of "strict contruction." It is ironic that John Roberts, nominated for the Supreme Court, was one of the Republican lawyers providing the intellectual underpinings of those arguments. While he may not have had the political calculation of Lee Atwater, his memos  critique school busing and affirmative action on the constitutional grounds that fueled the Southern Strategy for the last 40 years,   Either he too has some apologizing to do when questioned in the Senate, or he must acknowledge that he is one of the architects  of a discredited political strategy that crassly used the Constitution for  political expediency.

Posted at September 1, 2005 10:55 AM in response to Roberts and Civil Rights: What's at Stake? (Part II)

I didn't say exit an honorable war--nothing will make this war honorable. However we are there--with 135,000 members of the US Armed Forces and equipment and untold numbers of American "contractors" working for private companies.  I said exit with honor. It isn't like you just throw down the ball and walk home. There are logistics that look out for Americans and the Iraqis who have thrown in their lives with us.

I remember the helicopters pulling out of the Saigon embassy with peopl dangling from the rails. It didn't look very honorable.

We are in a very complex situation. I want to hold Bush accountable, but I want to get as many Americans home in one piece and I would like to leave as much order as we can as we exit. Slogans alone and pointing fingers isn't going to accomplish much. 

Posted at August 28, 2005 9:03 PM in response to [UPDATE}

People might want to check that out carefully. I don't think  the anti-deficiency laws apply to refinances--only purchase transactions. When you treat your home like an ATM you lose this very basic--depression rooted protection.

Posted at August 28, 2005 3:17 PM in response to The Volokh Conspiracy Tackles the Mortgage Bubble

I don't want a retread of the Democratic party.

I'm not going to look to a Congressmember or a Senator for leadership. They're all tainted with the same problem. They aren't leading, they're trying to straddle some poll or analysis.

I don't want an immediate withdrawal--I want accountability and strategy to exit with honor. I want to declare we squeaked by and get out. The way the Dems are going and the antiwar movement is going, it's going to be the Republicans who declare victory and exit, while Dems are standing around declaring defeat and exit.

We are getting snookered AGAIN.

I want a Covenant party---one that contracts with the people to govern honestly without graft and that pledges that we keep America safe by honoring EVERY American life--in uniform and not. This Covenant government commits to healthcare and a decent standard of living for working americans and a helping hand to those who struggle. It's a party for thinking people that dialogues with citizens and listens and taps into a neighborhood level It recognizes and honors that we don't always agree so we find common ground. Clark said it well today on MTP when talking about Iraq and US diplomacy among the middle east countries. It isn't about changing people's minds, its about finding common ground and moving on together. That used to be what American democrcy was about---not "with us or against us" or friendly crowds or the devastating polarity that engulfs this country and the Democratic party.

Covenant--we might even pick up a fundy or two.  

Posted at August 28, 2005 3:05 PM in response to [UPDATE}

Larry Diamond made a good point on trying to get to a place of reasonable discourse towards a solution, rather than defensive postures and "See, I was right" postures where public discourse seems to be stuck.

I am a mediator (like I said above, I'm an idealist). In mediation, the parties can't really work toward a solution to their conflict until they really listen to each other and each feels "heard" by the other. I'd calm down a lot about the run up to the war, if several people in power, Repubs and Dems, said, "We made a mistake. We froze out opinions that really mattered and would have helped us do it right, or not do it at all. I'M REALLY SORRY FOR MY PART IN THAT. I apologize to those who saw this more clearly, but couldn't get my attention or get heard over  the war drums. We had thousands of Americans in the streets and we ignored them, flat out ignored them. That was wrong. I really want to hear everyone now. Keep talking to me, I NEED your help to solve this really bad situation."

Posted at August 11, 2005 10:13 AM in response to Final Thoughts: Reply to Tom Donnelly and Readers

I'm an idealist at heart, and largely for that reason opposed the Iraq War. We were catapulted into that war, not by democratic idealism, but fearmongering. When I argued against the war, I was shouted down as an appeaser. The adminstration sold the war on the hot blood of the national tragedy of 9/11. This government (of the people, I might add) slanted evidence, suppressed opposition and dragged a reluctant nation into war.

I think DefJef has it right. War makes money for people who give a lot of money to this administration and this Congress. I think that the unraveling of the "Duke" bribes are the tip of an iceberg, most of which is probably legal. Huge, huge amounts of American treasury and way too many lives have been squandered in this venture. The loss of that "soft power' is a great strategic loss that will haunt this country for decades.

Posted at August 11, 2005 7:42 AM in response to Final Thoughts: Reply to Tom Donnelly and Readers

Snark.snark.

So don't give him money. Give him feedback --directly,  person to person.

What is it about Democrats? I think I'll get on a bull horn and criticize the guy and get my cool strokes. No party can succeed with this incessant internal snarking.

Posted at June 29, 2005 3:25 PM in response to Howard Dean Wants My Money

Tomorrow a high school friend of my 26 year old son will bury his 21 year old younger brother, a Marine who died in Iraq. Being a Marine and serving his country were lifetime goals and he was proud. He trusted his government and his fellow citizens to not squander his life on adventures that did not honor the profound  committment he, and many others make, when they join the armed services and put their lives on the line for their country. His government did not honor that trust, and contrary to the President's speech and actions, this tragic breach of trust has harmed not only this Marine and his family and his community, and thousands like him, it has wounded the basic trust of citizens of their government. There is no good spin for this breach, there are no easy solutions, attacking the strawman of immediate withdrawal, does not persuade a public whose trust has been violated. My anger and outrage at this administration is very personal today and nothing in this speech has soothed. My country was better than this and I despair that it can regain its idealism or reputation in the world.

I realize that every death in war has these same components of loss and sacrifice, but it is very personal today. I cannot imagine the President comforting families at Fort Bragg and then coming out and making this speech. The arrogance and denial of responsibility is staggering. The strking feature of the speech for me was the dignified silence of his military audience. They're not looking for a cheerleader, they want a leader.

Posted at June 29, 2005 11:48 AM in response to One More Instant Analysis

EJ Dionne's column was excellent. I was glad to know more about congressman Obey and the stands that he has taken.  To me,  pluralism is the  way to speak about religion in public life. Tolerance is more respectful than some watered down, common denominator,  squishy "God-talk". Religous beliefs are profoundly personal expressions of the spirit. As a Christian, I cringe when  Bush does his "God is gracious, God is good"  rap. An elequent speaker, Cuomo and Obama  come to mind, can articulate their faith publicly without dumbing it down, but most of us need to pray in private or in houses of worship.

Posted at June 25, 2005 4:32 PM in response to You Got to Have Faith

Using the metaphor chosen by Ms. Lamott, it is also important to realize that "hitting bottom" is not a rational course of action. Most people would have changed course long before this bottom. A well run country would have changed course long before. An addicted person hits bottom when they realize they have to change course. I can't "wish" a bottom on them. They're going to continue until they get it.

Posted at June 25, 2005 3:01 PM in response to HITTING BOTTOM