« Spread the wealth vs spread the trickle. | tpmgary's Blog | 12 days left. Time to pander to special needs parents? »
Do we create a wider divide by alienating all Republicans?
Like many of you, I haven't had any kind words to say about the Republican party over the last eight years. During this presidential election especially. And with good reason.
I was pretty infuriated when Minnesota Republican Michele Bachmann called for an investigation of who's pro-America and who's anti-America.
But she doesn't represent the views of all Republicans.
Colin Powell reminded me of that.
His endorsement of Barack Obama made me realize how uncharacteristically hardened and vindictive my tone had become toward the entire Republican party.
Powell's endorsement was strikingly compelling in its lack of partisanship. It was a powerful call for the necessity of a more collaborative and inclusive politics--without which America will find itself in a constant and self-perpetuating weakening state.
Barack Obama once said that we won't throw the first punch. But we'll throw the last.
But in doing so, let's not fall into the small-mindedness and futility of merely pitting one spigot of hate against another.
Louder isn't smarter. A handful of self-serving blowhards have worked tirelessly day and night to market a toxic and much exaggerated polarization between liberals and conservatives.
It plays on the pre-disposition of some to be sure. Some who are still holding on to decades-old stereotypes for dear life right now.
Wingnut extremism used to have more mass appeal but it is no longer an accurate representation of the larger electorate.
It has become an embellished caricature of an era long since past.
I may have digressed but my point is that I don't want to endorse a Democratic version of power through alienation.
While there will be factions that continue to instigate division even after the election, we have to continue to outnumber them.
But she doesn't represent the views of all Republicans.
Colin Powell reminded me of that.
His endorsement of Barack Obama made me realize how uncharacteristically hardened and vindictive my tone had become toward the entire Republican party.
Powell's endorsement was strikingly compelling in its lack of partisanship. It was a powerful call for the necessity of a more collaborative and inclusive politics--without which America will find itself in a constant and self-perpetuating weakening state.
Barack Obama once said that we won't throw the first punch. But we'll throw the last.
But in doing so, let's not fall into the small-mindedness and futility of merely pitting one spigot of hate against another.
Louder isn't smarter. A handful of self-serving blowhards have worked tirelessly day and night to market a toxic and much exaggerated polarization between liberals and conservatives.
It plays on the pre-disposition of some to be sure. Some who are still holding on to decades-old stereotypes for dear life right now.
Wingnut extremism used to have more mass appeal but it is no longer an accurate representation of the larger electorate.
It has become an embellished caricature of an era long since past.
I may have digressed but my point is that I don't want to endorse a Democratic version of power through alienation.
While there will be factions that continue to instigate division even after the election, we have to continue to outnumber them.
(this is a second attempt to post this.)
Advertisement
One must wonder if those who use the words "repug", etc. and also applauded Powell's endorsement will sit in some self-reflection soon.
We can hope.
October 21, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. Does it occur to no one that this silly punning is precisely what Rush Limbaugh does? Someone posted elsewhere to the effect that you have to speak to them in terms that they can understand (those terms being silly puns, I'm guessing).
There are at least two problems with this. First, among them (they being Republicans and conservatives in general) are individuals intelligent enough to be offended by doorknob-dumb comic-book rhetoric, even if it is alliterative or rhymes, regardless of whether it comes from the left or the right.
Second, this terms-they-can-understand line of argument is something I hear all the time from a few friends and acquaintances in regard to Arabs. It pretends that its object is something less than human. This, of course, isn't merely immoral; it's a strategic mistake.
October 21, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm perfectly willing to be forgiving, gracious, kind even - once the right wing loonies are ground into dust beneath our bootheels.
Not before.
October 21, 2008 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is not an issue of being forgiving. This is an issue of putting your money where your mouth is. If you want to claim to be better than the Right, BE better than the Right. Using the word "repug" doesn't gain you converts, it doesn't help the cause.
In fact, it alienates centrists.
October 21, 2008 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
But what is the operational/functional distinction between "being better" and "not alienating" and complicity by silence or using good manners, or downright enabling?
I don't ask this lightly, this issue vexes me to the core.
But I have since high school age felt Republicans were the greatest threat to this country. Far more dangerous than world communism!
October 21, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think anyone is arguing for being silent or forgiving. I do think it's striking the number of people who think that is what is being advocated.
Watch this. (For some of the historical background, look here.)
Watch the calm that Welch has given insult after insult from McCarthy, who even mocks him and disrespects him only a few feet away!
Were there mobs with baseball bats attacking a group, I would advocate aggressive pursuit, both in terms of physical defense (I am not a pacifist) and in terms of legal response. But on TPM, there are no baseball bats. There are no crowds, there are only words.
October 22, 2008 2:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
For, if we are careless with how we choose those words, this is what it looks like to fence sitters.
You can be aggressive without looking ignorant.
October 22, 2008 2:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think what TPMGary is saying isn't that we need to allow foolish or destructive ideas to go unchallenged, but rather that we address these ideas as ideas, without leveling divisive ad hominem attacks against the people who hold them. Or, when we must speak to character (because some of the worst smears demand an indignant response), that we direct this discussion carefully against those who deserve it, without lumping together everyone with whom we personally disagree.
This is something Biden addressed in the debate, when he told the story about being corrected by a colleague after he, as a freshman senator, said something disparaging about Jesse Helms (against whom I've said some disparaging things myself, once upon a time).
October 22, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am better than the right wingers. I know the difference between right and wrong. I know the difference between better and baser instincts. I know the difference between honest and dishonest. And I conduct myself accordingly.
I also do not confuse that with being so tolerant that nothing matters.
And for the record, I do not use the term "repug" - I prefer "Republiqueen".
October 22, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Winners can afford to be magnanimous though some aren't. I do commend you for that. But I wonder if you didn't feel a win within your grasp if you'd be looking at how hardened and vindictive your tone had become and if in the unlikely event that McCain wins if you will continue to as magnanimous and work for what you view as Powell like non partisanship.
October 21, 2008 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
My personal decision to tack back from my blanket resentment of Republicans is not born out of magnanimity, but rather, absolute necessity.
Regardless of who wins, there will have to be a collaboration of efforts to create a deft forward thinking resurgent America--we simply can't move in opposing directions anymore.
October 21, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think calling for decency is just a benefit of being in the lead. Years ago, I wrote a similar post on Yahoo message boards (foolish me) asking people to give up terms like "repug" and "libtard" in favor of more civil discourse. Not that it got anywhere. But that was when Bush was popular and the war was too.
Wanting people to respect each other and focus on the issues over character attacks isn't a luxury of winning; it's a necessity of discourse. If we allow the discussion to descend into insults and ad hominem attacks, then we grant power to the people who thrive in that domain, raising the Bush/Rove types over the thoughtful conservatives--and more to the point, raising the John McCain of 2008 over the John McCain of 2000.
October 22, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Every once in a while this site contains commentary about why Democrats/progressives must be magnanimous and rise above the level of the opposing party. I hardly think that is our problem. Democrats are forgiving to a fault. In a month when I am bombarded with messages from Republicans that denigrate, demonize and viciously attack everyone who is not one of their voters (rural and white only) forgive me if I am not feeling so charitable. The tactics that they are willing to employ are the greatest threat to this country among a whole host of threats. I, for one, think it is essential that they be roundly defeated in this election.
October 21, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
You've misunderstood me. What I'm suggesting has nothing to do with adopting a forgiving posture. My point is that there is more power in establishing a working relationship than there is to remain divided and weak-kneed.
October 21, 2008 8:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a certain level of wounding that creates intolerance and lack of patience or compassion for some. Unfortunately there is enough confusion and wounding to go around for everyone.
It is human nature to find ourselves acting out something we are complaining about in another person. Yet, when we are able to see this about ourselves we are less liable to do so.
It is possible to have strong boundaries and make clear distinctions, and take firm action against ignorant behavior while having compassion and knowing that a person would never choose to be so ignorant... maybe even to feel humble that we are able to notice and are not lost in it ourselves.
I accept that our society is made up of people at different levels of development. That is just so. For some who are in a much more safety/security level of development people like us are threatening and scary and they do not understand us.
A man stood up at a McCain rally and said 'most of us don't understand how we find ourselves losing like this. It doesn't make sense.' They believe what they believe. They don't know better if they don't. They don't understand why we don't agree with them and most likely think we need to be better educated so that we could see what they see. We seem ignorant to them.
For me the way forward is to start embracing paradox... most of us want security and freedom. Most of us are conservative and liberal. Most want fellow americans to have a basic quality of life that we can all feel is respectful of a human being i.e. health care, food, shelter, etc. but we also want the freedom, at least the possibility of reaching beyond a fixed lifestyle in a variety of ways.
If we can get beyond fighting for, defending, and protecting the rightness or wrongness of things and look at what is true and of value in all of them, embrace the paradoxes instead of identifying completely with them... we will start finding new solutions.
Fortunately Senator Obama has demonstrated that he knows how to do this and he will be a great example for us all as our President.
October 22, 2008 1:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here we go again.
Obama supporters here do not attack or insult Republicans.
We do note and voice our disagreement with utterly false political propaganda disseminated by the Palin/McCain campaign.
We do strongly react against verbal violence and threats Palin/McCain have been stoking at their rallies, until they have finally been exposed by the MSM.
The folks here, who have been very active promoting the idea that by exposing lies and resisting violence, one "alienates" the other side, clearly have a deep lack of historical perspective and a certain relativistic sense of right and wrong.
We do no favors to the "opposing side" or to the nation by tolerating bigotry, acquiesing to the lies and "discussing" hatred.
Once in a while one must actuall take a stand for what one believes, even if, horror of horrors, it upsets people.
October 22, 2008 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dimitry, are you an expatriot of another country?
October 22, 2008 2:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, circa 1977 - USSR.
October 22, 2008 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, this doesn't surprise me. I have known many expatriots from a variety of countries (Russia/USSR, Cuba, Middle East) who, when they come to the US, tend to bring the hawkish/more extreme views of politics from the country they left. Presumably, part of the attraction of America is that things are less repressive and extreme in style -- there is a different way of doing things here. The US isn't perfect, but this is one of those areas where we do lead the world.
With all due respect, you might try to let some of our culture and approach seep into you. There are times for more stringent measures -- but those come later down the path, not earlier.
October 22, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
==I have known many expatriots from a variety of countries (Russia/USSR, Cuba, Middle East) who, when they come to the US, tend to bring the hawkish/more extreme views of politics from the country they left. Presumably, part of the attraction of America is that things are less repressive and extreme in style -- there is a different way of doing things here. The US isn't perfect, but this is one of those areas where we do lead the world.
With all due respect, you might try to let some of our culture and approach seep into you. There are times for more stringent measures -- but those come later down the path, not earlier.==
I have lived in America since 1977, having come here as a 13 year old - citizen since 1982. I was educated here and am as much of an American as anyone. I certainly take my RIGHTS more seriously than the majority of the native-born Americans. Thanks for the nice "civics" lesson as how thing are done stateside - it was priceless.
Most of my "compatriots" are, in fact, fairly rabid Republicans and hate Obama, because they consider him to be a socialist. Many are quite racist and they will vote for McCain in large majorities.
Your assertion that I should let "American culture" "Seep into me" is both insipid and insulting. Given your patronizing attitude, however, it is far from suprising.
October 22, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you were raised by parents from the old country.
Whether you like my comments are not, your comments are definitely in line with most others whom have left other places to come here -- and it's logical to assume for similar reasons.
October 22, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dimitry, you misunderstand my point, as some others have. I have said nothing about tolerating bigotry or acquiescing. I'm talking about approaching power differently than the Republicans have.
As I said, there will always be those that instigate fierce division.
I could spend the next eight years ripping Hannity a new one or I could work to strengthen a governing majority comprised of the non-wing nuts on either side.
October 22, 2008 8:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's a false choice. While pundits that spread bigotry and hate are POPULAR, and you chose to remain silent - in order to do practical things, of course - you end up simply empowering the bigots.
That's the choice made by Congressional democrats for years - remaining largely silet in the face of outrageous attacks against our laws and our way of life - you know, in order to make small things happen, in order not to rock the boat, in order to remain "on good terms" with the President.
I think their rating is now even below Bush's histroic lows in the 20 percentile range.
October 22, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
not a false choice Dimitry--I have, as I said, spent the last eight years fighting back in no uncertain or inhibited terms the rhetoric and actions of this administration and the likes of Hannity, whom I have referred to in the past as a one-man racist rally.
Moving forward, though, I don't have to expend my energy alienating guys like Hannity or Limbaugh--in large part because they're successfully alienating themselves in the face of a changing political landscape.
There are people wise enough from both parties to help reverse the descent of America.
October 22, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's incorrect.
In fact it is only recently that a majority of Republicans actually give President Bush unfavorable ratings.
For great majority of his tenure, he was VERY WELL liked by great majority of the Republican voters, even while his adminstration successfully dismantled several Constitutional provisions and safeguards, destroyed American economy and embarked on a series of grave war crimes. In fact, it is only the recent collapse of the stock market that really began to eat into Bush's Republican support in a serious way.
You assertion is simply wrong.
October 22, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dimitry, if you don't mind, could you take the time to re-read my post and go through all my comments here, and tell me what you think I'm advocating?
It would allow me to respond more clearly.
October 22, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I re-read it and I don't quite understand what you are advocating.
You say you don't want to endorse power through alienation. However, you don't provide examples of what consitutes alienation for republicans as a result anything specific that occurs here at TPM.
You talk about Powell at length, but he really is not a very typical Republican at all, and cerntainly no longer represents the center of power in the Republican party. McCain has laughed off his endorsement of Obama.
I agree that we should be civil and not use curse words and epithets. But beyond that, what exactly is your plan of action?
October 22, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
It has been necessary to become hyper-partisan to try and stop
an out-of-control neocon locomotive barreling down the wrong track.
The political dynamic is changing now--America doesn't wield the singular invincible economic power it once did, it has lost its moral leadership--both consequences of ushering in the 21st century with 20th century arrogance.
We have the opportunity to develop a more powerful bipartisan base which I believe will be more progressive out of necessity--(countries like Saudi Arabia, Germany, Japan and China(despite all its coal factories) started investing heavily in alternative energy a decade ago.)
I think this powerful, more inclusive base will have greater longevity, not just nationally, but internationally.
It's imperative to stop destroying relationships and start building them.
And I think there are a growing number of Republican moderates to start with.
October 22, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Most of the Republicans that I know (myself included) are moderates. We may not be as visible or as vocal as the press would have you believe, but we outnumber the far-right fringe within our own party. We're the nice, mostly anonymous folks who prevent the state and national party platforms from being more outrageous than they already are and leak important information to the press when necessary. Does the name "David Iglesias" sound familiar? If Republicans constitute a monolithic voting bloc, we sure as heck wouldn't have had nine candidates running for president during the primaries.
What many TPM readers fail to understand is that most Republicans are elected to public office by reaching out to disaffected Democrats. By not reaching out to cross-over voters, Democrats are far more dependent on registering new voters who then become vulnerable to various disenfranchisement schemes. Reach out to both sets of voters and cover your bases. Demonizing Republicans as "repugs", "rethugs", or "repukes" doesn't win our support when you don't hold your own leaders accountable for their actions. Whose idea was it to "take impeachment off the table"? Who organized the "Gang of Fourteen"? Resolving the tremendous problems facing this nation will require bipartisan effort. In order to win THIS presidential election, you'll also need every vote that you can get.
October 22, 2008 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Goldspinner, I've been seriously disappointed with the dems for the reasons you mentioned. It wasn't part of my original post because it was a little too tangential to the point I was making.
Moving forward, I don't advocate the "dems good, republicans bad" philosophy.
October 22, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Then throw the damnable right wingers out of your party. At every level, from school boards to the Senate. Start now. Take the time to do what is necessary at the primary and state convention levels to purge those walking, talking cancers.
Otherwise, they act in your name.
October 22, 2008 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
The last time I checked, Americans usually aren't kicked out of their political parties for not toeing the party line. My fellow moderate Republicans and I will continue to be change agents within our own party but you might want to remember the wise counsel of a certain Republican president: "A house divided against itself can not stand".
October 22, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
The definition of being a "change agent" is to effect change. To this point, you and your fellow "agents" have effected exactly none.
You need to get active at the local level and defeat the paranoid, race-baiting, gay-baiting, muslim-baiting, fundamentalist lunatics, and the sooner the better.
And don't tell me, show me.
October 22, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Grouch, I think you need to give Goldspinner some credit for trying to do a necessary but nearly impossible job. Certainly I wouldn't be up to the task of trying to bring moderation to the GOP.
And if you want to see the benefits of Goldspinner's approach, look at recent columns by Christopher Buckley, David Brooks, George F. Will, and others, giving Obama his proper respect. Heck, I even read a bit where Bill O'Reilly spoke respectfully of Obama--albeit emphasizing their disagreement at the same time. And why? Because Obama knows how to give people respect even when he disagrees with them.
Sure, I'd rather see the Dems in charge. Heck, I'd rather see the Dems and the GOP both lose out to the Green Party. But the approach that Goldspinner is advocating is the REASON Barack Obama will win big on November 4th.
October 22, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Goldspinner:
Will you please post something like this as a blog? It's important for many TPM readers to see this.
I totally understand your point of view and agree -- all the people who I know that are Republican are Republican because the Dems don't offer solutions to the problems that are of concern to them. I speak not of issues like abortion, but more of issues like putting taxpaying citizens first in line over illegal immigrants, supporting local municipal functions like firefighting and police protection, paying more attention to the victim over the perpetrator, etc. In short, worrying more about the middle class rather than just the poor -- especially when the middle class is what really supports this country. Given some of the Dem plans, it's hard not to see their point.
Obama has reached out to a broad spectrum of those forgotten middle class voters (some of them being the soccer moms, etc.) in a way that few Dems have done -- and look at the result.
October 22, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want there to be good repubs. It's ok to disagree. But I truly hope their party will renew itself in terms of positive values and behavior that matches their values. Divide and demean is a not a strategy. It really isn't. It leads to dead-ends.
October 22, 2008 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Repubs? So you're a "demo"?
October 22, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I generally use the abbreviations "Dems" and "Repubs," but only in writing and only as a convenience.
October 22, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "same old" divisive partisan politics is different this time around, and it's not because of Barack Obama - it's because of John McCain. The Rove playbook has not worked out for him, and it's McCain (not the democrats) who is alienating republicans.
With any luck, McCain will turn a 37-29 democrat advantage to a 45-22 democrat advantage, and people will increasingly stop identifying with the republican brand.
October 22, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
FUCK THOSE FUCKING FUCKERS!!!
You're thought is well intentioned though, I believe, underestimates what it takes to be heard today. The ambient noise level of today's political environment requires loud and outrageous statements to attract attention to otherwise legitimate messages.
It's the way it is. I am not hopeful it will get better before it gets worse. Obama's election will result in the vilest Republican venom being driven back underground and out of the public eye where hate brews itself best; in churches.
Someday it will resurface like it did 28 years back when it percolated to the surface with the Moral Majority and the election of Reagan. Finally, the Moral Majority and Reagan's transformation appears to likely be over. I welcome the respite with open arms. I'm glad I lived to witness its end.
Eventually we too, and our ideals will become corrupted and in need of change. I may sound pessimistic though I believe it is human nature.
No other country's political system allows its citizens the freedom of being human more than ours. The freedom to be human is the one thing about our political system, above all else, that makes the United States unique in the world.
That our population continuously evolves makes us, citizens of the United States, a species separate as much as the Galapagos Iguana is from its mainland cousins.
Soon, we will be turning our attention to solving some big, REAL, problems.
October 22, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Historically, things began to turn with those who Nixon labeled "The Great Silent Majority". Nixon was the one who really started the GOP rolling after years of Dem control (with a brief blip of Eisenhower in there).
Dems tend to (conveniently?) forget that a good chunk of the country was fed-up with the constant preaching, etc. of the Dems and the lack of emphasis on the middle class in their platforms.
It's this same middle class that is now fed-up with the GOP and their constant moralizing and the lack of emphasis on the middle class in their platforms.
October 22, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't see any effort from the Democratic side to polarize the electorate or to demonize Republicans.
If you mean that bloggers can be offensive, well then you're probably being too sensitive.
Obama is unquestionably running his campaign from the center, not from the left. This is in complete contrast to McCain, who has decided to concentrate entirely on bringing out the far-right base, and to do it by stoking fires of resentment and paranoia. I'm sure Obama, and most other Democrats, would prefer that the moderate Republicans realize that they can have a home as moderate Democrats instead of voting for Sarah Palin-style policies.
I'm sure President Obama will work well with the remaining centerist Republicans in Congress, just as the Democratic leadership did on the financial bailout bill.
October 22, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with the whole of your comment. My post is a little more about self-reflection. I found myself breathing fire 24 hours a day
and I needed to recalibrate, not acquiesce or stand down or fold like a lawn chair, or ignore despicable injustices through willful blindness--just recalibrate and work productively with Republicans like Chuck Hagel.
October 22, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I get older, I become more of a pluralist. We don't have to like one another or understand one another, but we do have to get along. So what matters is less what we believe than what we do and say. It's not easy to agree on rules for acceptable behavior, but it's a great deal easier than agreeing on ideology.
There's a big difference between treating a person with respect and respecting that person's ideology. I might think that someone's beliefs are stupid and wrong, but I can treat them with respect as long as they reciprocate, and as long as their ideology isn't actively evil (e.g. racist or violent).
The challenge of a pluralistic society is figuring out where we must come to agreement, where we can reasonably hope to cooperate, and where we need to stay out of one anothers' way. Political triage, if you will.
October 22, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly correct. I wonder when the "progressives" will see this? And how will they react?
But I, for one, am glad we have someone who can begin to move the country back to the center. We are so for extreme to the right (for the US), the the center is looking "progressive"!
October 22, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it possible, clearthinker, that on the ideological continuum, as you pointed out, the right has moved so far right, that the center doesn't just look more progressive, but is in fact more progressive than it once was?
October 22, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn, this just makes me want to recommend your post again.
October 22, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I think we need to remind people that the Neocons -- who were driving the GOP -- are in fact, radical. Ironically, for a party named "Republican", they are out to destroy a strong central government -- the very thing that the Republican party was formed to promote!
As far as the rest of the labels, I'm not sure about nuances here since things are on a continuum. I just know that many of the "leftist" ideas espoused by the Dems, used to be closer to the GOP's viewpoint 30 years ago.
October 22, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
And now, finally, responding to the post itself and not just to other people's responses:
Well said. Well reasoned. Well thought.
For me it was James Jeffords who caused this revalation in 2001, when he abandoned the GOP over the foreseeable consequences of Bush's tax cut. Of course, that didn't make him a moderate Republican--it made him an ex-Republican. But it occurred to me that if it was possible for someone who had been elected as a Republican to leave the party over something as simple as bankrupting the U.S. economy, then most likely there were others with similar views who hadn't left yet. In this sense, Colin Powell and David Brooks are more remarkable than James Jeffords and Mike Bloomberg, because they make (what I believe to be) the right choice without abandoning their affiliation--they continue to hold views with which I vehemently disagree, but they still found their way to the same choice I have made about whom to support this November.
October 22, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right wing loonies - Must be excluded. There are some people that can't be compromised with. The rest of the Republican party must be reasonsed with. As somebody who voted Republican until 2003 I can attest that there are good Republicans and even not-so-good Republicans that have common cause with us. It strikes me that this mirrors the debat going on in foreign policy now. Some people can't be reasoned with, but that doesn't mean you stop dialogue with anybody who isn't 100% in step behind you.
October 22, 2008 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I recall during recent elections, Republican Senators and Congressmen distancing themselves from Bush in an attempt to hold onto their jobs. I feel the move to the center began then.
I may be mistaken, but didn't Sen. McCain start his campaign more toward the center? It is only now with the addition of Palin, that it steers right? I thought it was to appease the 'base' of the party.
But I too, digress. I believe your post is spot on. It is about a United America.
One I wish to live in.
October 22, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
==Whether you like my comments are not, your comments are definitely in line with most others whom have left other places to come here -- and it's logical to assume for similar reasons.==
It is logical to assume that you are a snide and disrespectful fool, whose "civility" is skin deep and who will immediately reneg on their vow of "respect" and use even opponents' ethnicity to score a semantic point.
As I said before, great majority of ex-Soviet citizens living in America are hard-core right wing Republicans.
My comments are exactly "out of line" with what I hear from my compatriots. They, in fact, welcome more government surveilance, more government control and no racial integration. They are "base" McCain voters. And they are FAR more aggressive in their treatment of "commie democrats" than I have ever been in my mild push back against Republican outrages.
October 22, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess I know the kinder, gentler crowd.
It's not surprising that you are upset with my characterization as it challenges your world view. I base it, of course, on nothing more than what you've posted here. I suspect you've prided yourself in becoming more liberal than your background... which I take you at your word. But you may not be as liberal as you think when you are put into an environment that is as right-wing as you are used to.
By the way, using "blockquotes" will make your posts more easy to read rather than "==". See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockquote
October 22, 2008 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can't we all just not get along?
October 22, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
==It's not surprising that you are upset with my characterization as it challenges your world view. I base it, of course, on nothing more than what you've posted here.==
Running away from the ebmarassment you caused to yourself? Par for the course...
I am upset with how fake your declared "civility" turned out to be. After advocating understanding and respect for your republican opponents, you immediately savaged your democratic ones with attacks based on their ethicity, attacks based on nothing more than stereotypes and your own lack of knowledge.
Not even to mention the patronizing and utterly stupid advice to let "American political culture" seep into someone who has lived most of his life here and who has been educated here since the 8th grade. Whey you even intimated that my parents are responsible for my "unamerican" political behavior!
Are you sure we did not see you at a Palin rally, yelling "traitor"? You sure sound just like that kind of ignorant and bigotted fool.
October 23, 2008 12:18 AM | Reply | Permalink