Super Tuesday!
What an exciting time in American politics. We will have, for the first time, a major political party endorsing either a Woman or African-American man for candidacy to the Presidency...soo cool.
As you all know, I love politics; talking about it, reading it, and discussing it. I've come to discover over the years that I am quite decidedly moderate, though a "practicing" Democrat. I've also come to understand that the extreme polarization of political ideology, post the 60's, have given rise to a devision between the parties that seem insurmountable...wherein your political designation enters one into a pseudo religion of sorts. Conservatives accusing liberals of being traitors, as to suggest themselves as Patriots...Liberals calling Conservatives compassionless hate-mongers, as to suggest themselves as the progressive tolerant party...etc. etc...and it goes on and on. Well we've all been duped folks, cause all of it is bullshit.
Despite the political rhetoric over the last 30 some years, most folks remain moderate...and I truly believe that. I might be going out on a limb here but..."drum roll"...not all liberals are tolerant, and conversely, not all conservatives are anti-abortion, etc.etc.etc...you fill in the blanks.
"Whatever the explanation, the lines between Republican and Demorcrat, Liberal and Conservative, would be drawn in more sharply ideological terms. This was true, of course, for the hot-button issues of affirmative action, welfare, abortion, etc, all of which were extensions of earlier battles. But it was also now true for every other issue, large or small, domestic or foreign, all of which were reduced to a menu of either-or, for-or-against, sound-bite-ready choices. No longer was economic policy a matter of weighing trade-offs between competing goals of productivity and distributional justice. You were for either tax cuts or tax hikes, small government or big government. No longer was environmental policy a matter of balancing sound stewardship of our natural resources with demands of a modern economy; you either supported unchecked development, drilling, strip-mining, and the like, or you supported stifling bureaucracy and red tape that choked off growth. In politics, simplicity was a virtue."
Furthermore, re. the nature of today's politics, "Politics was no longer simply a pocketbook issue, but a moral issue as well, subject to moral imperatives and moral absolutes. And politics was decidedly personal, insinuating itself into every interaction."
"Not only did we disagree, but we disagreed vehemently, with partisans on each side of the divide unrestrained in the vitriol they hurled at opponents."
Activists in both parties began developing litmus test, checklists of orthodoxy, leaving a Democrat who questioned abortion increasingly lonely, and Republican who championed gun control effectively marooned. Where compromise came to look like weakness, to be punished or purged. Where one was with you or against you. You had to choose sides.
No longer do we have competing policy vision between the parties, instead, it has become a WAR between "good and evil", depending on where you stand. And where you stand is my point. I, like most people, stand somewhere in the middle...and I want a president that does the same. What we have lost sight of is that we have more in common with each-other than we have differences. And I want to vote for a candidate who believes that though we can disagree, we do not have to be disagreeable.
I think you've figured out who I'm routing for now (and you can thank this person for the quotes above)
Let me leave you with one thing. An article by David Brooks which really crystallizes the reasons I'm choosing this particular candidate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/29/opinion/29brooks.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=david+brooks&st=nyt&oref=slogin
As you all know, I love politics; talking about it, reading it, and discussing it. I've come to discover over the years that I am quite decidedly moderate, though a "practicing" Democrat. I've also come to understand that the extreme polarization of political ideology, post the 60's, have given rise to a devision between the parties that seem insurmountable...wherein your political designation enters one into a pseudo religion of sorts. Conservatives accusing liberals of being traitors, as to suggest themselves as Patriots...Liberals calling Conservatives compassionless hate-mongers, as to suggest themselves as the progressive tolerant party...etc. etc...and it goes on and on. Well we've all been duped folks, cause all of it is bullshit.
Despite the political rhetoric over the last 30 some years, most folks remain moderate...and I truly believe that. I might be going out on a limb here but..."drum roll"...not all liberals are tolerant, and conversely, not all conservatives are anti-abortion, etc.etc.etc...you fill in the blanks.
"Whatever the explanation, the lines between Republican and Demorcrat, Liberal and Conservative, would be drawn in more sharply ideological terms. This was true, of course, for the hot-button issues of affirmative action, welfare, abortion, etc, all of which were extensions of earlier battles. But it was also now true for every other issue, large or small, domestic or foreign, all of which were reduced to a menu of either-or, for-or-against, sound-bite-ready choices. No longer was economic policy a matter of weighing trade-offs between competing goals of productivity and distributional justice. You were for either tax cuts or tax hikes, small government or big government. No longer was environmental policy a matter of balancing sound stewardship of our natural resources with demands of a modern economy; you either supported unchecked development, drilling, strip-mining, and the like, or you supported stifling bureaucracy and red tape that choked off growth. In politics, simplicity was a virtue."
Furthermore, re. the nature of today's politics, "Politics was no longer simply a pocketbook issue, but a moral issue as well, subject to moral imperatives and moral absolutes. And politics was decidedly personal, insinuating itself into every interaction."
"Not only did we disagree, but we disagreed vehemently, with partisans on each side of the divide unrestrained in the vitriol they hurled at opponents."
Activists in both parties began developing litmus test, checklists of orthodoxy, leaving a Democrat who questioned abortion increasingly lonely, and Republican who championed gun control effectively marooned. Where compromise came to look like weakness, to be punished or purged. Where one was with you or against you. You had to choose sides.
No longer do we have competing policy vision between the parties, instead, it has become a WAR between "good and evil", depending on where you stand. And where you stand is my point. I, like most people, stand somewhere in the middle...and I want a president that does the same. What we have lost sight of is that we have more in common with each-other than we have differences. And I want to vote for a candidate who believes that though we can disagree, we do not have to be disagreeable.
I think you've figured out who I'm routing for now (and you can thank this person for the quotes above)
Let me leave you with one thing. An article by David Brooks which really crystallizes the reasons I'm choosing this particular candidate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/29/opinion/29brooks.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=david+brooks&st=nyt&oref=slogin
posted by supergoober at
9:37 AM
2 Comments:
Good stuff P....that's who I'm pulling for as well. He's less of a Politician than the others. Unfortunately though....it always seems our choices are a Giant Douche and a Shit Sandwich.
Thanks bro.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home