Here's an Idea for Improving the Political Conversation and the Governance of the United States:
A New Political Party of “United Democratic Republicans” could bring together thoughtful Americans from both sides of the Left/Right political divide to debate all national issues, in mutual respect, with both sides seeking compromises that rise above ideology and serve the American people as one nation, indivisible.
Such Compromises Are Well-Within Our Reach, if instead of dividing the country by political orientation, we divide it by the attitude of shared spirit and good manners.
One Example of Such Cooperation Exists in the “Welfare-to-Work” Program of the Clinton Administration. “Responsible compassion” combined with “individual responsibility” worked to get participants off the welfare merry-go-round.
Other Such Liberal-Conservative Solutions must exist, once both sides put their minds to it.
POTENTIAL RESULTS:
No More Big Government masquerading as small government, as we've seen over the past twenty-eight years.
No More New Deal Great Society that puts government ahead of individual responsibility, as we've seen off and on since 1932.
The Thinking Americans from “Both Sides of the Aisle” could work together in earnest sincerity, absent the rancor and mistrust of motive that has permeated American political discourse for so long.
Meanwhile, the Know-Nothing Americans Must Either Work with One Another or else fracture into dozens of small parties that can never elect anybody to anything.
Is This Just Another Naïve Idea by some washed-up old terrorists?
Or Is It a Legitimate Way to re-configure the country?
If American Truly Can Do Anything, We Can Do This. If we can put a man on the moon, we can do this.
If Americans from Both Sides of the Aisle can elect an African-American as President just 44 years after passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we can do this.
As for the Know-Nothing Americans? First, they might nominate Governor Sarah Palin to run against Barack Obama in 2012.
And Then Next, If They Lose Enough Elections, maybe they’ll decide to stop shooting first and questioning later. Maybe they'll decide to put down their slogans and start to think.
A New Political Party of “United Democratic Republicans” could bring together thoughtful Americans from both sides of the Left/Right political divide to debate all national issues, in mutual respect, with both sides seeking compromises that rise above ideology and serve the American people as one nation, indivisible.
Such Compromises Are Well-Within Our Reach, if instead of dividing the country by political orientation, we divide it by the attitude of shared spirit and good manners.
One Example of Such Cooperation Exists in the “Welfare-to-Work” Program of the Clinton Administration. “Responsible compassion” combined with “individual responsibility” worked to get participants off the welfare merry-go-round.
Other Such Liberal-Conservative Solutions must exist, once both sides put their minds to it.
POTENTIAL RESULTS:
No More Big Government masquerading as small government, as we've seen over the past twenty-eight years.
No More New Deal Great Society that puts government ahead of individual responsibility, as we've seen off and on since 1932.
The Thinking Americans from “Both Sides of the Aisle” could work together in earnest sincerity, absent the rancor and mistrust of motive that has permeated American political discourse for so long.
Meanwhile, the Know-Nothing Americans Must Either Work with One Another or else fracture into dozens of small parties that can never elect anybody to anything.
Is This Just Another Naïve Idea by some washed-up old terrorists?
Or Is It a Legitimate Way to re-configure the country?
If American Truly Can Do Anything, We Can Do This. If we can put a man on the moon, we can do this.
If Americans from Both Sides of the Aisle can elect an African-American as President just 44 years after passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we can do this.
As for the Know-Nothing Americans? First, they might nominate Governor Sarah Palin to run against Barack Obama in 2012.
And Then Next, If They Lose Enough Elections, maybe they’ll decide to stop shooting first and questioning later. Maybe they'll decide to put down their slogans and start to think.
Posts
2 comments:
A couple of things about your thoughtful and hopeful post.
I don't think we can get away from big government. In a country of well over 300 million people that's an impossibility. Now that doesn't mean it shouldn't act small when it can. Yet there are fundamentals that need to be addressed. Regulation of economy because as we have seen, deregulation gives way to chaos and is very costly. We've also seen what happens when the government fails to act. For instance, California has had a strong energy policy since the 1070's, at tremendous economic benefit to the citizens of the state. Yet conservatives decry this kind of interference. But the result of NOT acting on a national scale left us vulnerable to oil speculators and has put our domestic auto manufacuters in the weakest position they've been in decades. I'm not saying we micromanage. If you look at California there was little micromanaging but the ultimate effect is that the average Californian uses about half the energy per capita. That's an incredible amount of savings.
There was no need to micromanage the auto industry, but we did have tax laws that encouraged the purchase of gas guzzlers and that was very inefficient.
Environmental regulations are often the bugaboo, yet there are no other mechanisms in the free market that deals with externalities and the like in an effective way. The government has to step in as a substitute for a market that does not exist yet for a social need that does.
Tax collection. I've had it with no-bid contracts, loopholes and offshoring. One thing that gives me hope is that the Obama campaign is not beholden to any major contributor or corporate interest.
I also have to disagree with the New Deal characterization. Many of the hallmarks of the New Deal gave rise to an independent middle-class, people who weren't beholden to the "company store" so to speak. If anything created more individual freedom it was the attainment of a middle class lifestyle. As we saw during the Clinton admin, yes we had a tax hike, we also had welfare reform, and best of all, we had an effective government, one that could handle disasters and terrorism, a shrinking government and a budget surplus.
You don't have naive ideas, I just think some of them need updating.
I think a major corporation that avoids taxes through loopholes, instead of legitimate business expenses, lacks patriotism.
If you do business here we have expenses to pay, a government structure that allows maximum free commerce as possible, a military that defends corporate assets and helps to keep those assets safe, and so on.
finally, I recommend you read Arriana's latest at the Huffington post.
"The Internet and the Death of Rovian Politics" shows why what was so effective against Gore and Kerry lacks most of its punch these days.
Marcus
Thanks for this thoughtful comment. Here are some responses to the main issues raised:
First, the "big government masquerading as small government" refers to the Reagan and Bush administrations, which argue for small government, but deliver huge government and leave tremendous debt.
Second, the "New Deal Great Society" term condenses the sense that Richard Nixon capably sold "the Silent Majority," that a Democratic government would just keep coming after more of their hard-earned dollars and throw them at the indolent poor. [Racial implications are intentionally omitted in this response, but they were palpable at time, as you may recall.] This vision persists in the perspective of "the Real America" and "Pro-America."
The third---and most-important---point, though, is the thrust of this blog. While it admittedly "went awry along the way," Channeling Barack Obama largely attempts to find any common understanding possible between the two sides of the national divide. Arguments that can find even an iota of credence in the views of the Right are presented here in hopes of drawing some "Right"-minded people into the discussion.
Some on each side of this divide are as mystified as those on the other side. Efforts to understand the opposite side, and to give some voice to ideas that may help find bridges, are presented here at ChannelingBarackObama as frequently as possible. They are as hard for us to find as they seem to be for everybody else....
It is a naive hope overall, and you accurate in using that term:
"Naive," yes. But regardless of naivety, let us hope for constructive American "Change."
Thanks!
Post a Comment