Posts filed under 'Featured blogs'
Political season ranks right behind football and baseball season as my favorite time of year. I can do without the robocalls from former presidents and candidate’s spouses or moms. Even the littering of signs is a bit much. I just admire how people will stand outside for hours waving signs in 100+ degree heat for a candidate that they believe in.
In 2008, I happened to be in Nashua, NH during primary season and if anyone wants to see the real beauty of politics, they need to go to NH. Like spring training for Cubs fans, hope springs eternal and everyone is still in it. It is common for a presidential candidate to have coffee with a group of 3-5 voters in a living room everyday. I volunteered to a candidate that I supported and was amazed at the people that came from all over the country on their own dime to make hundreds of calls a day, wave signs in the snow, and go without sleep for weeks just because they believe their candidate can make a difference. It really is the best of America.
So here we go again and in the spirit of a pregame breakdown of two teams I detail how Republicans and Democrats win or lose in November.
How the Democrats win:
- The economy, job and housing markets and news improves.
- Run like a winner. If their agenda is the best way for America then run on the record. Run on health care, financial reform, stimulus, everything. Not personal attacks, run on an agenda.
- The Republicans don’t get out of their own way or fail to provide a roadmap. They will pick up seats but not take over.
- Listening. One thing that Republicans lost on a few years ago was just listening. They became so wrapped up in their power that they forgot that they represented people.
- Do what they say, say what they mean. Don’t say that PAYGO rules and discretionary spending is frozen and then pass billions in extended unemployment without having a way to pay for it. Don’t say that earmarks will be cut “with a scalpel” then pass billions in earmarks. People arent stupid, stop treating them as they were.
How the Democrats lose:
- Unemployment the same, stock market falling, consumer spending stalls, lack of good news. John McCain actually led after 8 years of Bush until Lehman happened. Dems can say anything that they want, but people are awake and listening and hard to believe numbers that require a PhD in economics and a magic 8 ball.
- Running against George Bush. Politics is about the future. You cant own congress for 4 years and not claim any responsibility for bad decisions that happen on your watch. It’s foolish and worse it implies that people that vote for them are foolish.
How the Republicans win:
- Define the narrative and create a roadmap beyond tax cuts. A new Contract with America that shows a unified movement and plan.
- Seek to understand peoples issues then attempt to be understood. This is a center-right country, but arrogance and lack of understanding is where they started to falter before.
- Be principled. Be simple. Be courageous. I’m not talking about reducing to slogans but define who you are and that the path forward will require some pain, but it allows people to see beyond the next election cycle. We need a 15-20 year executable plan on sustainable energy, social security, budget, etc. and that may not include that elected official being there to take a victory lap but show the courage to say no to some things need to go.
How the Republicans lose:
- They assume victory. Bad things happen to people and parties that arent exhausted from outworking and outthinking their competition.
- George Bush somehow gets on the ticket by association. If after 2 years of motivation and anger this happens, as a Republican I will dip myself in honey and roll around in fire ant piles. Then join an obscure 5th tier party that secures 12 votes during a presidential election.
- President Obama finds his voice again and it resonates. People are desperate for a transformative leader and are ready to sacrifice. In 20 years he can either be remembered as a Reagan or Kennedy or Carter. He needs to find it.
Prediction: Republicans pick up a healthy number in both but don’t take over leadership. Worst thing that can happen to Democrats because they still have the keys to power but have to have Republicans votes for anything. Gridlock may actually lift markets and lead some of the money on the sidelines back into the market. Obama’s numbers go a bit higher and set up a great next race.
Is it 2012 yet?
(Photo credit.)
—-
Andrew is married and a father of two daughters. Owner of Wilcox and Hackett, LLC a legal recruiting and client development consulting firm. A conservative who likes healthy debate. Enjoys reading, writing, working out, sports, and BBQ cooking.
August 26th, 2010
While flipping through radio stations the other night, I happened upon the Dave Ramsey show. Perhaps there is a certain cruel intention, “geez, thought I had a bad day, this persons life stinks, now I feel better” type of mentality. Much like what my wife gains from watching Real Housewives of New York.
The stories are tragic and all end the same way. Dave Ramsey talks low and tells the folks the bad news. There is no money and you have to change your ways.
How wonderful it must have been to be a politician when times were good. A new program here, a pet project there. Just like people who overextended themselves on mortgages and credit card debt, there was no reason to believe that the good times would end. Spend away and kick the problem of paying for a program down the road. If the people want cake, let them eat cake…
Rather than real solutions, political parties dig in. Democrats won’t let anyone touch Social Security, Medicare, and social programs. Republicans resist raising taxes.
If we want to get us out of this mess, both sides have to go Purple.
Dave Ramsey doesn’t tell people what they want to hear. He tells them what they need to hear. We all know changes have to be made to entitlements. The solutions are fairly straight forward. It takes leadership to say it though and paint the picture, regardless of reelection. Americans are willing to sacrifice, but we have to have faith in our leaders that increased taxes won’t be used on pet projects, or a never-ending program that is used to garner votes of a niche group or lobby.
If compound interest is a miracle then compound debt is a plague. Currently, interest on debt by the US is 160 million dollars a day! How much could one day of paying off China do for your local school district, or a week’s worth do for alternative energy to retrofit public buildings, or build a high speed rail.
How many people do you know that have large debt and just pay the interest? The average American has over 15k in debt. To get it paid off requires cutting back on everything. You sell off some assets, maybe not go out as much, take on a second job. You got into this mess, now it’s time to hike up the boot straps and make changes. Or you can just expect the government to “do something…”
I had a purple conversation with a Democratic friend about one current issue. Extended unemployment benefits. First we are told that discretionary spending is frozen and PAYGO is the policy. Except when it’s not. My suggestion was simple. Budgets are being crushed at schools, communities, and government programs. Provide extended benefits to folks that agree to give 5 hours per week while collecting unemployment to help in the community.
Sometimes when folks are in a slump the best they can do is shorten up and bunt. 5 hours a week is a great way to make contact again. Enrich our hurting communities. Reinvent themselves. Show their kids what the “greatest generation” did, that they won’t take unemployment sitting down. If 5 hours is unreasonable, then how is it reasonable to have others pay into a system so that you can do nothing?
It’s this type of tough love/ tough choices that people have to make.
How do we expect politicians to change their behavior until citizens change theirs?
—-
Andrew is married and a father of two daughters. Owner of Wilcox and Hackett, LLC a legal recruiting and client development consulting firm. A conservative who likes healthy debate. Enjoys reading, writing, working out, sports, and BBQ cooking.
Photo credit: Richard Cox
July 28th, 2010
“Gannett picks Pluck for moderation” reads a headline on a recent press release from “social media application developer” Pluck.com.
Gannett owns four Florida newspapers, so it’s not too soon to start praying that their publishers will resist headquarters’ decision to outsource” the task of “moderating on-line comments.”
The outsourcing has already begun at the Gannett papers in Green Bay Wisconsin and Hattiesburg Mississippi. There, as here, readers will continue to enjoy 24/7 access to the papers’ cyber-newshole to expound, editorialize and randomly pontificate on news stories, a 21st century innovation known as “posting.” Posters may make unlimited contributions to the cyber-marketplace of ideas irrespective of their personal knowledge of the events reported, willingness to identify themselves, or blood alcohol level.
Many posts appear to have been phoned in by Mel Gibson. Readers of delicate sensibilities have no recourse but to “report abuse.”
Most readers don’t bother because, as one Gannetteer put it: “Our online staff can’t be everywhere at all times, and it can be difficult to offer a prompt response to every claim of abuse.”
But Gannett’s not pluckin’ around anymore. Under its deal with Pluck.com, abuse reports will be reviewed within 30 minutes for “compliance with Gannett guidelines.”
The Pluckers will work from remote and undisclosed locations. They could be in Montana. Or on Mars. They could be holograms for all we know. Has the industry learned nothing from McClatchy’s ill-fated attempt to outsource the Miami Herald’s copy editing to India?
Not so long ago, when newspapers had 30% profit margins and a better public image, every word published under the paper’s banner passed through multiple layers of scrutiny by people known as editors who jealously guarded this prerogative.
Epic legal battles were fought all the way to the Supreme Court by journalists who would sooner have a root canal than yield a column inch to unfiltered commentary by anybody whose bread was buttered by someone other than the newspaper’s owner. If Thomas Jefferson came back from the dead with an op-ed piece in hand, he would be subjected to the same gauntlet of red pencils that everyone else had to run.
Chief Justice Warren Burger—a Nixon appointee and not a particular fan of the press—wrote, “For better or worse, editing is what editors are for.”
The 20th century publishers who opened their checkbooks to keep government out of their newsrooms would be stunned at how much of their branded corners of cyberspace have been handed off to cranks, crackpots and cowards, and downright stupefied at the watered down journalism gene pool we have to thank for Pluck.com.
—-
Florence Snyder is a corporate and First Amendment lawyer. Contact her at lawyerflo@gmail.com.
July 20th, 2010
Let me first say that I am Andrew Wilcox and I am a conservative. (Hello, Andrew.)
I read a book a few years ago about how Bill Clinton would go to meetings of people on the polar opposite ideological spectrum from him. These meetings many times lead to what Clinton called the “third-way.”
I took a page from that concept and decided to engage on Alan Colmes blog, to attempt a civil discourse. Within minutes of posting, I was berated while people made wild assumptions about every aspect of my thoughts.
President Obama, when asked if he watches the talk networks said something that I believe. Effectively, he stated that if Ann Coulter, Keith Olbermann, Hannity, etc. talk you know what they are going to say.
This has become an unfortunate part of the fabric of our conversations. News shows interrupt and scream. Guests armed with talking points don’t listen, they just recite. It has truly killed trust in civic dialogue.
People, especially our leaders, have to have the freedom to say what is on their minds, and be able to explain a nuanced perspective, without being called: Hitler, Socialist, racist, bigot, war criminal, homophobe, wacko, boogeyman, etc.
Instead, talk and listening is put through filters. Politicians do mental compromise arithmetic in nanoseconds after a question to determine a position that works. People hear something, and based on the source, go into protect or attack mode.
By starting this article saying that I am a conservative, there were some assumptions you made about me. Be honest. I actually consider myself what I call a Buffett Conservative (Jimmy not Warren). I am fiscally conservative, love free markets, but do believe in some regulation. Love the environment and seeing what is happening to the coast is heartbreaking.
On the Colmes blog, the topic was the oil spill in the Gulf. The conversation turned quickly to how criminal George Bush is. All of his cronies caused this. They expected me to blame President Obama and blasted me for 8 years of Bush, the last two of which were a Democratic Congress. Then came the tirades about squandering surpluses and wars. Again a Democratic president, but people forget a Republican Congress.
You simply can’t associate 100% accomplishments and/or blame to either party, but that is the line in the sand that has been drawn. Scream and spin. That goes for the Gulf spill, Katrina, wars, all the way down the line.
I find myself starting conversations with people ideologically different from me by making a statement and then hoping to facilitate conversation. “I don’t have all of the answers and neither do you, but would really love to learn your perspective. May not agree on everything, but the stuff that we can agree on, let’s solve something.”
Imagine if every big issue that needed to be addressed started like that.
—
Andrew is married and a father of two daughters. Owner of Wilcox and Hackett, LLC a legal recruiting and client development consulting firm. A conservative that enjoys healthy debate. Enjoys reading, writing, working out, sports, and bbq cooking.
July 1st, 2010
Something interesting happened last week amidst the hype of primary elections and the growing concern of BP’s oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
June 2, 2010 Armando Galarraga almost pitched a perfect game for the Detroit Tigers. History doesn’t remember “almost perfect” games, but I have a feeling this one will be remembered. With two outs remaining in the ninth inning, Galarraga had a chance to pitch the first perfect game of his career, a remarkable feat for any baseball pitcher.
As the Cleveland Indians Jason Donald hit the ball to the right of Tigers first baseman Miguel Cabrerra, Galarraga had to hurry to first base to cover. Cabrerra tossed him the ball, beating Donald to the bag, an “out” for you non-baseball people; even replays showed Donald was clearly out. However, umpire Jim Joyce didn’t have the benefit of the replay and called Donald safe.
Most athletes, especially the pitcher himself, would have been the first in the umpire’s face, yelling and screaming about how much of a _____ (insert whatever) he was. Galarraga, no doubt surprised, cocked his head back, shot Joyce a wry smile, and pitched to the final batter who was also thrown out.
After the game umpire Jim Joyce watched the replays and realized how wrong he was. He immediately sought out Galarraga and, weeping like a baby, apologized. He later said, “I cost that kid a perfect game.”
The next day, the final game of the series between the Tigers and Indians, Galaragga met Joyce at home plate before the game to give him the starting lineups. The video shows Joyce dropping his head and trying to hold back tears. The two men then pat each other on the shoulders, a subtle gesture that meant so much, and went their separate ways.
So often we hear the bad sides of sports, the athletes who hold out for more money, abuse women, and spend lavishly, hold themselves above the law. Many more are better suited for Broadway with their celebrations and dramatic shows of emotion towards a bad call.
Everyone once in awhile, we get to see something great in sports. The blown call will no doubt haunt Jim Joyce for the rest of his career, perhaps longer. Galarraga still hasn’t pitched his first perfect game. But Joyce was man enough to admit he was wrong, and Galarraga was gracious enough to accept his apology and move on. He didn’t argue, he didn’t complain, he simply went back to work.
It would be nice if we all worked the same way. It would be nice if our elected leaders worked the same way. The events between Jim Joyce and Armando Galarraga are a shining example of why we need The Village Square. Sometimes hope springs from the strangest of places.
—
Luke Inhen is an FSU political science graduate student and Village Square intern.
(Photo credit.)
June 11th, 2010
I think this Village Square thing is working. Let me tell you why.
Last week I had the (privilege?) of attending the Tea Party rally at the State Capitol here in Tallahassee on a Village Square Teen Square field trip of sorts. I consider myself to be a fairly liberal person (I would say I’m liberal socially and left of center to moderate fiscally.) Regardless of where I am on the political spectrum, the tea party people and I don’t exactly see eye-to-eye. In fact before last week I didn’t have very many nice things to say about them.
Now have a different outlook.
I still do not like Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck. Nothing you say or do will change my mind about them. The fact that they are the poster children for the tea party hurts the tea party in my eyes. However, walking through the crowd I saw no yelling or racial and socialistic slurs. There were no people with loaded guns shouting into bullhorns, and while I did see a ‘Don’t Tread on Me’ sign (a great misuse of a truly great American phrase) there wasn’t any sense of impending violence.
I was especially surprised to see all the children and young adults. Despite the two speakers I heard, who were more radical than the crowd, the feeling of the event was more like a picnic.
It made me realize that despite some misinformation (and slightly poor word choice by some in the movement) the people at the tea party protest were genuinely scared about something. It was clear to me that they had legitimate concerns and gripes with the path our country is on. And quite frankly, that’s something I can agree with.
As I walked around the rally, a liberal in a crowd of conservatives, I felt their pain. I connected with them on an emotional level.
I will confess I attended the rally prepared with my talking points…
• Healthcare is a fundamental right not a privilege
• Reaganomics? More like broken-omics?
• Yes, President Obama is an American
• No, there aren’t really death panels
I left ashamed that I thought I would need them. Maybe this Village Square thing is working. At the end of the day we are all a lot more alike than we (like to) think.
Because of the Village Square, I’ve learned to take of my partisan blinders off and see people for who they are and what they believe in. Because of that I’ve learned that maybe having a tea party isn’t that bad of an idea. I may even go as far as having a cup with Sarah Palin herself!
Well, let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
_______________
–Luke Inhen is a Florida State University political science graduate student.
(Photo credit.)
April 22nd, 2010
BY FLORENCE SNYDER
The year is 2020, and all that remains of print journalism is the New York Times, USATODAY….and the National Enquirer. Google has been broken up into twelve competing companies. 97.9% of all news websites have installed pay walls. All state and local public records are available on-line…..for a fee. Vice President Marco Rubio has inherited the Oval Office from President Sarah Palin, who resigned to resume her career….as a journalist.
That’s the way it was in a world conceived by Miami First Amendment lawyer Tom Julin for The Florida Bar’s annual Media Law Conference. The Conference dates back to the 1970s when Wall Street was beginning to see journalism as a cash cow, rather than the watchdog the Founding Fathers intended. In the 1980s, as media companies’ profit margins climbed past 30%, hundreds of lawyers, judges and journalists crowded into hotel ballrooms to hear media A-listers opine on the future of journalism. Times and travel budgets being what they are, the 2010 Conference was a far less lavish affair. At times, the speakers outnumbered the paying audience.
One can only wonder how 20th century Conference speakers like Katharine Graham, Abe Rosenthal and Fred Friendly would have responded as Julin prodded veteran reporters, academics and fellow media lawyers to answer questions which have, for decades, vexed journalism think-tanks….in 140 characters or less. Julin lightened the mood with James Cameron-level audio visual references to narcissistic presidential hopefuls and their tango-dancing soulmates. Still, it was a sobering picture he painted of a not-too-distant future where the body politic has the attention span of a goldfish.
Some think that day has already arrived, but Conference-goers found reason to be hopeful that real news and well-reasoned commentary will adapt to the new and much leaner environment.
Some of the 21st century’s best explanatory journalism is happening on Comedy Central; Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and South Park’s Trey Parker and Matt Stone have the Peabody awards to prove it. These modern-day Mark Twains provide a national audience the kind of fact-based, impossible-to-ignore editorial voices that Florida used to take for granted.
Howard Troxler and Carl Hiaasen are, thank God, still with us. But Florida’s increasingly anemic editorial pages are no match for state government’s standing army of flacks and flunkies who pay lip-service to transparency while actively obstructing reporters in pursuit of stories their bosses don’t want told.
It’s always cause for celebration when front-page news slips past the government’s spinmeisters and makes it to the front page, and Conference-goers were spellbound as Gina Smith of the State newspaper in Columbia, S.C. described the combination of luck, instinct and shoeleather involved in her pursuit of Gov. Mark Sanford down the “Appalachian Trail” to the Atlanta airport.
To a roomful of reporters who are expected to do impactful investigations while blogging at 20 minute intervals, it was a cheering reminder that one reporter can change the course of history.
A reminder of another kind was delivered by the Miami Herald’s former general counsel Richard Ovelmen. In a moving tribute to his friend and mentor, legendary First Amendment lawyer Dan Paul, who died this year at age 85, Ovelmen recalled how Paul leveraged his bulging Rolodex in the service of all of Florida’s journalists—not just the ones who worked for Knight Newspapers and the New York Times Company in the decades when they could afford Paul’s eye-popping hourly rates.
Under Paul’s direction, Ovelmen recalled, Florida’s media lawyers took up the cause of reporters in places they could barely pronounce.
If a city clerk in Opa Locka withheld public records, or a judge in Palatka threw a reporter out of a courtroom, publishers of mom-and-pop newspapers could count on Paul to declare a constitutional crisis and dispatch an army of lawyers bearing briefs that argued, “News delayed is news denied.”
With 20th century media on life support, displaced journalists are bringing their craft to cyberspace. The lonely pamphleteer is on-line at places like Broward Bulldog, Health News Florida, and FloridaThinks, looking for a business model that will support the never-ending mission of “comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable.”
There’s a lot at stake, and The Florida Bar deserves thanks for reminding us that failure is not an option.
——
Florence Snyder is a corporate and First Amendment lawyer. Contact her at lawyerflo@gmail.com.
Parody photo courtesy of Random Pixels. Tom Julin’s “Journalism and Other Financial Disasters” was presented at The Florida Bar’s Media Law Conference, March 26, 2010.
April 9th, 2010
I don’t really watch the Price Is Right anymore, something about it just didn’t seem right after Bob left. Kind of like the Tonight Show without Johnny Carson or Jay Leno. I have always liked Drew Carey. I thought his show was funny, but something about him replacing Bob Barker didn’t seem right.
The other day as I was getting ready to start my day, (I know at 11am, tough life right?) the Price Is Right came on and I forced myself to watch. Despite the host, who I will confess has certainly come into his own since he’s started, I learned something from the show.
I wish America was like the Price Is Right. Not just the fun games and prizes, although it would be nice to randomly walk around town and find a new car behind door number 1, but the way the show works. People from all over the country gather every day, usually wearing some sort of shirt to symbolize the group or college they belong too. They pack in tightly shoulder to shoulder with each other hoping for a chance at contestant’s row.
Do you ever notice how excited everyone is to be there? They are all there with the same goal in mind hoping for their chance at the big prize. Everyone supports each other. It’s commonplace to see contestant’s high fiving complete strangers as they run down to take their spot. Once on stage, contestants often rely on the crowd to guide them through their decisions; only the smart ones listen to me.
I realized that Americans don’t really ever get excited about our democracy anymore. Sure the 2008 election was exciting, but on many levels it was very divisive. Republicans certainly weren’t high fiving Barack Obama on his way down to claim his prize, and they still aren’t.
Since he’s been in office there has been little “support from the crowd,” kind of like that contestant that just looks to his or her group for the price of the 18oz. jar of peanut butter, $3.89 by the way.
But what if our democracy functioned like the Price Is Right? I feel like our very own Liz Joyner** would be a pretty good host. We could all gather every four years, or even every two years from our respective and very different groups. We would all be excited for each other and high five complete strangers. And once one from our group gets on stage, we would all shout together trying to help them win the brand new Chevy Malibu behind door number 1. At the end of the day we would all still be excited and happy and look forward to the next show.
It’s more important now in these trying times that we come together. For what we need now is friendship and excitement. I don’t think we are that far off.
–Luke Inhen
(Luke is a political science graduate student at Florida State University)
(**Liz Joyner nominates Luke Inhen to be the host.)
March 20th, 2010
(Village Square intern Luke Inhen is a political science graduate student at Florida State University. You can read Luke’s other contributions here.)
Exodus has always been one of my favorite books of the Bible. The story of a boy born into slavery only to be saved by the royal family, then leading his people against that same royalty into the Promised Land, all through the power and guidance of a divine hand has something so romantically fascinating about it to me.
Something equally as fascinating but maybe less romantic is the current exodus of moderates in American politics these days. This past week centrist Democratic Senator Evan Bayh announced he would not be running for re-election in November.
“Congress is not operating as it should,” Bayh proclaimed at a news conference in Indianapolis, adding there’s too much partisanship and “the people’s business is not getting done.” Bayh went on to say he loves public service, but does “not love Congress” and is “not motivated by strident partisanship or ideology.”
A brief scan of the American electorate would reveal the strident partisan ideology Bayh was talking about. Tea Party activists, Glen Beck loyalists, progressive letter writing campaigns and my beloved Keith Olbermann are all results and examples of the strident partisan ideology gripping our nation these days.
Something even more interesting to me was what Bayh wrote in a letter published in the New York Times entitled “Why I’m Leaving the Senate:”
“When I was a boy, members of Congress from both parties, along with their families, would routinely visit our home for dinner or the holidays. This type of social interaction hardly ever happens today and we are the poorer for it. It is much harder to demonize someone when you know his family or have visited his home. Today, members routinely campaign against each other, raise donations against each other and force votes on trivial amendments written solely to provide fodder for the next negative attack ad. It’s difficult to work with members actively plotting your demise.”
Truer words cannot have been spoken. That lack of any personal chemistry between members of Congress is alarming. Congress is certainly the poorer for it, but the true losers on the other end of our strict partisan divide are the people. People like the single mother working two jobs to make ends meet, or the unemployed father trying to remain strong for his family; the 46 million people who lack healthcare, and the more than 15 million people who are jobless.
Our history has been defined by people or small groups coming together to enact change. Part of the American Dream is that one person can make a difference. The Village Square is just a drop of water in the ocean. We the People, need to stand up and let our voices be heard.
Personally, I think it is a shame that Senator Bayh is leaving. If he is as passionate about bridging our differences as he says he is then now is no time to give up. We need people like Evan Bayh in the Senate.
What we need more is for everyone else to wake up.
(Photo credit.)
March 2nd, 2010
I’m sure many on the left side of the aisle were watching the election results from the Massachusetts special election Tuesday to replace Senator Ted Kennedy in dismay. For 40 years, Kennedy stood and fought for the people of Massachusetts as their senator. Before that his brother John, the other Kennedy, held the seat.
Most TV pundits and political experts are calling the election a referendum on President Obama. Many more are wondering how a seemingly decent and likable woman made such a bad candidate, and late night talk show personalities find it hilarious that the Democrats just lost to a man who modeled nude for Cosmopolitan magazine in the 1980’s. No doubt Republicans are happy that Democrats no longer have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and can no longer get their healthcare overhaul through on numbers alone.
Majorities, like victories, come and go. The Democrats dominated early 20th century politics for nearly 50 years. The “Solid South” earned its name because of it propensity to consistently vote for Democratic candidates. Our state of Florida used to be under solid Democratic control. The fact that the Republicans finally won a Senate seat in Massachusetts isn’t appalling, just unexpected. It’s part of the natural ebb and flow of American politics.
The thing I found more upsetting about the results Tuesday is the current state of our political system. What’s so bad about having one Republican and one Democratic senator? I’m positive not everyone in the state of Massachusetts is a Democrat. It should really be the same way in Washington. Nowadays whenever one party gets a majority, they use it to shove their agenda down the throats of the opposing party. Equal representation has turned into a race to the majority. The losers are the American people.
It’s a shame that Democrats can’t pass comprehensive healthcare reform without 60 votes to stop a filibuster. As backroom deals are cut and egos are massaged, 46 million Americans still don’t have healthcare. It’s a bigger shame that something as helpful and needed as healthcare reform is slowed down with the threat of a filibuster anyway.
I’m not ranking sins. Both parties are guilty.
Americans are now more deeply divided than ever. Elections are held for the purpose of getting more people than the other guy, and then the winners use that majority to put forth whatever agenda they want. Supporters of one group or party paint their opponents as unqualified at the very best and often as unmentionable vulgarities.
For all Ted Kennedy did for the American people, he did just as much for Republican fundraising. Republican’s have bragged about their fundraising under current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. After Joe Wilson shouted “You Lie” to President Obama he recorded massive fundraising gains, as did his opponent.
After the 1856 Presidential election, in which Democrat James Buchanan beat Whig John Charles Freemont, Abraham Lincoln said of his party’s defeat:
In the late contest we were divided between Freemont and Buchanan. Can we not come together in the future? Let bygones be bygones; let past differences be as nothing; and with steady eye on the real issue, let us re-inaugurate the good old ‘central ideas’ of the republic. We can do it. The human heart is with us; God is with us.”
People don’t talk – or act – like that anymore.
-Luke Inhen
(Photo credit.)
January 23rd, 2010
Previous Posts
