The Common Cause

Last week I wrote to all of you discussing my hope that someday partisanship will lessen to a point where civil cooperation might be possible. I was met with attacks from the Republicans and my fellow Democrats I was informed me that this was far too hopeful for reality.
A recent study from Democracy Corps and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research showed that it is not racism that pushes the Republicans away from President Barack Obama, but instead it is a desire to see less cooperation and more bi-partisanship. The summation of this report shows that the Republican Party wants Republicans to stop working with Democrats.
Well, they can check that off their lists. The Republican caucus in Congress is doing exactly what the Republican voters want. Do nothing but get in the way.
Today I’ll do what I’m asked by both sides of the aisle. The Republicans want to stand in the way of all Democratic progress, and my fellow Democrats think the Republicans cannot see past their partisanship to work together. So let’s be real about today’s political climate.
In November 2008, voters spit in the face of the Republican Party. More Democrats were placed in both chambers of Congress and the presidency was handed to a Democrat as well. It wasn’t a close election like 2000 or 2004. There was no small margin in most Congressional races. The people of this country from coast to coast said they were tired of the minor party.
As a brief fact, Democrats make up 34% of the American electorate, Independents make up 34%, Republicans make up 30%, and “third-parties” make up the remaining 2%. This does make the Republican party the minority party.
The Republicans represent nonprogress. Republicans want to go back to a simpler time in American history. A time where government was small, by small I mean a time when government stayed out of the way of the average citizen. It sounds great!
The Republican Party wants to make sure if you get a serious illness you go bankrupt. Who needs government insurance? The right for a woman to choose for her own body? Nope! There is no need for that sort of government intervention to protect the privacy of a woman.  How about government protections for industry and the worker? This should be basic, I mean who really wants the government making a pesky minimum wage or protecting the workers with a safe working environment. To hell with the workers of this country is the position of the Republicans. Let’s protect the executives, don’t you know they all vote Republican.
The point of this is that maybe I was wrong. Maybe bi-partisanship is stupid. The voters elected the Democratic Party into total control. As far as I’m concerned now all we need to do is put the stake in the coffin. To hell with the obstructionists! The people chose Democrats. Get used to it; 2010 and 2012 are going be a sunny election years to be a Democrat.

• Facebook Comments
• Site Comments

6 comments

T. James

Sat Oct 24 2009 09:25

A paragraph of non-sequiturs and back-peddaling.

Hooray.

John

Thu Oct 22 2009 01:31

Why is it always necessary to call people stupid in this newspaper? I'm referring to the people I know that I consider educated, not using it as a slam against Democrats. There are plenty of educated people on both sides of the aisle... yet everyone likes to do the whole 'you're calling someone stupid, so that makes you stupid' rationale as a personal insult against me. I just don't get it. And I'm not 'mindlessly defaulting' to the Founding Fathers. Why is it so hard to see that everything the government touches turns out bad? The education system... social security... 'war' on poverty. All failures, and yet, Democrats want to turn over our health care system? Why is it so hard to see that aborting our young children out of convenience is wrong? Why do Democrats fight tooth and nail to save this 'right', but then fight just as hard to save the life of a convicted murderer? Why are they 'pro-choice' when it comes to killing an unborn child, but if a mother wants to exercise her 'choice' to send that child to a private school, instead of the government-run public schools... well, that's not allowed? I just don't understand why there are so many things in the Democrat's world that are exactly backwards from what makes sense (to anyone who takes the time to really think about them), and yet people hold fast to those ideals. And I don't get why we have to be so venomous to the other side - and that includes the author of this column we're all commenting on! It's no wonder things don't get done.

T. James

Wed Oct 21 2009 12:06

I'm not sure where the comment "[e]ducated people don't want socialized medicine (yes, that's exactly what it is), abortion on demand or high taxes" is grounded. I'm just assuming that John has misunderstood the definition of "educated" and instead meant to use something along the lines of "smart" as a way to casually insult Democrats. Of course, this makes for good joke fodder--guy calling other guys stupid exposes himself as stupid.

There are certainly plenty of educated people who favor national insurance and/or socialized medicine (give you a dime if you are informed enough to know the difference), legal abortion, and "high taxes" (although, they probably favor the perceived benefits of those taxes as opposed to the actual taxes themselves).

Furthermore, to suggest that Republicans want government out of our business is disingenuous at best...an outright lie at worst. Republicans are far from Libertarians or Anarcho-Capitalists. They preach "free market" but never follow through, and they take every opportunity to govern our personal lives.

And let's be realistic about this so-called "return to the values set forth by the founding fathers." Why are people so quick to resort to such a flimsy, counter-productive defense of political decisions? Do we really think that politicians from the 18th Century, operating in consideration of a small 13-colony "nation," still offer the best approach to modern national and international politics? It's one thing to rationally conclude that a 200+ year old plan of action is still viable and beneficial...but it's another thing to mindlessly default to the values of the Founding Fathers, as if their historical relevance somehow validates their potential modern/future efficacy.

I've distanced myself from both political parties, and it's not hard to see why. There is a lot of thoughtless back-and-forth tongue-lashing, and very little informed discussion.

John

Tue Oct 20 2009 17:46

Ooh... got me there, COLA. Keep drinking the Kool Aid.

COLA

Tue Oct 20 2009 11:03

Bush was reelected with half of Obama's approval rating. Congress' rating has been in the teens for the last 25 years. From a political science perspective change is not expected in the upcoming two elections.
Check you facts next time John.

John

Tue Oct 20 2009 03:59

Misguided as usual, Jay. You really think Democrats are good in 2010 and beyond? President Obama's approval ratings are near the lowest they've been all year. The approval ratings for the Democratically controlled Congress is hovering around the mid-teens. Whatever 'Obama-mania' there was is wearing thin. Educated people don't want socialized medicine (yes, that's exactly what it is), abortion on demand or high taxes. You call that a 'simpler time'. Republicans call that a return to the values set forth by the founding fathers. Yes, Republicans want government out of your business, because a large federal government benefits no one but politicians. There's been one two-term Democrat (Clinton) since Truman was re-elected in '48. Americans tire of Democrats quickly, and will be ready for 'change' in 2010.

Add comment


I am not posting spam. I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Enter the characters in the image above:

log out