|
...traditional definitions of "conservative" and "liberal" really don't apply anymore.
The Democratic party has never effectively answered the linguistic bludgeoning it took from the RNC, starting back in the 80's. Newt Gingrich and his band of merry thugs did a superb job of addressing the terms they should use in framing political ideas.
However, there are a great many "conservative" ideas that have become anything but. "Smaller government?" The Bush government has run up an incredible deficit and dropped the US economy into a crater from which it will take years to emerge. "Family values?" Two parents working three jobs in a desperate effort simply to approach the same living standard enjoyed by their parents argues powerfully against this - especially when those jobs are being outsourced, or even insourced, in a deliberate effort to drive down real wages. "Compassionate Conservatism?" What's compassionate about underfunding education - which across the spectrum of political thought, from Al Gore to P.J. O'Rourke, is clearly regarded as the best defense against poverty? What's compassionate about cutting taxes on those who least need cuts, while increasing tax burdens on everyone else? What's compassionate about leaving the next generation of Americans, and the generation after that, with the bills of profligate government spending?
More than a few liberals I know or have heard have made the same single, extrordinary observation in the past year: when discussing issues with avowed conservatives, there has been a greater consensus between the two sides than I think I have ever observed. This doesn't mean that the left is moving to the center, or that the right is getting cold feet; I think it means that people across the political landscape are waking up to a simple reality: our nation is financially and politically sick, and the solutions are so obvious that both the left and the right can see them and agree on them.
The Democrats, however, have a huge advantage in this scenario, if they will only have the vision and courage to reach out and grasp it: the Republicans are married to their party and the Bush administration, and are in the cleft stick of funding vs. public opinion. Their solution will be the usual one: hammering at their opponents rather than addressing their own issues (and revealing their own past records of malfeasance/incompetence).
Fault lines are rife within the conservative base. Investors are appalled at the idea that a company with a national security contract may falsify or fudge its financial records in order to conceal its contracted work (if Negroponte approves). Fiscal conservatives are disgusted with the national debt, trade imbalance, and budget deficits that are the hallmarks of the Bush administration. And the average joe in the street is struggling to keep up with gas prices that rise at a rate of 40% per year. Military families wonder when or if their loved ones will return from abroad (and some of those families have gotten a real earful about the reality of the situations their loved ones have endured). The transparent-government types are very unhappy with the wiretapping, spying, and overall secrecy shrouding the Executive Branch. Even the national-security types are angry over the Plame outing.
The shocking thing is that, when faced with all of these issues, the Bush government has answered with only one response: "Trust us." It even worked for a long while. However, little by little, as the months have stretched to seemingly interminable and almost unberable years, more and more Americans have wised up and realized that they have been lied to by this administration, on many levels and on many issues, and that they have been sold a bill of goods by the RNC and its minions.
The Democrats need do only one thing well in order to win convincingly in November: REFRAME THE DEBATE. All of these issues can be prefaced with a simple question: "Is this in the best interest of our nation and its people, and if so, why?"
Think of all the things that can be reframed:
"Is it in the best interest of America and its people to run a twelve-digit budget deficit?"
"Is it in the best interest of America and its people to allow energy companies to make record profits while fuel costs rise at a rate ten times higher than inflation?"
"Is it in the best interest of America and its people to pursue an offensive-minded, military-based foreign policy?"
"Is it in the best interest of America and its people to allow corporations to outsource jobs to nations whose labor policies wouldn't pass muster in a single one of the states of the union?"
"Is it in the best interest of America and its people to allow our government to compile and maintain massive databases and dossiers of information on its citizens without prior cause?"
"Is it in the best interest of America and its people to allow corporations to exert influence upon the elected representatives and exectutive through the disbursement of campaign funding - funding which few if any Americans could possibly offset through their own efforts?"
"Is it in the best interest of America and its people to award government contracts without a bid process, and to award those contracts to a small cluster of corporations - a cluster whose boundaries are clearly defined by their collective proximity to the officials in the Executive branch and/or the most powerful, majority-party members of Congress?"
I don't think any conservative can answer any of those questions satisfactorily, and most will fall back on the "trust me" strategy because the arguments in favor of these scenarios are demonstrably pernicious to the vast majority of Americans, regardless of political stripe.
The "trust us" answer forces the issue, because most Americans can grasp the simple point: we trusted you, and look what you did.
You spied on us without our knowledge.
You compromised our security at home through your failure to recognize and prevent the events of 9/11 before they occurred, and by failing to mitigate and alleviate much of the damage wrought in the hurricane season of 2005 in the Gulf states.
You compromised our security abroad by entering into a war with another nation under demonstrably false pretenses.
You mortgaged the future of our children and grandchildren through short-sighted fiscal policy.
You endangered our own abilities to provide for ourselves and our dependents through your utter failure to restrict profiteering by energy companies in all sectors.
You allowed your chief executive to sign statements upon the passage of bills that rendered their effect null and void upon his office, effectively placing that executive above the law. In this, you failed in your oaths to uphold the Constitution of these United States.
And through it all, you lied to us, promised things you failed to deliver, postured when you should have led, and blamed those who were out of power when you yourself held power.
You have been unaccountable, unwilling, untrustworthy, and unjust in your dealings with the American people.
We need to keep this stuff in mind. They did all of this. For the love of God, let's make them ANSWER for it!
Peace
PsA
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
