So, let's not be "politically correct"
Is this the logical conclusion of focusing on political corectness as the reason why Republicans control the government? Talk about tacking right.......
posted by Dumplingeater @ 3/11/2005
3 comments
3 Comments:
I think there are a lot of different reasons for the dems troubles and the rise of the Rs. I'm not sure about the political correctness theory. But I do agree with the idea that a national party has to be a "big tent." How anti-abortion is Casey? I'm definitely willing to sacrifice something on abortion if it means defeating Santorum.
It's great to look at those previous two comments together. Their juxtaposition really spells out the delemma. Is it an unresolvable situation? Can you be big tent and inclusive and not be co-opted at the same time? Is abortion, per se, a bedrock issue? Is it possible to deny a woman's right to choose and still be "tentable?" At some point, some answer to this question needs to be reached and agreed upon, and the principle for resolving the question must be generalizable to similar questions. Is that possible?
I guess the point is to distill the big soup into the questions that are bedrock -- and I guess maybe I feel they should be economic in nature. Maybe that makes it easier. If someone who feels that abortion is tantamount to murder can be allowed into the tent, can ANY Democrat be in favor of privatizing social security at the expense of future beneficiaries? Is there some way to separate out the "values" questions -- to identify them as being tool used by the R's to their political advantage. It would seem that allowing courts and legislatures to resolve those questions in a more localized manner would make sense, but not if the Republicans are successful in inserting extremists as judges and in undermining "moderate" R's such as Specter.
I guess it makes sense to get a deeper understanding of Casey. Hopefully we'll be able to post more info on this topic on our blog. The one thing I agreed with in that article is that it's unacceptable to not even allow a self-identified (but "pro-life") Democrat be part of the debate (or speak at the Democratic Convention).
But while what I want, in an idealistic sense is more clear, we're back to this whole lesser of two evils question. I would have never thought I could actually campaign for someone like Kerry, but I did. AARRGGGHHH!!! How do we step off this vicious unmerry-go-round?
Post a Comment
<< Home