Tuesday, January 01, 2008
PUZZLING POSITIONS
Our newspaper tells us of an imminent meeting at the University of Oklahoma of national luminaries of both parties. Attendees appear to be largely conservative democrats or republicans who have deviated publicly from their party’s baseline.
The purpose of this meeting is said to be that of fostering cooperation and reducing friction between our major parties. The purported goal is pressuring the parties toward a bi-partisan approach. Perhaps this pressure is from the threat of an independent candidate.
Well, good luck!
Pledges of cooperation between the president and democratic leaders made after the 2006 election have been largely ignored. The rigid petulance of the president on major issues spelled doom to any spirit of cooperation. In trying to do what they had promised in the election, the provocative challenges made by democrats confirmed the divide. Republicans in congress have lined up to support their president and block actions.
One might well conclude that America is divided, which is true. But the majority of Americans are also frustrated and angry. They are angry that their government is not working.
The major republican candidates for president are quietly supporting the positions of the Bush administration. They support the Iraq War, tax cuts for the wealthy, status quo private profit on health and drugs, borrowing to spend, and other policies and proposals of the Bush administration.
This is a riddle to many. Why would republican candidates be quietly supporting the unpopular and ruinous policies of an unpopular Bush administration? Why then are they running negative on issues such as immigration, as if their man were not already in charge? Why are they talking about religion instead of the nation’s problems?
The answer to the riddle may be simple. These candidates are appealing to the republican base, because this is a primary election. While Bush’s approval ratings may be down around 30% in the country, his approval ratings with republicans are around 70%.
This suggests that there is indeed a great divide between republicans and democrats. It is almost as though the two live and function in parallel universes. For democrats the blind loyalty of the republican rank and file in the face of bad experience seems unfathomable.
While one hesitates to acknowledge hopelessness, the reconciliation of republicans and democrats seems impossible.
Republicans who actually believe that the Bush tax cuts for the rich was good for America will be hard to convince different. Those who believe in the wisdom and necessity of the Iraq War, with the sacrifice of lives and huge debt, will be hard to reach.
Democrats who believe that corporate greed has corrupted the economic system and the political process with money and lobbyists will be hard to reconcile. Those in the middle and working classes, who are aware of research showing a loss in share of income to the wealthy, will be hard to reconcile with those who believe that is okay. Those fretting over the price of gasoline will find it hard to reconcile with oil company tax breaks.
Republicans who do not believe in any universal health plan at all, and instead believe that our status quo health care system should remain forever private, a for-profit domain for providers and insurance companies, will be hard to reconcile with democrats who are concerned about the millions of uninsured (1 in 5 Oklahomans) and under-insured left out.
Some democrats seem obsessively concerned about the agendas of various subgroups. Other democrats seem concerned with political correctness. Some democrats and republicans put single issues above the party agenda.
It is our wish that a working middle ground will emerge without an independent candidate. There should be some basic philosophic premise upon which all could agree.
Maybe it could start if we defined again the basic purpose of government. The Preamble to our Constitution says it is to serve the welfare of the people. Perhaps that is a place to start.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
The purpose of this meeting is said to be that of fostering cooperation and reducing friction between our major parties. The purported goal is pressuring the parties toward a bi-partisan approach. Perhaps this pressure is from the threat of an independent candidate.
Well, good luck!
Pledges of cooperation between the president and democratic leaders made after the 2006 election have been largely ignored. The rigid petulance of the president on major issues spelled doom to any spirit of cooperation. In trying to do what they had promised in the election, the provocative challenges made by democrats confirmed the divide. Republicans in congress have lined up to support their president and block actions.
One might well conclude that America is divided, which is true. But the majority of Americans are also frustrated and angry. They are angry that their government is not working.
The major republican candidates for president are quietly supporting the positions of the Bush administration. They support the Iraq War, tax cuts for the wealthy, status quo private profit on health and drugs, borrowing to spend, and other policies and proposals of the Bush administration.
This is a riddle to many. Why would republican candidates be quietly supporting the unpopular and ruinous policies of an unpopular Bush administration? Why then are they running negative on issues such as immigration, as if their man were not already in charge? Why are they talking about religion instead of the nation’s problems?
The answer to the riddle may be simple. These candidates are appealing to the republican base, because this is a primary election. While Bush’s approval ratings may be down around 30% in the country, his approval ratings with republicans are around 70%.
This suggests that there is indeed a great divide between republicans and democrats. It is almost as though the two live and function in parallel universes. For democrats the blind loyalty of the republican rank and file in the face of bad experience seems unfathomable.
While one hesitates to acknowledge hopelessness, the reconciliation of republicans and democrats seems impossible.
Republicans who actually believe that the Bush tax cuts for the rich was good for America will be hard to convince different. Those who believe in the wisdom and necessity of the Iraq War, with the sacrifice of lives and huge debt, will be hard to reach.
Democrats who believe that corporate greed has corrupted the economic system and the political process with money and lobbyists will be hard to reconcile. Those in the middle and working classes, who are aware of research showing a loss in share of income to the wealthy, will be hard to reconcile with those who believe that is okay. Those fretting over the price of gasoline will find it hard to reconcile with oil company tax breaks.
Republicans who do not believe in any universal health plan at all, and instead believe that our status quo health care system should remain forever private, a for-profit domain for providers and insurance companies, will be hard to reconcile with democrats who are concerned about the millions of uninsured (1 in 5 Oklahomans) and under-insured left out.
Some democrats seem obsessively concerned about the agendas of various subgroups. Other democrats seem concerned with political correctness. Some democrats and republicans put single issues above the party agenda.
It is our wish that a working middle ground will emerge without an independent candidate. There should be some basic philosophic premise upon which all could agree.
Maybe it could start if we defined again the basic purpose of government. The Preamble to our Constitution says it is to serve the welfare of the people. Perhaps that is a place to start.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
