One can hope. What will be telling is if in 4 (or 8, or 12) years when the Democrats lose the White House if the same attitude will be apparent. I am very skeptical, considering the vitriol of the last several years.
"We are trying to change the tones in the state capitals—and turn them toward bitter nastiness and partisanship."
—Republican strategist Grover Norquist
"Rancor becomes top D.C. export GOP leads charge in ideological war", The Denver Post, May 26, 2003
Yeah, I didn't like the vitriol of the last several years either. I'm glad this election was a victory against the increasing nastiness and partisanship in politics and a step towards Working Together to solve problems.
To me the real mind-blowing disappointment is in all the blog entries I've been seeing from sore losers who claim the loss of this election cycle somehow "proves" the GOP needs to move even further to the right and be more divisive instead of moving back toward the center.
To many Republicans or conservative McCain came off not as centrist but as left and the summary of "Dem-ed if we do, Dem-ed if we don't." fit. Obama does not seem centrist but outright leftist, and Old Democrat (FDR, LBJ) in a bad way and McCain seemed to be that, but in the light version. It makes sense to come to the conclusion that they need not Democrat-light, but Republican-without-apology. Republicans and conservatives didn't vote for McCain, merely against Obama. They, naturally, want someone to vote for.
I would like to see the Republicans cut the "social conservatives" loose and get back to purely the ideals of non-interference in citizens lives. Sort of like Libertarians, only with some grasp of foreign policy. I think something like that will have to happen. The Democrats finally realized that the old FDR assembled coalition no longer work, now it's time for the Republicans to abandon the Reagan coalition arrangement.
As for working together, I expect that is an illusion. A Democrat in the White House, Democrats in majority in the House, and Democrats with an almost filibuster-proof majority in the Senate they have no great need of actually doing what is being said. It sounds good, and I expect it will keep sounding good, until about the 21st of January.
I'm an independent, myself. I just vote for whoever has the good ideas.
This year I voted for Obama (as opposed to against McCain). I understand there's a degree of cynicism (and in some cases, outright refusal) toward working together, but personally I think this election proved most Americans are tired of extremism and want to focus on getting things done rather than being obstructionist.
There is nothing more frightening to me than a bunch of legislators getting together to Do Things For The Common Good. More freedoms have been lost to such gatherings than any other cause. Mark Twain was right: "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session."
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
I dunno. Doing Things For The Common Good doesn't seem that frightening to me.
While it may be true we have lost some freedoms through legislation For The Common Good—things like the freedom to sell uninspected meat to the public, or the freedom to drive while intoxicated, or the freedom the use 6-year-old children as factory workers—I think the world would be a much more frightening place with those freedoms.
Those aren't the freedoms I was referring to, as you almost certainly know.
I'm referring to the freedom to profit from one's endeavors and keep those profits for one's own benefit and the benefit of one's family. I'm referring to the ability to gather peaceably, and to speak freely, and to keep and bear arms for the defense of oneself and one's country.
All of those are threatened by the results of this election.
"I would like to see the Republicans cut the 'social conservatives' loose and get back to purely the ideals of non-interference in citizens lives. Sort of like Libertarians, only with some grasp of foreign policy."
Amen. I know that my goal in attending the Iowa Republican caucus every four years is to do my best to counter the religious extremists.
I don't buy it. To me, ti's a smokescreen designed to get those of us who don't buy into Obama's "major redistributive change" to back off while he puts his class warfere into action.
I really hope the country cacn work together, although getting emotions up to a fever pitch before the election didn't help. More should have been done to have the candidates promote unity before the election, and to say that they will work with the winner should they not be it. This is what attack ads get y'all, folks.
Hell, I'd even be content with having both sides work together in the way that they worked together when Bush was(/is) President, even though most Dems (and some Republicans) didn't like the guy and violently opposed his policies, much like some Republicans violently oppose Obama's stated policies, some of the language coming from Republicans frankly scare me. Stuff like "armed uprising", "violent measures", and other words that make me think another Civil War could break out, and the last one didn't work well for y'all ...
Stuff like "armed uprising", "violent measures", and other words that make me think another Civil War could break out...
I haven't heard any calls for any of those, myself. That is, not from people within the U.S.A. recently. I have heard that from some on the left (some of them European) over the last few years, with the idea that it was necessary to go that far to remove Bush from office.
Oh? Do you really think the right (not necessarily only your household) will sit idly by if Obama gets to implement his "wealth distribution" scheme? Or his supposed* gun control measures?
(*I use the term "supposed" because I personally haven't heard anything about them except from right-wingers' blogs who mention it. Nothing from Obama itself. Not in the least implying that they don't exist, I just don't know anything about them other than heresay.)
Those of us concerned about the Left's anti-gun agenda need look no farther back than 1994. The last time Democrats were in control of both houses of Congress and the presidency, we were subjected to the greatest, most sweeping gun ban since 1934. There's no reason that we should expect anything different this time. The only solace I can take from that is that the 1994 ugly gun ban was a major factor in throwing the Democrats out later that year.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 17:15 (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 17:20 (UTC)Vitriol
To me the real mind-blowing disappointment is in all the blog entries I've been seeing from sore losers who claim the loss of this election cycle somehow "proves" the GOP needs to move even further to the right and be more divisive instead of moving back toward the center.
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 18:44 (UTC)I would like to see the Republicans cut the "social conservatives" loose and get back to purely the ideals of non-interference in citizens lives. Sort of like Libertarians, only with some grasp of foreign policy. I think something like that will have to happen. The Democrats finally realized that the old FDR assembled coalition no longer work, now it's time for the Republicans to abandon the Reagan coalition arrangement.
As for working together, I expect that is an illusion. A Democrat in the White House, Democrats in majority in the House, and Democrats with an almost filibuster-proof majority in the Senate they have no great need of actually doing what is being said. It sounds good, and I expect it will keep sounding good, until about the 21st of January.
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 19:21 (UTC)This year I voted for Obama (as opposed to against McCain). I understand there's a degree of cynicism (and in some cases, outright refusal) toward working together, but personally I think this election proved most Americans are tired of extremism and want to focus on getting things done rather than being obstructionist.
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 23:48 (UTC)no subject
While it may be true we have lost some freedoms through legislation For The Common Good—things like the freedom to sell uninspected meat to the public, or the freedom to drive while intoxicated, or the freedom the use 6-year-old children as factory workers—I think the world would be a much more frightening place with those freedoms.
no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2008 14:01 (UTC)I'm referring to the freedom to profit from one's endeavors and keep those profits for one's own benefit and the benefit of one's family. I'm referring to the ability to gather peaceably, and to speak freely, and to keep and bear arms for the defense of oneself and one's country.
All of those are threatened by the results of this election.
no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2008 22:05 (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 20:23 (UTC)Amen. I know that my goal in attending the Iowa Republican caucus every four years is to do my best to counter the religious extremists.
no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2008 00:21 (UTC)*applause*
no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2008 02:22 (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 17:46 (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 22:46 (UTC)Hell, I'd even be content with having both sides work together in the way that they worked together when Bush was(/is) President, even though most Dems (and some Republicans) didn't like the guy and violently opposed his policies, much like some Republicans violently oppose Obama's stated policies, some of the language coming from Republicans frankly scare me. Stuff like "armed uprising", "violent measures", and other words that make me think another Civil War could break out, and the last one didn't work well for y'all ...
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 22:59 (UTC)I haven't heard any calls for any of those, myself. That is, not from people within the U.S.A. recently. I have heard that from some on the left (some of them European) over the last few years, with the idea that it was necessary to go that far to remove Bush from office.
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 23:39 (UTC)(*I use the term "supposed" because I personally haven't heard anything about them except from right-wingers' blogs who mention it. Nothing from Obama itself. Not in the least implying that they don't exist, I just don't know anything about them other than heresay.)
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2008 23:51 (UTC)