Appearing elswhere
In response to Bob Fancher at Xanga.
>It is disappointing to hear you say that you want more division among our elected officials. The requirement that a politician’s beliefs be easily discernible from his or her party affiliation is exactly why our representatives in Washington are filled with such rancor, bitterness, and devoid of any remnants of statesmanship or true bipartisan cooperation. Instead of making up one’s own mind regarding an issue, you ask that a politician merely consult his party’s platform, which if you look at either major party’s platform you will find two complete heaps of trash. The Republican party has degenerated into a party of moralizing, controlling old biddies who can’t find there way to shut the purse. On the other hand you have the democrats who are falling all over themselves to attack and whine about any policy or program a Republican might have even considered proposing.
> During post-primary election periods our political landscape does seem to blur, but that is because the 60% of the country that makes up the middle of the political spectrum doesn’t buy the need to protect the flag in the constitution or keep the retirement age artificially low.
> We need more John McCains (although fewer Zell Millers — he’s just crazy), more sensible pragmatists, willing to play fair, talk straight (relatively), and do what’s right for the country regarding any given policy, not call up Howard Dean for a pep talk on the wonders of overweening unions.
My feel is that the public’s desire for clear cut, black and white answers from government is one of the many reasons we get unreasonable, ineffectual solutions from Congress and the rest of them. Finding answers becomes more about politics and ideology than about fixing problems and improving the lives of citizens. Most questions in government are complex and nuanced (I know many conservatives fear that word, but it’s true) and the answers our representatives develop should be likewise nuanced, if not too complex.
Lars, it won't let me comment on Xanga because Xanga is stupid. Tell Mr. Fancher Xanga is stupid. Also, tell him this:
While I disagree with you on many points, Mr. Fancher (including those about Ms. Miers' alleged *constitutional* law qualifications), I do agree that factions, debate, and general rancor are good and necessary in effective government - if for no other reason than to keep it interesting to the general public.
Congress needs Orrin Hatch and Ted Kennedy to contribute to the marketplace of ideas, but I also agree with Lars: the majority of the country falls in with Arlen Spector, John McCain and Ben Nelson.
Unlike many democracies wherein political factions bind together to form government and create policy by consensus, we have a government by majority. And since the majority tends to sway back and forth over the "line" between conservative and liberal, politicians reflect that.
After all, Mr. Fancher, it is Conservative Theology that states that representatives are elected to *represent* their constituency - not their personal views. And since a constituency is fluid and dynamic, so are many politicians. People who supported the Iraqi War - and the president - have changed their minds. Social Security is not as high a priority as gas prices. Even Republican Govs Terminator in CA and Pataki in NY have trashed the president's "environmental" policies in favor of strict controls on automobile emissions - and this from a party that supports "limited government intervention." Congressional districts get redrawn - but then the constituency changes as well.
It is the *liberal* elite that gets elected and then sticks to its guns until defeat is assured. Why do you think we lose so much?