Facebook Throwdown, part 6
BillI can’t disagree with you. On many levels the Republicans under 8 years of George Bush let the people of America down-and of course this was why they were voted out. I get it. The problem is, a vote for Democrats wasn’t a vote for liberalism, it was a vote against George Bush. The hope and change that Obama inspired in all of us was founded on the basic desire that government should be fiscally responsible, transparent, and accountable (all true conservative values). Obama, like all liberals, need to run on these conservative principles because they would never win if they ran on their true ideology. And honestly, Obama seems to me to have his heart in the right place, and he truly won the trust of the American people in that he would uphold these principles. Unfortunately he is beholden to special interest groups, surrounded himself with Clintonites and Wall St. cronies, and has a majority of Democrats in congress who, I believe, sincerley think that their election was an ideological mandate and have not upheld the virtues of transparency, accountability, and fiscal responsibility. This is why its all backfiring on them and this is why the Republican party is rightly not supporting the Democratic agenda and alligning themselve in any bipartisan manner.
Now, I’ll give you this, the Republicans should not be fooled into thinking that the backlash on the Democrats is a mandate for a return to Bush policy either. This backlash and the Tea Party agenda which you wrongly paint, is founded on the same principles that voted the Republicans out!! What I see in this swing in public opinion back and forth between one party and another is a cry from the people (and the majority being Independents) for good government! It is not a cry in supprt for one party over another. Both are to blame. Rather this cry insists that both parties begin to transcend politics and begin doing what is good for the country. Not good for elections, not good for special interest, not good for ideology, but what is good for the country. Surly to agree on what is good for the country is difficult to agree upon, but common sense and majority voting by like minded people can prevail.
Now this is where you and I come in. We mustn’t fall into this divide and conquer trap and we mustn’t fall prey to the perpetuation of caustic politics. So I must apologize for inflaming you, but my intent, honestly, is not to be an apologist for the Republican party, but rather to help provide some insight. Besides, debate is important and I love to argue. However, if I didn’t respect what you are saying, I wouldn’t be wasting my time. So let me end by saying thank you. You have provided me with much insight that I will fairly carry forward with me. We might agree to disagree on some issues. I truly believe that liberalism is killing this country, but there are components of the far right that greatly disturb me, particularly the religious right and their stand on social issues such as abortion and gay marriage. Pat Robertson’s recent remarks about Haiti made me puke my coffee out my nose. Liberalism and Religiosity-two great evils that are not only dividing and conquering our country, but are diminishing the individualism that makes America great….but that’s a whole other topic I won’t belabor anyone with. Maybe on some level we can agree on some of this.
I’m glad you’ve given Obama the benefit of the doubt for where his heart is, I hope you will consider giving him a little more time and slack. It’s hard to know whether he’s only governed the way he has because of the seriousness of the recession coupled with it being his first year in office. He faces incredibly tough decisions and considering the stakes he, to me, seems like he’s done a decent job and at least hasn’t made any huge errors (which is saying a lot). He’s challenged the left wing in his party more than you may realize and I predict you’ll start seeing a more moderate president now that the recession is starting to temper.
We’ll have to agree to disagree, as you said, on the tea parties; any group that looks up to Sarah Palin as a serious leader doesn’t deserve much regard. But to end this on some notes of agreement. I too love to argue and enjoy its benefits to help sharpen and clarify my thinking. I certainly respect what you are saying. Most especially, I think we agree on the dangers of the Christianists in this nation that seek to limit the freedoms of other citizens. Also, I’m no leftist and have battled them myself.
Finally, to me, healthcare expansion isn’t a leftist idea, it’s one based on economic security, moral responsibility, and economic mobility. A political philosopher once wrote on healthcare, “Nor is there any reason why the state should not assist the individuals in providing for those common hazards of life against which, because of their uncertainty, few individuals can make adequate provision…. Where, as in the case of sickness and accident, neither the desire to avoid such calamities nor the efforts to overcome their consequences are as a rule weakened by the provision of assistance – where, in short, we deal with genuinely insurable risks – the case for the state’s helping to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance is very strong… Wherever communal action can mitigate disasters against which the individual can neither attempt to guard himself nor make the provision for the consequences, such communal action should undoubtedly be taken.” That’s Friedrich von Hayek in “The Road to Serform” an anti-socialist classic.
Thanks for your time. We’ll do this again sometime when you’re feeling a little foolhardy. And Tony, did you make a decision on how you feel now yet? haha