My Andy Rooney moment: Who is "partisan"?
I’m getting really sick of seeing pundit cretins attack any strong beliefs as “partisan.” What, believing the Constitution should maintain the checks and balances that Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton et al built into it is “partisan”? Believing strongly that we have made a horrendous mistake by going to war in Iraq is “partisan”? Believing the war on terror should be based on maximum international cooperation is partisan? Being concerned about 40 or 50 million Americans facing complete financial disaster from a health emergency is “partisan”? Not being happy about seeing a city destroyed partly due to incompetence of the people who are supposed to help is “partisan”? Believing that Social Security should not be destroyed as an extremely successful old age income insurance program is “partisan?
Once upon a time, those would have been considered "dead-centrist." Now, Republicans call them liberal, so, as night follows day, so does the press. If these liberal ideas, then certainly they are partisan. Certainly the word is used as a pejorative. But what do David Broder and the wannabes really mean? They mean they pine for the days when Republicans and Democrats could actually work together, yet refuse to admit the actual genesis of scorched-earth politics as residing entirely in today’s Republican Party – in the Willie Horton ads, Gingrich’s nasty-words list, the government shut-down in 1995, the Whitewater fiasco, digging out Clinton’s personal problems to distract Americans from the overwhelming success of a Democratic Presidency – followed in this century by the attack on Gore’s character, and then character assassination of Max Cleland, John Kerry and anyone who disagrees as in league with terrorists. This election, we had robo-calls as well as the usual repertoire of tricks designed to disenfranchise as many voters as possible.
What’s partisan is when Republicans who claim to be conservatives thumb their noses at actual conservative values by blindly following their Leader. That has no purpose except to keep power. Is it too much to ask wealthy writers who once were journalists to give 10 minutes of thought to the actual subject, as opposed to how they are going to word something to impress their colleagues?
Yes, we won, but that doesn't mean they aren't still out to get us.
Once upon a time, those would have been considered "dead-centrist." Now, Republicans call them liberal, so, as night follows day, so does the press. If these liberal ideas, then certainly they are partisan. Certainly the word is used as a pejorative. But what do David Broder and the wannabes really mean? They mean they pine for the days when Republicans and Democrats could actually work together, yet refuse to admit the actual genesis of scorched-earth politics as residing entirely in today’s Republican Party – in the Willie Horton ads, Gingrich’s nasty-words list, the government shut-down in 1995, the Whitewater fiasco, digging out Clinton’s personal problems to distract Americans from the overwhelming success of a Democratic Presidency – followed in this century by the attack on Gore’s character, and then character assassination of Max Cleland, John Kerry and anyone who disagrees as in league with terrorists. This election, we had robo-calls as well as the usual repertoire of tricks designed to disenfranchise as many voters as possible.
What’s partisan is when Republicans who claim to be conservatives thumb their noses at actual conservative values by blindly following their Leader. That has no purpose except to keep power. Is it too much to ask wealthy writers who once were journalists to give 10 minutes of thought to the actual subject, as opposed to how they are going to word something to impress their colleagues?
Yes, we won, but that doesn't mean they aren't still out to get us.
posted by KISSWeb | 3:59 PM
2 Comments:
Go get 'em Kissweb
Yeah, great "partisan" post!
Post a Comment
<< Home