Getting In Touch My Centerist Self
Published on December 15, 2004 By Solnac In Politics
Dear Republicans:

I realize we don't agree on much if anything at all. Common ground is not what I call the difference in our politics, and my feelings on the matter is I shouldn't have to confirm to you and you shouldn't have to be thrilled and confirm to me either. So, in the spirit of Christmas, and because I know your leaders won't listen to me anyway, I offer a piece of advice: Be careful.

No, that's not a threat. You see, from '92-'94, we had the majority in all the branches (excepting judicial, maybe) of our government, and we Democrats blew it. Big time. In comes 1994 and Newt Gingrinch and his cronies, and for our political landscape in Congress, it's been downhill ever since. Some would argue that this happened because we 'lost touch with America and American values', others would say it's because Clinton got 'favors of the wrong kind' from his intern and so many scandals bogged us down. I discard both theories, it's what gets said when you lose on every election, full of political doublespeak without any real meaning. It's like 'moral values', damn vague and left for us to wonder what the hell that means.

I'm digressing again. Anyhow, the thing that sunk us in '94 is our plans to change society failed utterly. Our agenda for the 'far left' got out of hand, alienating our centerists and we didn't get hardly anything done that Clinton promised we would, and he spent the next 6 years returning to center. You've won both Houses of Congress, you've won the Presidency for another four years, enjoy it. But as the old saying goes, 'consume wine, don't let the wine consume you.' To translate that, don't let a soon to be lame duck get in the way of getting things done. And while you're free to pass anything you like, keep in mind that will bite you in the butt too if you lose touch with your center, or even the will of Americans.

You don't have it easy. You've got a president who's under heavy fire for his war stance, (I never agreed with the premise of the war, personally,) down to the fact that his Secretary of Defense can't suppress his need to make tart, cute comments like, "Armor doesn't guarantee protection. A tank can still be blown up," while true, doesn't help the issue any, really. (I was waiting for the "so suck it in, soldier," after that, personally. I think Rummy's missed his true calling: drill sargeant.) So, get what you need passed, make sure it's reasonable, because any failures will come right to your door. You can't blame liberals for our policymaking any more really, you've got the majority. All we can really do is swamp legislation or insert a few amendments to it, if we can find an issue which we agree with you on. Keep in mind, despite all your wins, your president was elected by the shortest victory margin of a lot of incumbents.

Best of luck to you. We'll be back in 2006, and again in 2008. Hell, let's face it, we won't leave you alone. Which is why you need to be careful. Oh, and the blistering political commentary: that's not going to be absent from this blog. Being liberal in a rather conservative controlled branches of government gives me a lot to do by way of criticisms. I'd get used to it, if I were you. We endured it during the Clinton years.

Politely and in a giving mood, the AWM wolf dragon,

Sol




Comments
on Dec 15, 2004
Excellent "letter"!!!

You are right, once the euphoria of such an all encompassing political victory wears off, we Repubicans will realize that the curtain is open and it's critic's night at the opera. Let's hope we do better in establishing our vision of a Great America than the Democrats did when they were producer, director and starring role.
on Dec 15, 2004
Solnac

I agree with you on allot of what you said, but I think you are missing one of the most important thing that sunk the Democrats:

Oh, and the blistering political commentary: that's not going to be absent from this blog. Being liberal in a rather conservative controlled branches of government gives me a lot to do by way of criticisms. I'd get used to it, if I were you.


You’re missing a big point, the shrill screeching and negativism released since 2000 by the Democrats is making conservatives go vote and converting people to conservatives in droves. Until the Dems change to a more positive attitude and not so negative, the parties fortune will not change. James Carville has been saying this for the last six months and I agree.

So scream criticisms all you want. But you can't catch flies with vinegar. Until you change to honey you’re doomed to repeat your mistakes.

Think about doing something positive and not bad mouthing everything. It makes the party look childish.

That's My Two Cents

P.S.: and if Moveon.org does get any of its mister negative guys into the DNC chair seat, I think the party is finished.
on Dec 16, 2004
You are right, once the euphoria of such an all encompassing political victory wears off, we Repubicans will realize that the curtain is open and it's critic's night at the opera


Ted, you got it! I'm really happy about this, acutally. I don't want to see this country go the wrong way as much as any Republican, but I see it unfolding more as the curtain opens on the opera.

You’re missing a big point, the shrill screeching and negativism released since 2000 by the Democrats is making conservatives go vote and converting people to conservatives in droves. Until the Dems change to a more positive attitude and not so negative, the parties fortune will not change. James Carville has been saying this for the last six months and I agree.


I disagree with that. If the tone's more hostile, the Republicans helped it along. Rush has been around since the Contract of America. There were more anti-Clinton jokes, 'the presdient and her husband' springs immediatedly to mind. Granted, Clinton was impeached, but that seemed even more a political partisanship issue then anything else. On one of the charges in the Senate, the vote was spilt 50-50 to convict on one charge, and 45-55 against conviction on the other. And during the McCain primary in 2000, there was a huge smear campaign, which proves in politics not even members of the same party are immune to attacks from the same. If the tone's more shrill, I think it's more of an evolution of the tone becoming that way than anything else. Ann Coulter turns a lot of liberals off, and she's as shrill as any of us. I don't tend to try to be shrill, and most of my attacks are more of the mocking playful type (and mostly against the current adminstration) than anything else. Thus the dig against Rumsfeld. Have I said anything that wouldn't be found in the mainstream media? I don't think so. You guys (Republicans) have pundits like we do (Democrats). We do need to propose solutions to the problems we mock, but mocking the problems didn't hurt anyone in the first place. I'm glad you see the wisdom there, tho'.

So, there's some change for your two cents.

P.S.: and if Moveon.org does get any of its mister negative guys into the DNC chair seat, I think the party is finished.


I wouldn't go that far, but yeah, I've gone on record in my blog saying PACs have about as much right as corporations in controlling party policy or anything else. If Moveon.org thinks it's wiping out corporate contrubutions by this coup d'etat, I think the Democrats are going to have a hard time fundraising.
on Dec 16, 2004
Ann Coulter turns a lot of liberals off, and she's as shrill as any of us.


This is true. However, Ann Coulter doesn't have the visibility of say Michael Moore. Both parties have their nuts, but the Democrats are the ones who are embracing their's.

The underlying point of your article is on target: It's time for Republicans to put up or shut up.
on Dec 16, 2004
I don't think the Dems have to change much at all. I think the right is going to dig its own grave. I vote republican within my state very consistently because they actually do keep taxes low, keep the budget lean, and state government small in these parts. They also don't screw with our civil liberties. A very different beast from the Republicans running the Federal Govt. Seems to me a balance and stalemate works best in D.C. Anyhow if you look at current polls, public support for Bush's economic plans lie in the 30-40 percentage range. The only thing he rates above 50% on is the war on terror. What does that include? The new war on drugs in Afghanistan?

In any case Bush doesn't have to look at the polls, but the Senators and Representatives who will be running for reelection do. Take a look at the Republican party now. It looks like two seperate parties fighting and criticizing each other more than they are going after the Dems. They now want a majority of the majority to even bring a bill to the floor in the house. Lobbyist writing appropriation bills put up to vote with no time to read and riders in bills allowing committee members access to peoples tax returns. A lot are criticizing Rumsfeld...including the warhawks, and Kerik is showing what true Republican "values" are. Conservative media is still going after the UN in which I suspect many will be surprised by who is actually involved in the Oil for Food Scandal. Everything in the Bush economic plan is geared towards throwing money at Wall St. Well isn't that what happened in the 90's before the white collar criminals took everyones money and ran? And they have the nerve to criticize Spitzser saying that his crusade against corporate criminals will hurt the markets. Isn't it the people he is trying to expose that hurt the market? Anywho I suspect the media will get a steady stream of conservative whipping posts over the next few years. This week it's Kerik ....The poster boy of true Republican "values". Any guesses for next week? Since it will be Christmas week maybe it will be Falwell or Crouch. After all it wouldn't be fair to Bill O'reilly if the liberals stole Christmas.

In any case look how quickly McCain (one of few Republicans I still respect) has come out of the gate distancing himself from the lame ducks.

And we haven't even seen inauguration day come and go yet!
on Dec 16, 2004
However, Ann Coulter doesn't have the visibility of say Michael Moore.


Define visibility. The only real difference between the two is that he made a movie, which is kinda what he does as a documentary film maker. I see her books everywhere and I've seen her write internet opinion articles. The Moore movement is a reasonably young one, even tho' he's been around for years.

In any case look how quickly McCain (one of few Republicans I still respect) has come out of the gate distancing himself from the lame ducks.


Mark my words: thatwill pay off for McCain at the end, even if he doesn't run for president.