There are times when that seems unlikely. But I hear you loud and clear.
Posted on 07/16/2005 5:01:08 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
I happen to believe that politics is circular. There comes a point when the extreme left and extreme right meet each other and more or less conglomerate into one big mess of extremism. In Internet community terms, consider the similarities in behavior between Democratic Underground and Free Republic. I think you'll find, if this is true, that there's a point where actually the ideologies are the furthest apart. When you have mainstream political debate pushing towards those points, not the farthest to the extreme mind you, that's when you have real divisiveness.
You have the MoveOn.org/Daily Kos crowd on the left, and you have the Christian Coalition/The American Cause crowd on the right. They are all cannibals of some sort, though I must admit that MoveOn.org is pretty good about not ripping into other Democratic candidates, and they represent basically the "mainstream extremes," which is to say that they represent those points of view that are diametrically opposed to one another and, in circular politics, are the most distant.
We have a lot of folks who are subscribing to those kinds of opinions these days, and so politics appears more shrill and divisive - perhaps moreso than it has ever been before. Could Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill be friendly after 5 PM in the political world of 2005?
Ask yourself this - could George W. Bush and Nancy Pelosi, were she Speaker of the House? I seem to find it unlikely; not because Bush hates Pelosi, but because Pelosi seems to genuinely dislike the President, and the President's supporters would rip him to shreds were he to befriend a San Francisco liberal like Pelosi.
For a long time, politics really did exist mostly in the mainstream. The candidates always seem to be somewhere near the center, where most politics takes place at least in the Beltway. Their supporters, however, used to come from wide swaths of the population. They were not extremists.
That has begun to change. Extremists are going to the polls and voting in primaries for candidates who, in previous years, might not have ever received the time of day. Truly, what business does US Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin have in running for President in 2008? A divorcee and unabashed liberal, in previous elections he wouldn't be able to raise any money, or maybe even get on ballots. But in 2008, he might have a legitimate shot at the nomination - not because the time is right for his ideas, but because the time is right for extremists to get another nominee in the mold of George McGovern in 1972.
Republicans have the same problem. Will they nominate someone like US Sens. Sam Brownback of Kansas or Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania? Both could be considered mainstream extremists of the Free Republic variety, though Brownback has the ability, unlike Santorum, to think before he speaks. What of Tom Tancredo, a militant opponent to illegal immigration? No other candidate is likely to take up his cause in 2008, and he may stick with it Pat Buchanan-style up until the nomination, then give a rousing, and probably offensive, speech to the party convention.
Could 2008 be a matchup between Democratic Underground and Free Republic? No, probably not. But it may be a matchup between Daily Kos and the Christian Coalition, trading barbs about who is evil rather than who is best for America.
For the sake of our country, we have to take politics back from the extremists who can be found lurking behind the scenes, agitating and causing the degradation of our political culture. It's not a coincidence that things have gotten so bad in Washington over the past decade. New, alternative media like blogs and talk radio have given extremists on both sides an opportunity to be heard loudly.
When professional writers comment about the "echo chamber" of blogs, they are usually trying to snipe at one particular blog or another where it's suggested that there is no difference of opinion. These are usually Republican blogs since, as everyone knows, there is less disagreement and dissent on the surface within Republican communities. But let me make the statement, quite authoritatively in fact, that the true echo chamber exists within the blog community itself.
In the blog community as a whole, profanity and extremism are considered the norm. RedState.org is a fine example of keeping politics respectful and professional, by and large, and it ought to be commended for doing so. On the left, MyDD is my favorite blog, replacing TPM Cafe which I can no longer use due to my new Mac causing display issues with posts, because they too tend to forego much of the extremist, profane, and offensive banter.
We ought to be doing more to try to make the mainstream media realize that Daily Kos, Free Republic, and Democratic Underground do not speak for us, at large, as bloggers. The fact that Markos Moulitsas was invited to the FEC to speak about the freedom of bloggers, along with RedState's own Mike Krempasky, shows that he is considered one of the more prominent bloggers on the web. Why we, as members of the larger blog community, have allowed ourselves to be linked with this man of questionable decency, I do not know.
it was a fun and worthy cause. A very enjoyable experience. Thanks for organizing it Summer. (And nice to see you posting again.)
Well, you are wrong, my FRiend. From a Jane FReeper.
This is an artifact of when the left kept assigning the Nazis to the right. Fascism has almost nothing in common with conservativism and is communism and socialism's soulmate. With fascism properly assigned, the ends do not meet.
Thanks again.
"...In yet another outrageous outburst, Senator Miller claimed that John Kerry, if elected President, would “use military force only if approved by the United Nations,” and he “would let Paris decide when America needs defending.” If the speech hadn’t been delivered by a sitting United States Senator to a national party convention, an independent observer might suspect that these lines had come from a right-wing online message board. The sheer inaccuracy of these statements defies any attempt to make sense of them..."
"..Either way, the ideological diversity of the Democratic Party makes things difficult sometimes. I’ve left the party before, joining the Republicans as a bit of a law-and-order moderate, because the internecine conflict became so intense, so brutal that I could no longer stand the cannibalism. After some time with the GOP, I must admit that I miss the kind of respectful disagreement that I found in the Democratic Party. We could all do without, though, the shrill and profane behavior of a minority in both parties.
The Republican Party, as a socioeconomic and cultural institution, has never fit me properly. The Democratic Party, warts and all, is the only party in this country that truly, genuinely believes in the philosophy of a big tent. You can find elected officials of virtually every opinion underneath that big tent, and I am willing to take my chances that there’s a spot somewhere underneath that tent for somebody like me too. .."
Also:
"Tim Saler is a freelance political analyst, activist, and writer. He is a Democrat and writes from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Tim’s primary focus is on how government and issues affect the common person. To this extent, Tim strives intently to be, genuinely, a uniter - not a divider. Many of his friends, both personally and professionally, are conservative Republicans, whom he deeply respects. Tim also contributes to the popular websites MyDD and RedState.org, a Democrat and Republican community respectively..."
This is no moderate.
Jim, that's what I tried to write. Constitutional Free Speech for American citizens. I intend that the money should come directly from American citizens to the candidates who are to represent them. That would exclude labor unions, corporations, etc who may contribute what their citizen members may not wish.
I am out on the limb whether citizens can contribute to those who represent others [States] but I think I would exclude that also. People in NY should not control who is elected in Montana.
There are times when that seems unlikely. But I hear you loud and clear.
On the other hand, their citizen members may wish them to spend the money. These things aren't for the government to decide. It's between the organizations and their members. There's no "organizational" escape clause in the first amendment.
Bingo. And not the mind-numbed robots the moonbats like Chuckie think.
...agree totally.
Thank You, Thank You, Thank You! Anyone that wears a starched shirt and tie does not know the real meaning hard work...
If the press (or anyone else) wants to incorporate or otherwise organize for or against an issue or candidate, then it is allowed. The congress is forbidden from interfering. If they want to make a law forbidding corporations or unions or any other persons or groups of persons from raising money to support or oppose candidates or issues, then they need to repeal the first amendment first. Good luck (see the second amendment).
I don't know if it ever has been tested but my preference is that the Constitution applies only to human beings not artificial entities, foreign or domestic. It is hard for me to visualize that the 'original intent' of the First Amendment was intended to also give groups of people additional leverage.
"assemble"
Re your post #81 - Thanks for your nice post there, KC_for_Freedom. You were a big part of that effort! :)
But they sure as heck can be "extremely mainstream", in the Katie Couric/Matt Lauer sense,these days,can't they? It's not PC to be for liberty and justice anymore. It's just too radical a concept--- and it's not "fair".
Above, a member of Free Republic giving a speech.
Below, members of DU responding to a salient point.
A Leftwing "activist" calling other people "extremists?" ROTFL!!!! Now that's funny. I don't care who you are, that's funny right there. Like my dad used to say, "people who live in glass houses shouldn't take showers." Little Timmy sounds like a real jughead.
" I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me also remind you that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Barry Goldwater
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.