So What’s Next?

a2a_linkname=”TI&S | So What’s Next?”;a2a_linkurl=”https://timvalentine.wordpress.com/2009/04/30/sowhatsnext/”;

When Arlen Spector can publicly say that he’s found himself increasingly at odds with the Republican philosophy and more inline with the Democratic philosophy you have to wonder what shift or how much of a shift within the Republican party has occurred to push the moderates out?

This is what I’ve been warning Republicans about in multiple posts since September 2008. Although it’s just my opinion and I am not a Republican, but as a socio-political observer and critic I believe the Moderate Republicans are the conscience of the party. They are the ones who inject common sense and rationale into the ideology, to push them away like you’re doing is like ignoring what your conscience is telling you.

So what’s next? Should we look for Republican Governors to switch parties, I think Charlie Crist would make a good Conservative Democrat and Arnold is married to a Kennedy, so we can use a Terminator. Who should we be making space for? I can think of only two other Moderate Republican Senators that would provide a spirited debate within the Democratic Caucus. We still have room.

When the party asks too much what are you to do? Should you resign your morals, convictions or objections and follow the party line? Should you assert your independence and adherence to the needs and desires of who you are to represent? I guess it depends on the measure of value of the issue, but I would hope you would follow the later more often than not.

Some want to constrain a person to one opinion and leave no room for debate or consideration. Opposition is good, because it keeps you sharp. Those who are honest and respectable in their opposition are few and often ridiculed for their independence or consensus nature. Consider President Obama and his multiple attempts to seek bipartisanship. His opposition called him weak; some of his supporters are suspicious, because we are reluctant to consider the position of our opposition as if it can never be true.

So what’s the problem?

Allow me to offer my analysis to this question. Perhaps the Republican Party can finally call themselves “Dixiecrats” now, since they have virtually modified themselves into what was known as Dixiecrats long ago. Then the brilliant incorporation of what is known as the “Religious Right” was the confusion of God and the Government. So instead of using God in your damning of America you have essentially damned the party, because you confused God and Government. Some of you may know what I’m talking about.

Now Democrats I suggest that we do not get too happy with the Specter prospects. I respect Sen. Specter, but just like our own defectors like Zell Miller or even someone whom I’m still suspicious of to this day, Joe Lieberman, let’s not get too confident. Welcome Bro. Arlen, but proceed with caution.

Although Republicans probably wouldn’t be gracious to us if this was reversed, let us not engage them in the game of tic-for-tat politics. They may be several strokes down, but we still got work to do ourselves if we’re going to win this tournament. Just because we’re on the leaderboard doesn’t mean we’re going to win the tournament. Mr. Arlen Specter I welcome you to the Democratic Party, but you understand if we proceed with caution.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “So What’s Next?

  1. Good news with Senator Specter is that is one more in the moderate camp that could (and in my opinion ‘should’) pull the reigns toward the center. Then again … will they?

    Sure the senator’s jump is also for political convenience, nonetheless, Keystone State voters will decide his political future.

  2. This is a good post. I understand you skepticism of Specter and Lieberman, but in my opinion both parties need a core of dedicated partisans with a fringe of moderates who are willing to compromise, if not on their principles then on the multiple conflicting interests which always shade any debate.

    I like your observation that Republicans confuse God and government. I suppose that the Religious Right in politics thinks that government shouldn’t take care of certain issues because people should deal with their problems on their own. The market and the church should guide a person’s wealth and welfare, and the government doesn’t need to get involved with regulation or ensuring equal rights because that imposes government onto the private sphere. I’m sure I’m not fully elucidating what you meant, but your observation just brings to mind Peggy Noonan’s comment last week that we should “just keep walking” sometimes when problems appear — even if it’s torture or other abusive behavior.

Comments are closed.