Sunday, November 19, 2006

an inauspicious start



The party on the left is beginning to sense that all might not be well on the road to the next election. As the shows, these problems, though not of their creation, (for the most part, and in the mind of the public), are now theirs to solve.

And they need to get started soon.

Attitude is important, but equally is the public perception of that parties attitude as they begin to dismantle to the product of the last Congress' agenda, and to assenble their own. Though the party has a majority in the House and Senate, it does not have the votes to close debate on any particular bill, thus bringing it to a vote, a recipe for deadlock. They need to be shrewd, and put some pressure on the party on the right. That will not get done with a Speaker and/or Majority Leader who is prone to chest thumping and rubbing things in. Believe it or not, the election is old news, a fact-of-life, and the voters that got the party to the place where it is are expecting not just the first, but quite a few dances in the coming months.

This is the time for a sober and restrained presentation of the party platform. It goes without saying that it is also the time to show some good faith towards the party on the right, (who incidentally, are lining up with their heavy hitters in both chambers), and the production of some quick results. By putting away the usual Democratic bluster and indignation, they can go a long way towards not disguising the coming wave of Republican obstructionism behind the politics-as-usual veneer that serves to hide both fact and nuance so well. Transparency & moderation, as well as, (and I am hesitant to use the word), bipartisanship should be the keys to the agenda for the next two years. The party on the right is preparing to do exactly nothing, and in doing so, keep the new leadership from accomplishing anything. They should be offered respect, some political concessions, upfront, to get a little of their skin in the game. Right now, in the Senate, Mr. Bipartisan, Trent Lott is preparing to tack a little pork onto every order for post-its and paperclips, assuring that the Dem's maintain the reputation of tax-and-spend. In the House, Roy Blunt is prepared to tag every vote for a Democratic initiative as an endorsement of the "San Fransisco" agenda. That's a nice way of saying 'fag'.

That isn't fair and it isn't right, but it is politics. the only response is to talk to the electorate directly, studiously avoid partisan criticism and name calling, and present a moderate plan to the people. If they can do that, they have little to fear from the shouting-as-usual pol's across the aisle. If they can't do that, they, and we, are screwed.

The Dem's won the election because they said little while the opposition said altogether too much, (it matters little that they didn't have a lot to say). If they can manage to stay above the fray that is surely coming, the party of pachyderms may well dig themselves in deeper. If the new Speaker of the House and her idiot cousin in the Senate don't put away the vindictive attitudes and recognize that the public does not hold them in higher regard than the other team, then they are in for a short and rocky term in the majority.

Now is the time to contact your representatives and express your views, invite them to your house for some coffee, (some might actually show up, or at least call), and let them know that you are paying attention.

Stay focused.

8 Comments:

Blogger mika said...

love the cartoon! it sucks that they have to deal with the shit that others have created. nobody takes responsibilty for their crap anymore.

stay focused i shall- im busy with exams now.

3:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It matters quite bit that they didn't have a lot to say. They weren't elected. The arrogant, political hacks on the right were DE-elected. Saying that now is the time to present their agenda tells the problem. They couldn't present their agenda and win. Presenting it now is no different.

The country is still swinging to the right. This country (aside from who is in congress) is still only ten years into the conservative revolution. Like the liberal revolution that took foot in the early 1970s... these are quarter-century cycles. The new majority is the predictable ripple.

The biggest problem to face is that the economy and the post 9/11 security, here at home, are houses of cards. If the Dems even whisper the agenda that would appease their base; both could come tumbling down (when Nancy more than whispered, "I'm dedicated 100% to bringing the war in Iraq to an end"... I'm afraid one of those houses teetered).

By getting themselves elected sans agenda; they've plopped the party into a "lose/lose" situation. A perfectly expectable recession, or, statistically likey attack on our soil, will be seen as their fault. Not to mention that no matter what reality is... the looming failure/disgrace in Iraq will fall on them too. "If Bush had only the terrorists to fight and not the Dems and the media too", will be the right's theme come 2008's election.

4:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Which "vindictive attitudes" are they to put aside? Information is the key to keep from becoming the party to blame next. Investigate and prosecute is not vindictive. Serving up the goods on 12 years of what Newt and his gang has wrought on our country won't hurt a soul.

Some will not believe and some will claim it's politics as usual but the truth will at least help to set us free of these thugs.

JB

7:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm all for shining the light on the scoundrels and mis-deeds of either party. But if the Dems are to hold power, they must remember that the Repubs were NOT thrown out BECAUSE of a conservative agenda. Their base threw up their hands because the conservative agenda got lost to the greed and power swilling in DC.

The populace at large is conservative and getting more so.. and will, for at least another decade..

9:27 AM  
Blogger eccentric recluse said...

JB: the procedures that you have mentioned are not what I consider 'vindictive'. What I believe needs to be done, (what will impress me and I believe, a fair number of independent and middle-of-the-roaders), is to moderate the inflamatory rhetoric that emanates from DC like stink emanates from you-know-what. The Dem's and the Repub's both suffer from the constraints of an ideology that must be acknowledged in all things---in other words they are going to do what they are going to do and that is the end of it. The Dem's need to take a cue from Bill Clinton, who was both a gentleman and concilliatory in his public stances and pronouncements.

We are talking about image here, and the perception that the body sometimes called middle America or the 'silent majority' has of the ruling party. The appearance, of maturity and moderation is the key to acceptance, and the only way that the Dem's will avoid being stuck by the GOP's tactic of painting the opposition into the loony corner.

bh~: thanks for weighing in. I am not arguing, but define 'conservative' for me. i agree that the electorate is changing, but I see the tilt more towards a hard line on leveling the economic playing field for the individual, (we like to think of ourselves as 'the little guy'), combined with a common-sense foreign policy and pretty much leaving other issues out of governmental life. if that is conservative, I agree. There are just too many nuances that go with that term...

10:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No argument from me.. I'd bet our politics are pretty close. There's a common-sense conservative side, even within liberalism; as there is sensible liberalism, to what I feel is the mainstream, conservative majority. Liberalism doesn't mean socialism and conservatism is not a form of fascism.

I think either of these are era specific responses to the other being in place long enough to have run amok.

Current conservatism was pretty well spelled out in the old 'Contract with America' (long since lost on the Repubs of today). Aside from political unpleasantness (can't please everyone), even Dems saw that the message was hard to disagree with; and it is what propelled the 1994, political eruption. A promise to address; government drunk on revenue through confiscatory-redistributional tax codes, politcal-correctness to a ridiculous degree, deteriorating public education, enviromentalism gone mad, broken Social Security and bankrupt Medicare.. and more recently.. illegal immigration and terrorism. THESE are the things 'conservatives' want fixed. It could be completely different (hopefully) twenty years from now.

Arrogantly protecting (so they thought) their personal, political power by letting this stuff just stagnate, is what cost Repubs their majority.

6:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And yes.. We are all the little guy. Conservatism asks us to level the economic playing field by our own merit and effort. A government that tries to accomplish this, can only do so through least common denominator. It can't prop someone up (for long).. at best, it can drag others down.

6:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

6:20 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home