Two things before this post begins: 1) I wanted to do this as a column for my paper, but I was talked out of it. I was talked out of it because I am the political reporter for our paper, and even if it's not
The New York Times, it's probably best that my biases don't come out that easily. So, if the writing seems like more column-y that's because it was my original intention. 2) This is the most intellectual post I've done, so please feel free to open that good bottle of cab and drink it while nibbling on some brie and cracked pepper crackers.
Without further ado, my response to the democratic response (from Tuesday's State of the Union Address):
A few weeks ago, in an effort to rile me up, Pete defended the conservative movement in the government and had the audacity to ask me what the democrats stood for.
I was shocked and appalled. Then, as if it were a staring contest, I blinked.
Despite my left-leaning tendencies, I could not prattle off any tenets that my party has.
Pete then started listing at least three principles that the GOP has stood for in the past decade under their majority. I'm sure he could have spouted off more but he quit when he heard the sound of my heart breaking.
In my head, which was also throbbing, I was still trying to recall from civics lessons in high school or from 2004's presidential election, just what democrats stood for. I remembered from high school that they were the party of big government, to provide help to every American. Then, I remembered that the republicans had gotten the country to forget this fact by allegedly appealing to middle America's moral values. I remembered from high school that they were the party that helped the little guy, the little guy meaning America's many blue collar workers and being supportive of workers unions. Again, by appealing to the Christian values, the republicans had taken that away from us too.
Was there anything else the democrats stood for? Did I miss something? We had to have some platform didn't we? Apparently not. I googled both the republicans and democrats and went to their official sites for closer inspection. While when you look at their histories, both are pretty vague, the republicans do actually list a couple of their tenets. "Individuals, not government, can make the best decisions; all people are entitled to equal rights; and decisions are best made close to home." Sure, it's not definitive, but pretty clearly you understand they're not a party that's pro-big government. When Dubya ran in 2004, the republicans came out with a 92-page platform. It talked about republican heroes of years past: Reagan, Teddy Roosevelt and Honest Abe (the founder). It also outlined five areas W. was going to focus on. Maybe it's because we lost, but the democrats website didn't contain a platform. And our "about us" page online says, "Over 200 years ago, our party's founders decided that wealth and social status were not an entitlement to rule." What a great statement! Seriously. But that was 200 years ago. What are we doing now? Well, it seems in the last 200 years, we've had some good leaders who've stood for some good things. Again, according to the site: FDR (social programs like social security and WPA); Truman (NATO, early civil rights); JFK (progressive space program, gorgeous); Johnson (war on poverty, civil rights, Medicare); Carter (ending conflict in the middle east); Clinton (working for the poor and lower middle class). But we never come out and say what we stand for. How has the party progressed? How have we taken these great leaders and modified our vision? As a party it seems we haven't gotten that far yet. In the last paragraph of our vision: "While we have accomplished a great deal -- as a nation and a party, we must continue to move forward in the 21st century." No hows, just that it must be done.
So, I'm already feeling a little down. And not to give away the ending, but no, I'm not declaring myself a republican. But I am eagerly awaiting the State of the Union, because of the impact it could have on the midterm elections this year. I had hope the democratic response would offer some insight as to what the democrats were going to stand for in '06.
"Had" is the operative word in the previous sentence, because I quickly lost faith in my party, despite an inspirational speech. Virginia Gov. Timothy Kaine gave the response. It was a perfect set up: no one up for election in the house or senate, and a fresh new face for the party and one who had made some real reforms for the commonwealth of Virginia. I was excited. Then, as I'm listening, I'm only looking for a theme or a tenet. And all I'm hearing is, "There's a better way." I don't disagree with Kaine. I think this Bush administration isn't helping America. In fact, I think he's hurting it. So, yes, there is a better way. Preach on, Kaine. Oh wait, you don't offer the better way. Oh wait, you spout off what is wrong, and that it can be done to be better. But how? Obviously it's working in Virginia, but how can the whole nation work like it's going in your state? Nothing but "There's a better way." It not only pissed me off, but it broke my heart again.
Our party knows that the current administration isn't good. People, like me, who follow along with the party, know that Bush isn't right for America. But we're having a real hard time selling it. Part of that is the loss of our spine. More often then not, when they call us on something, we cower. When they claim that we're pro-big government, we shouldn't apologize. We should say, "Fuck yeah, we are." Big government doesn't mean clusterfucks like the disaster relief of Hurricane Katrina unless you put cronies in those positions. Big government does mean helping other Americans. It does mean that we may have to raise taxes on the people who have the money to give. It does mean that we'll help others in need, because that is what America stands for. And none of this trickle-down bullshit. If Bush really wanted to make trickle-down economics work, the oil and gas companies who are making the most money they've ever made, would be forced to lower the gas prices so the rest of us aren't getting anally raped when we fill up our tanks.
If anything, I don't think my party necessarily needs to change its tenets, but it definitely needs to stand up for them. Yeah, so Ted Kennedy is for health care reform, and Rep. Sanders is against most of the Patriot Act, and, while I disagree, Lieberman is for parental advisory labels, at least stand up and regain your back-bone and say we're for something. We do have some tenets. No apologies from democratic liberals who are both religious and pro-choice. No apologies for raising taxes if it means the poor and the sick and those affected by horrible natural disasters are helped by it. Hooray for higher taxes because it means when I retire I'm going to be taken care of, and hooray for higher taxes because if I have kids that I don't abort (because I should have the right to abort them) they'll be taken care of by their children. I think democrats would be surprised to learn that if they didn't apologize for what they stood for they might have some real supporters.
Bush knows that there is a lot of partisanship. He knows that there are a lot of people who strongly disagree with him. He doesn't sweep it under the rug, though. He calls us on it.
At his speech on Tuesday, the smartest thing he said (that had some truth to it: because, hell yeah, our dependence on foreign oil is bad and we should look at hybrid cars etc., but I highly doubt W. will fund any of those programs well enough) was that "Hindsight alone is not wisdom, and second-guessing is not a strategy."
He called democrats out on our spinelessness and our bullshit. He's right. We don't like the war in Iraq or his health care reform or the way he does Medicare or his environmental policy. In fact, we're against most things he does, hence the partisan clapping at his speech. But, fuck, if we offered anything other than apologies maybe more people would respect us. If we had a plan, more people might follow. If we keep saying that there's a better way, and not offering a way, then we're in danger of dying. This doesn't make me agree with the current administration and their Christian conservatism, but it does make me wonder what the future of my party is.
On Tuesday, for the first time, despite two crushing presidential losses, I was worried about the future of my democratic party.
And I'm not saying I have all the answers. I have a few tenets I'd like to run on (should I ever run for office, though there are a few things I've done that could have me dragged through the mud) but I'd support my party if they were at least willling to stand up for those principles or evolve theirs from 200 years ago.
It's a sad day when one loses faith in his vision of America. It's a sadder day when one loses his faith in his party. It's the saddest day when one loses faith in his party to uphold that American ideal.
Good luck democrats in 2006, in coming up with a vision and gaining the support of the Americans. I hope the best for you, but I'm losing that faith, despite a corrupt republican party.
So, to you snooty bloggers who have made it through this, good night and good luck.
