7 replies to this topic

[Lazarus Long]

America won an election last night, not one party, not one people and certainly not just one man. We have demonstrated to the entire world that the most basic principles, which have guided our democracy from the dawn of the modern era through our darkest nights of racist fears and political fanaticism, still shine bright in our hearts and minds. They still guide this nation toward a better horizon and yes hope not only matters; it is still very much alive. The United States has not just shown the world that we can lead but that we are sill the world leader in change for the better.

There is no possible message that terrorists, religious extremists, or political demagogues can express which drowns out this clarion call for positive change. That summons is merely symbolized by Obama because he is but one clear and eloquent voice expressing what is in the hearts and minds of many. However the DEMAND for change comes from the electorate and last night the people unequivocally spoke and let no one mistake the message.

Many still fear change, conservatism is predicated on resistance to change, in fact it is a part of the definition of what it means to *conserve*, however, now is a time to heal wounds not irritate or infect them with the toxin of social bitterness and poison of revenge. McCain is an honorable man and one that can work to demonstrate how to move away from the extremes and back to a constructive opposition, one that defends a principle of checks and balance in governance that not merely keeps the party in power honest, but through dialectic synthesis find solutions not recognized initially, better than mere compromise and sometimes even better than were ever imagined when the legislative process began.

Nevertheless make no mistake about it, we are a seriously divided nation still and now is the time for leaders to step up and demonstrate to all our citizens and the world that our leaders lead by setting an example. McCain helped set that example last night.

Now we must all work together to heal the wounds that afflict this nation. The winners need to be gracious to the losers and not forget that we are together one people and the losers need to move beyond the bitterness, blame and self delusion that contributed greatly to their defeat but more importantly undermine their ability to contribute to constructive change protecting their interests through the integration of ideas.

We are not a people trapped in stereotypes and the whole world should heed never to mistake their clichés for the truth about America. Change has come and where it leads is clouded in the pragmatics of politics but what it promises to lead to is far better than where we have been of late. A time of mindless hate is slowly coming to an end and hope is a worthy anodyne for healing the wounds still festering and threatening to cripple this nation but hope is only a beginning not an end and hope dies swiftly without meaningful action to uphold it.

Hope is not the message; the message is one of hope. Hope that peace in this world will be made a reality in our time. Hope that the crimes of the past do not control our choices for the future. The hope that invention can once again be made the bulwark of technology and growth does not mean more must suffer for a few to advance.

Hope in itself is not a message; it is the substance of the message which brings hope. Obama and the Democratic sweep mean that once again we will take a seat at the table of nations and discuss issues climate and energy with rational positions and honest negotiations. We will advance the science of health with a promise to make those benefits available equitably. We will reverse this economy of depression left to us as a legacy of failed economic policy and replace it with a period of growth and prosperity, which is the ultimate means of defeating extremism.

When we destroy the despair of global poverty we will defeat the source pool of terrorism plaguing our world because this is a battle that will never be won by force of arms alone or even in combination with legitimate diplomacy, without the effective amelioration of the conditions which harbor and incubate terrorism like an anaerobic affliction of all humanity.

The message is that we have not forgotten the war on terrorism because we want to close illegal prisons, end our irrational use of torture or remove our forces from the illegal, strategically incorrect and unjust occupation of foreign lands, the hope is that we are going to change our methods and confront the enemy in ways they can no longer easily predict, confront, and even benefit from. The war on terror is not over and for the first time in many years there may even be a chance for victory, a victory the whole civilized world will share against the dark madness of those filled with hate and fear for change.

The message is that America once again represents world leadership moving toward a better world worth hoping for. To make that hope a reality we must also remember that we are still a deeply divided nation and the map tells the story. A clear majority won the election yesterday but those that lost are very united in their resistance and opposition.

Some issues may not be reconcilable like abortion and fundamentalism but others are truly on the table. For example when it comes to economics I think we are entering an age of pragmatism not the economic adventurism many fear. Yes, we are going to change the rules on health care and the fact is that change is needed. So now is the time to negotiate the details not to try and obstruct all change. To make healthy change happen the losers of last nights election will need to lick their wounds and swiftly return to the table.

Now is the time that moderate forces within the Republican Party should stand up and lead without allowing the more obstructive forces within the party a chance to undermine the movement of the party back to the center. Now is the time for Democrats to remember to work with opposition moderates and listen to them. We must work together to put this nation back on a rational fiscal course respecting once again the importance of things like a balanced budgets, social programs, education with meaningful assessment, adequate but not excessive market regulation and oversight, as well as the importance of real intelligence and boots on the ground, not just toys for remote control combat.

It is time for the defense objectives of this nation to answer once again to higher standards than hegemony and hooliganism rationalized in some minds by the actions of the criminals we oppose. The message of hope is also a warning that we will not retreat from the real war on terror and if any on the other side wish to consider their options, right now may be a time to negotiate surrender because make no mistake, defeat is not now, nor ever will be an option for this nation.

Obama will return to global action soon with the most powerful coalition of force imaginable. There will be no stone unturned. Terrorists can run but they can no longer hide. The removal of occupational force does not mean a retreat from the war on terror; it means a change in tactics that is actually an escalation and one that offers far more promise of success than the archaic models begun with neocon atavistic policy.

The message of hope is one of practical victory for the most important challenge to the security of this nation facing us today. I fully expect McCain and many on the right to join in changing the strategy and tactics for this struggle because our fates are inevitably and inextricably intertwined.

Change is not merely in the air, it is not merely on the horizon, as of right now we are metamorphosing in a manner that only a true transhumanist can appreciate. It is not just the "times" that are a changing, we are, and the election yesterday is not just proof, it is but the first example of much more to come.

[inawe]

I heard pundits giving Obama advice. He should restrain from moving to far to the left. Americans traditionally are center-right they claim.
What does it mean? And how do they know? If left is being progressive and right is being conservative or reactive to progress, where is the center
at any given time? Arguably, along the centuries, what was considered the center has been shifting towards the left. Where is the center today?
Self described conservatives were in control of things for most of the last decade. The economy was going in the wrong direction and
these guys didn't do anything to correct it. Now that they lost an election they are reacting fast. They had a meeting at an undisclosed
location in northern Virginia two days after the election, to plan for the resurgence of the Republican party. I watched a short interview of two of the
participants of the conservative meeting. Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.
Perkins contention was that the Republicans lost because they were lead by moderates, not conservative enough for his taste.

"Moderates never beat conservatives. We've seen that in past elections". Rejecting suggestions that the conservative
movement was viewed as being out of touch with the electorate, Perkins says the Republican Party needs to go back to basics. "It's a return
to fundamental conservative principles that Ronald Reagan showed work and that people can be attracted to," Perkins said. Pointing to
measures in California, Florida and Arizona barring same-sex marriage that passed Tuesday, Perkins said President-elect Barack Obama's
election did not mean the country had embraced liberal social views. "There was clearly no mandate to shift the country to the left on
social issues," Perkins said. "What Tuesday was, was a fact that people wanted change, and it's a rejection of a moderate view."

Grover Norquist said the group's goal was to rebuild the conservative movement in all 50 states. "There's no one leader. There
are many leaders," Norquist said. "One of the things that the meeting decided is they wouldn't decide something. They won't endorse a
candidate. It was the first meeting of a series of meetings of how do we structure, how do we increase building."

Norquist said one of the lessons the conservatives took away from Tuesday night's results was that they focused too much on the
presidential race and not enough on helping congressional candidates. "As a national movement, a conservative
movement, as a national Republican Party, it was certainly a mistake to focus on the presidency. It would be a mistake to focus on the
elected officials in Washington," Norquist said. "So we rebuild, not just in Washington, but in all 50 states."

Perkins also said the meeting was meant to get the various wings of the conservative movement talking again. "What has made the conservative movement
strong is when you have social conservatives, fiscal conservatives and foreign policy conservatives working together," he said. "This was the
first step in what will be a long journey in rebuilding that communication and that common vision."

Question is: if these guys succeed in restructuring the Republican party according to their wishes, what are the so called moderate Republicans going to do?

[Lazarus Long]

Here is an edited version I made of this essay for publication. The above draft was off the cuff, made for posting and not really edited even for grammar and spelling. And yes Inawe, the Republicans have a big infight coming and it won't be pretty. I doubt they will even be able to keep much of it private and I expect a lot of dirty underwear waving.

I have also noticed that I must have been in tune with many pundits this time because I hadn't rad any of the press when I wrote the original piece and since I have read dozens that state almost exactly the same message.


Here is that 2nd draft:

America won the Presidential election, not one party, not one people and certainly not just one man. We have demonstrated to the entire world that the most basic principles, which have guided our democracy from the dawn of the modern era through our darkest nights of racist fears and political fanaticism, still shine bright in our hearts and minds. They still steer this nation toward a better horizon and yes, hope not only matters; it is still very much alive. The United States has not only shown the world that we can lead but that we are still the world leader in change for the better.

There is no possible message that terrorists, religious extremists, or political demagogues can express which drowns out this clarion call for positive change. That summons is merely symbolized by Obama because he is one clear and eloquent voice expressing what is in the hearts and minds of many. However the DEMAND for change comes from the electorate and last night the people unequivocally spoke and let no one mistake the message.

Many still fear change. Conservatism is predicated on resistance to change. In fact it is a part of the definition of what it means to *conserve*, however, now is a time to heal wounds not irritate or infect them with the toxin of social bitterness and poison of revenge. McCain is an honorable man and one that can work to demonstrate how to move away from the extremes and back to a constructive opposition, one that defends the principle of checks and balance for governance that not merely keeps the party in power honest, but through cooperative synthesis finds solutions not recognized at first; solutions which are often found to be better than mere compromise and sometimes even better than were ever imaginable when the legislative process began.

Nevertheless make no mistake about it, we are a seriously divided nation still and now the true leaders need to step up and demonstrate to all our citizens and the world that our leaders lead by setting an example. McCain helped set that example in his moving concession. Now we must all work together to heal the wounds that afflict this nation. The winners need to be gracious to the losers and not forget that we are truly one people and the losers need to move beyond the bitterness, blame, and self delusion, which contributed greatly to their defeat but more importantly still undermine their ability to contribute constructively, protecting their core interests through the integration of ideas.

We are not a people trapped in stereotypes and the whole world should heed never to mistake their clichés for the truth about America. Change has come and where it leads is yet clouded in the pragmatics of politics but what the promise leads to a far better place than where we have been of late. A time of mindless fear and hate is slowly coming to an end and hope is a worthy anodyne for healing the wounds still festering and threatening to cripple this nation, however hope is only a beginning not an end in itself and hope dies swiftly without meaningful action to uphold it.

Hope is not the message; the message is one of hope. Hope that peace in this world will be made a reality in our time. Hope that the crimes of the past do not control our choices for the future. The hope that invention can once again be made the bulwark of technology and growth does not mean more must suffer for a few to advance.

Hope by itself is not a message; it is the substance of the message which brings hope. Obama and the Democratic sweep mean that once again we will take a seat at the table of nations and discuss issues climate and energy with rational positions and honest negotiations. We will advance the science of health with a promise to make those benefits available equitably. We will reverse this economy of depression left as the legacy of failed economic policy and replace it with a period of growth and prosperity, which is the ultimate means of defeating extremism.

When we effectively attack and destroy the despair of global poverty we will defeat the seemingly bottomless source pool of terrorism plaguing our world because this is a battle that will never be won by force of arms alone, or even in combination with legitimate diplomacy, without the effective amelioration of the conditions harboring, incubating and hatching terrorism like an anaerobic affliction infecting all humanity.

The message is that we have not forgotten the war on terrorism because we want to close illegal prisons, end our irrational use of torture or remove our forces from the illegal, strategically incorrect and unjust occupation of foreign lands, the hope is that we are going to change our methods and confront the enemy in ways they can no longer easily predict, confront, and even benefit from. The war on terror is not over and for the first time in many years there may even be a chance for victory, a victory the whole civilized world will share against the dark madness of those filled with hate and fear for change.

The message is that America once again represents world leadership moving toward a better world worth hoping for. To make that hope a reality we must also remember that we are still a deeply divided nation and the map tells the story. A clear majority won the election yesterday but those that lost are very united in their resistance and opposition.

Some issues may not be easily or ever reconcilable, like abortion or integrating fundamentalism and progressivism but others are truly on the table. For example when it comes to economics we are clearly entering an age of pragmatism not the economic adventurism many fear. Yes, we are going to change the rules on health care and the fact is that change is obviously needed. Now is the time to negotiate the details not to try and obstruct all change. To make healthy change happen the losers of last night’s election will need to lick their wounds and swiftly return to the table.

Now is the time for more moderate and educated forces within the Republican Party to stand up and lead without allowing the more obstructive and extremist forces within the party the opportunity to undermine the movement of the party back to the center. Now is the time for Democrats to remember how to work with opposition moderates and listen to them. We must work together to put this nation back on a rational fiscal course respecting once again the importance of things like a balanced budgets, social programs, education with meaningful assessment, adequate but not excessive market regulation and oversight, as well as the importance of real intelligence and boots on the ground, not just toys for remote control combat.

It is time for the defense objectives of this nation to answer once again to higher standards than mere hegemony and hooliganism rationalized in some minds by the actions of the criminals we oppose. This message of hope is also a warning: we will not retreat from the real war on terror and if any on the other side wish to consider their options, right now may be their best time to negotiate surrender because make no mistake, defeat is not now, nor ever will be an option for this nation.

Obama will return to global action soon with the most powerful coalition of force imaginable. There will be no stone unturned. Terrorists can run but they can no longer hide. The removal of occupational forces does not mean a retreat from the war on terror; it means a long overdue change in strategy and tactics, which is actually escalation and one offering far more promise of success than the archaic models begun under atavistic neo-con policy.

The message of hope is also one of practical victory for the most important challenge to the security of this nation facing us today. I fully expect McCain and many on the right to join in changing the strategy and tactics for this struggle because our fates are inevitably and inextricably intertwined.

Change is not merely in the air, it is not merely on the horizon, as of right now we are a nation transforming in a manner only a student of history can truly appreciate. It is not only the times that are “a changing,” we are, and the election yesterday is not just tangible proof, it is merely the first example of much, much more to come.

[inawe]

Bush approval is now like 20%. He'll be a good candidate for the worst president in history. Not all the credit for such a performance should
go to him. He had to satisfy power groups in the Republican party with contradictory requests.
All influential members of the Republican party carry the label "conservative" as if it were a badge of honor. But conservatives come in
different flavors.
1) Fiscal conservatives.
2) Foreign policy conservatives
3) Social conservatives

1) The Fiscal conservatives can be further divided into
1a) Libertarians, like Ron Paul
1b) Reduce spending advocates
1c) Tax cutters

I'm not sure if the libertarians (1a) should be grouped here. It's hard (impossible?) to know if the libertarians had their way, how would
they govern a country.
As far as (1b), every politician talks about reducing spending while adding useless pork.
Of these the tax-cutters (1c) had the strongest influence on Bush. The champion tax-cutter is Grover Norquist. He once said: "My goal is to
cut down the government in half in 25 years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub". So besides other things,
Norquist is a modern day anarchists. Instead of bombs he wants to destroy government by depriving it of funds.

2) Most active in this group are the neocons. According to one prominent neocon we won WWII and WWIII (cold war) and now we have to
fight WWIV against Islamic extremists.
"On February 19, 1998, an open letter to President Clinton appeared, signed by dozens of pundits,
many identified with neoconservatism and, later, related groups such as the Project for the New American Century, urging decisive action to remove
Saddam from power.
Neoconservatives were also members of the blue team, which argued for a confrontational policy toward the People's Republic of China and
strong military and diplomatic support for Taiwan."
Many neocons served and are serving in the Bush administration. They have been among the main advocates for attacking Iraq. They are
itching for an attack on Iran. They want to increase the number of troops and the military budget.

It doesn't require much brains to see that there is a problem. To satisfy the tax-cutters Bush decreased government revenues. On the
other hand, to go along with the neocons much higher budgets are required for military purposes. Result: big budget deficits.

Now come the social conservatives. They were pushing for the so called
Faith Base Initiative which would require to provide funds to churches. They also want the government to provide vouchers for children to
go to religious schools. Where is the money going to come from? Yeah, I know. From the liquidation of the public school system, which was an
essential element for the US becoming the richest, most powerful country in the world.

The point is that the right-wing coalition that has been controlling the Republican party is made up of contradictory agendas and
interests.

[sUper GeNius]

Lazarus wrote:
'However the DEMAND for change comes from the electorate and last night the people unequivocally spoke and let no one mistake the message. "

I think you mistake the message. Obama won by six percentage points. Had the financial sector not tanked in September, it's very likely Obama would have lost. The people who made the difference in this election, the middle, voted for blind change, something different from the status quo, in the most general sense. Obama simply passes the most meager of tests: he probably won't ruin things, can't be worse than Bush, maybe a bit better than McCain. That's it! No huge mandate for some liberal awakening.

Edited by FuLL meMbeR, 11 November 2008 - 07:23 AM.

[sUper GeNius]

.

The point is that the right-wing coalition that has been controlling the Republican party is made up of contradictory agendas and
interests.

The same is true of of the Democrat party. Completely normal and expected in a county with only two main parties. Just ask Obama. In the next 12 months he'll be pulled in 12 different directions. If he wants to be reelected in 4 years, he'll navigate a centrist course.

Edited by FuLL meMbeR, 11 November 2008 - 07:22 AM.

[inawe]

.

The point is that the right-wing coalition that has been controlling the Republican party is made up of contradictory agendas and
interests.

The same is true of of the Democrat party. Completely normal and expected in a county with only two main parties. Just ask Obama. In the next 12 months he'll be pulled in 12 different directions. If he wants to be reelected in 4 years, he'll navigate a centrist course.

I wish I could belive that Democrats, Republicans, Obama, McCain, whatever; are all the same. Then I wouldn't spend time voting, on
campaigns or posting here. However, when I compare things during Clinton's and Buch's administration I have a hard time convincing
myself that everything is the same.
The contradictions in the Republican party I was referring to, are very specific. To satisfy the neocons -wars in Iraq and other places,
military bases all over the world- the government needs a lot of revenue. Tax-cutters like Grover Norquist pushed Bush towards starving
the government of funds. See what the problem is?
I believe that we all are responsible of what happens in our country. So when it comes to voting, instead of relying on Joe the plumber, I
try to get some real information.
Bush inherited a budget surplus from the Clinton administration. In the middle of 2002 a big chunk of the surplus was already eaten up. Official
word was that 2/3 of the lost surplus was due to the recession, what they were telling us is that 2/3 of $330 billion, or $220 billion in reduced income
was due to the 2 months of recession in FY 2002. I wont go into the simple calculation necessary to show that's impossible. The problem was the tax cut instead.
Already in 2002 Bush and his people should have seen that their tax cut for the rich was going to result in increasingly larger budget deficits. But Bush is a
dogmatic kind of guy and kept us in the wrong track. And McCain promised us he was going to continue with the Bush tax policies.

[Lazarus Long]

I think you mistake the message. Obama won by six percentage points. Had the financial sector not tanked in September, it's very likely Obama would have lost. The people who made the difference in this election, the middle, voted for blind change, something different from the status quo, in the most general sense. Obama simply passes the most meager of tests: he probably won't ruin things, can't be worse than Bush, maybe a bit better than McCain. That's it! No huge mandate for some liberal awakening.

This nation is clearly still highly polarized, and not around one but multiple different issues with intricately overlapping constituencies. However the size of the majority is only one aspect of the "mandate" and it was a mandate for change, both parties ran on that platform BTW.

You and I might differ on what form that change might take or what form is most popular but the point is clear that change is DEMANDED by the electorate, the one unacceptable interpretation is that the people want the status quo. It is also not just an economic issue and that should not be seen as something that appeared out of thin air but the consequence of cumulative bad policy, which clearly falls on the party that has controlled the executive office (as well as the legislature for most of the 12 years) and failed in their watch, both in defense of the nation militarily and economically.

The Bush administration has been a day late and dollar short since before 9-11, perhaps since the day they were "selected".

This last election was a clear mandate by the majority electorate that they DO want to try a different tact and that is coming no matter what. So the Republicans can come back to the table as negotiators for reason, functioning as the loyal opposition and helping to keep the process constructive for the nation as a whole or they can become even more obstructive and thus alienate themselves further to the extremes, irrelevant and more likely to go the way of the Whigs and *Know-Nothing parties* of history.

Also you do realize that the 6 percentage point spread you mention is very significant when compared even to Reagan, whose majority mandate was predicated on the significant vote for 3rd party candidates in both his elections. In real terms this was a larger mandate than even Reagan received once that factor is taken into account.

The in-fight within the Republican party is between fiscal/governmental conservatives and religious/social conservatives. If the religious right wins this in-fight then huge swaths of the educated, wealthy, and socially more liberal members of the party are going to go their own way or try to drive the religious right out.