The Republican Days of Rage
We are seeing a reversal of roles in political theatre, with Republicans who are the shouters and the disrupters of law and order while the silent majority are the Democrats. The Days of Rage were radical actions in 1969 that were organized by the Weatherman faction of the Students for a Democratic Society. They became an icon of leftist radicalism run amok. The tea parties and town hall disruptions are also bitter expressions of the divide that our nation is experiencing, as deep as any since the Viet Nam war. I think some of the anger comes out of implosion of two decades of conservatism, of which I include the Clinton years. The catalyst for that implosion is the Bush presidency that left a nation at war, a economy in tatters, and a party devoid of leadership.
As to the substance of the anger we are seeing in these town hall meetings, I believe there is reason for skepticism. Open debate on this kind of a program is positive and ultimately builds political capital. I think Bush blundered when he tried to sell his social security reform idea to invitation-only Republican audiences. In time, the talks became repetitious and uninformative, with diminishing passion for Bush's plan. However, today's over-heated rhetoric about death panels and premiums for abortion undermines that skepticism, and the blowback may be such that the net effect is a political gain for the Obama health plan.
The country faced much of the same kind of debate with such new-fangled notions as social security and medicare decades ago. But it is the Republicans of a certain age who are most resistent to surrendering what they now see is an entitlement. I think we could fund a universal health plan if Republican would opt out of the plan as well as medicare, social security, agricultural price supports, government school assistance, and corporate tax breaks.
"Why didn't these ubiquitous leftist tactics trouble you in the past? After all, the leftists are violent; we're not."
The Republican doctor killers, nazis, klansmen, yahoos, gun packers, skin heads, and militia types are non-violent?
As to the substance of the anger we are seeing in these town hall meetings, I believe there is reason for skepticism. Open debate on this kind of a program is positive and ultimately builds political capital. I think Bush blundered when he tried to sell his social security reform idea to invitation-only Republican audiences. In time, the talks became repetitious and uninformative, with diminishing passion for Bush's plan. However, today's over-heated rhetoric about death panels and premiums for abortion undermines that skepticism, and the blowback may be such that the net effect is a political gain for the Obama health plan.
The country faced much of the same kind of debate with such new-fangled notions as social security and medicare decades ago. But it is the Republicans of a certain age who are most resistent to surrendering what they now see is an entitlement. I think we could fund a universal health plan if Republican would opt out of the plan as well as medicare, social security, agricultural price supports, government school assistance, and corporate tax breaks.
The battle outside is raging. Your old world is rapidly fading. The times-- they are a'changing.
"Why didn't these ubiquitous leftist tactics trouble you in the past? After all, the leftists are violent; we're not."
The Republican doctor killers, nazis, klansmen, yahoos, gun packers, skin heads, and militia types are non-violent?
Labels: politics

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home