Wise political move or dumb technical move

The Republican Party has started a web site to solicit opinions based on "the priorities of the people".  It is "America Speaking Out".    For one summary, see "Republicans' new Web site not exactly what they hoped it would be", Dana Milbank, Washington Post, 2010-05-26.

I went to it with the idea of submitting the proposition that the three greatest Republican Presidents were the ones that made major investments - Lincoln and railroads, Teddy Roosevelt and the National Parks, and Eisenhower and the Interstate highway system.

When I clicked on the button to add a suggestion, the sign-in was overlaid on the current window:

If these people want to run our government efficiently, can't they at least run their own web site efficiently?

Has a new, moderate party gotten closer?

David Brooks speculates in "The Story of an Angry Voter", New York Times, 2010-05-21, that given the extremes that both parties seem to be moving to, the pragmatists in government will have no choice but to start a new party.  Although he doesn't see it happening in the near future, I hope that he keeps writing about the possibility.

A reasonable conservative speaks out

Today's Star Tribune had an op-ed piece titled "My fellow conservatives: Can we think?" written by Rod Dreher of the Dallas Morning News. It was originally published 2009-09-11 as "Zombie conservatives at the schoolhouse door". If you read the original, be sure to read some of the thoughtful comments that follow.

Dreher is really not happy about the words and actions of many who claim to be conservatives. He laments that thoughtful conservatives have no place to go. I suggest that people who think as he does should start shopping the various moderate parties. As one said who was in on the ground floor of a new party said, "As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew."

ACORN and other nuts

In the age of attack politics, if you want some balance you have to look deeper into many allegations. Two actors have posted on YouTube videos purportedly showing how corrupt ACORN employees are. They have succeeded in getting otherwise thoughtful people to jump on a bandwagon cutting all government ties to ACORN.

What is not highlighted or even mentioned in many news stories is that the pair had to spend months visiting ACORN offices in several cities before they found people who behaved as they wanted them to behave.

"In a statement over the weekend, Bertha Lewis, the chief organizer for Acorn, said the bogus prostitute and pimp had spent months visiting numerous Acorn offices, including those in San Diego, Los Angeles, Miami and Philadelphia, before getting the responses they were looking for." - "Conservatives Draw Blood From Acorn", Scott Shane, New York Times, 2009-09-15

What I would like to know is why Republican politicians aren't cutting their ties to the Republican Party because some Republican politicians had extramarital affairs. What I would like to know is why politicians who are Catholic aren't cutting their ties to the Catholic Church because some Catholic priests are pedophiles.

Actually I know why. There are two reasons. First, these two organizations are favored organizations; in general, they can do no wrong in the eyes of their members. Second, most people recognize that the actions of a few don't reflect on the many in the organization or even the organization itself.

However, in the age of attack politics, a disfavored organization must be doing something wrong, no matter how much good it may be doing. In the age of attack politics, when something wrong is found, no matter how few are doing wrong, then the whole organization is "proven" to be corrupt.

The center must defend against the politics of attack, attack, attack

After World War I and the Russian Revolution as shrill voices for one ideology or another were raised, William Butler Yeats wrote:

Things fall apart: the center cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Tom Ehrich quoted this in a column published in today's Star Tribune, a column on the bloviation of attack commentators. He explains bloviation as pompous and boastful oration. For example, Edward Everett's two-hour oration at Gettysburg, compared with Abraham Lincoln's two-minute speech.

Tom Ehrich is an Episcopal priest who writes for Religion News Service. You'll have to get the Sept. 11 Star Tribune to read his column. The Strib doesn't put columns online and the RNS charges for most of its articles.

Attack politics doesn't want compromise, only destruction of the "enemy". If a resolution of a problem benefits citizens will work to the opposition's favor, then no way will the attack politicians favor it. This is not governance, but rebellion and sedition. No wonder attack politicians want their supporters to carry guns to town hall meetings.