Moderation and Reason, the bedstone of my political beliefs

I share Julie’s hope for a change with the Democrats regaining control after the 2006 midterms. It seems clear that uni-party government does not lead to reasonable outcomes or honesty. It fosters insulation against differing ideas resulting in mis-management.

Now for the response Julie must have known would result from her clear adoration of Congresswoman and potential House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. It is interesting how the character traits that made some politicians in-competent and foolish are know being heralded as much needed. Bush’s backwater conservatism meets Pelosi’s and other liberal democrat’s inner city idealism and liberalism, six one way and half a dozen the other. Her strict adherence to her beliefs whereas the other side of course was foolhardy.

“Pelosi's democratic track record indicates a strong politician with apparent opinions and values... just the type of woman to open more political doors to females. Pelosi is no pushover, "she demands discipline and loyalty,”

Lets remember for a second 2004, Bush firm on beliefs whereas Kerry was prone to switching. An interesting change. Furthermore, is Pelosi any more at home to run the country that any other overly secure incumbent? My own intuition is that any challenger to her would face an uphill battle just as I am saddened to note that Republican Randy Forbes goes virtually unmatched in my own district. Just a thought to contemplate before one’s adoration turns into blind idol worship. While Pelosi’s gender will make history if she becomes the next speaker, I would certainly hope that biology alone is not enough to blind one’s reason.

However, I do understand Julie’s and others adamant liberal beliefs. I too used to feel secure in knowing that as a liberal I was right and others wrong. It felt good to look down un-approvingly on those “backwood” conservatives. I could articulate everything that was wrong and blame it all on Bush. I eventually reached some cracks in the logic of American liberals. I realized that they were as deciding and righteous as any person on the right. Many looked down on me as an aberration that could not exist within their select circle. My belief in things such as reason, the right of law-abiding citizens to bear arms, the belief that work is not such a bad thing, and that at times we have to reconcile our political beliefs with the economic needs of the nation; these all led me to see that liberals did not have the entire picture. I could not join conservatives either. They looked down on other individual rights such as gay marriage and felt that business deserved a free hand without any safety net. Furthermore, neither could articulate solutions, a real problem when the purpose of government is supposed to serve the people. The only logical conclusion was to become an independent.

Back to now, it is important to note that the Democrats who actually won races were moderate and more understanding of the needs of everyday America. Polticians such as Webb, Tester, or Kaine illustrate what is the future of the Democratic Party. There are two articles in The New Republic I would recommend. One deals with democrats being the party of the people (it highlights the difference between old liberals and new moderates, including the remarkable fact that many old school liberals were not self-made) and the other argues that “gun toting libertarians” will provide the future of the party. Furthermore, if the party wants to grow and possibly win 2008, Pelosi will quickly need to temper her beliefs. On Friday, an aide to Senator McCain announced an exploratory commission to examine his running in 2008. The party had better remember this. My hope is for moderates such as Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Warner, and others to take the helm. The Democratic Leadership Council, of which the party’s greatest hero in recent memory (Clinton) was part of works towards moderation. It also contains many officials who manage to win elections in red states and accomplish things with the Republicans. If the party is to continue, it will be with politicians who understand the needs of the global economy and can mange to balance the needs of the American people with the cold hard economic realities of the 21st century.

One other thing I would like to note. I feel that the unwillingness to compromise is the inability to govern. To govern is to understand all sides of the debate in an attempt to reach a reasonable and productive outcome.

“There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America”, Bill Clinton