Regarding Arlen Specter, Dana Milbank writes:
He is ornery, vain, disloyal and a brazen opportunist. He lacks a discernible ideology, puts his finger to the political winds before casting a vote and in the end does what is good for Arlen Specter.
But Milbank is going to miss him, because “whatever his faults, he fought the forces of party unity and ideological purity that are pulling the country apart.”
This is wrong for multiple reasons. First, why is party disloyalty for the sake of doing “what is good” for a pol (i.e., his own perpetual re-election) a noble thing? Sacrificing party loyalty for a principled stance is a different matter. Joe Lieberman is the quintessential example — casting aside partisan loyalty to advocate a robust foreign policy and the promotion of American values. We can say the same of pro-life Democrats when they cast aside party loyalty to uphold their core beliefs (not very often as Bart Stupak showed). Charlie Crist and Arlen Specter are simply opportunists, sniffing out the most expedient position at the moment. Even Milbank concedes: “His Democratic primary opponent, Joe Sestak, finished off the hopelessly contorted Specter with an ad showing him receiving Bush’s endorsement in 2004 and playing Specter’s boast that ‘my change in party will enable me to be reelected.’ Specter will probably be remembered for that unprincipled quote. I’d prefer to remember him for something else.” Yes, because it demonstrates how disdainful is a philosophy built purely around a pol’s self-preservation.
Milbank is also off-base, because there is nothing wrong with offering voters a rather stark ideological choice. Big government or smaller? Human rights promotion or appeasement to dictators? High or low taxes? One gains a governing majority by presenting a well-thought-out vision on both domestic and foreign policy, getting voters to agree, and then going to Washington with a mandate to govern. And if a politician misrepresents what he is about during the campaign or overreaches (as Obama has done), then a new choice, a new election, and a new mandate will follow.
And finally, the country is not being “pulled apart.” We have a revival of grassroots politics, a new crop of candidates, and a vibrant debate about the role of government and America’s role in the world. How is that bad? And why shouldn’t we see this as an affirmation of the health of our democracy and of the benefits of new media that can assist organizers and facilitate a robust debate between competing philosophies?
In sum, bipartisanship, if conducted on a principled basis for good and honorable ends (e.g., defense of the country), is to be cherished. But bipartisanship without any purpose other than self-preservation or for destructive goals is no virtue. And that’s why Arlen Specter’s defeat is to be celebrated.
Linda,
Biden can not make the case. There is no evidence to work with. They are going to try to coast to victory on biography, breaking the race barrier, and surrounding the One with 300 advisers.
The fact is the Democrats call themselves Progressives. They pride themselves on being ahead of the historic curve. They were the 1st people to nominate one of the discriminated groups such as women or African-Americans. Of course, this is a good thing, but their process has nothing to do with experience, the priority is being 1st in the evolution of history.
The Democrats of 08 are saying, “Elect us, we pushed history forward, albeit it with a highly under qualified candidate, but look, the One is surrounded by knowledgeable Democrats, He will be fine, don’t worry”
Thomas Frieman’s piece on China says it all. The Chinese are busy building their country, while we are entangled in keeping the world free from Islamic terror and Russian aggression. We need the same isolationism to make better airports and keep up with the world’s elite. I hope McCain is working on a better vision for our great country.
“We need the same isolationism to make better airports and keep up with the world’s elite.”
Life is not fair. We cannot embrace isolationism. If we do—America will merely repeat the same mistakes made before WWII. What can I tell you? Life sucks, and then you die.
Hi David,
I was quoting the Friedman piece, but it probably wasn’t clear.
I fully agree with you, except that I believe life is essentially a trial, to fulfill our unique mission, and return to our Creator. I believe that America must build internally, and also fulfill its mission to the world, as a beacon of freedom and hope to all oppressed peoples.
We don’t need isolationism. What we need is to get a large portion of this country off their worthless backsides. How much of our national psyche and energy is wasted on nonsense? Drugs, crime, gangs, addictions, single parenthood, broken homes, american idol, playstation, facebook, myspace, and whining about the war…How much further along would we be if our culture and population seriously valued and was seriously engaged in gaining real skills and education and getting the job done? If we’re in decline as a nation, then let’s look in the mirror. John McCain missed a key opportunity at saddleback to correctly identify our nation’s greatest moral failure–failing to civilize and educate our own children.
Linda says: “And we’re facing a new Russian threat.”
Behold the Neo-Domino Theory! If Gori topples Atlanta is surely next.
RPM said: “Our nation’s greatest moral failure–failing to civilize and educate our own children.”
Uneducated children are vital to America’s success. So vital, in fact, it’s necessary to import millions of Mexicans and Third World immigrants to ensure an ample future supply. Sounds insane, I know, but Linda can explain the irrefutable logic of it to you.
It is indeed a long way from Gori to Atlanta… but not any longer than from Mogadishu to New York…