Amazon.com Widgets

As featured on p. 218 of "Bloggers on the Bus," under the name "a MyDD blogger."

Monday, August 14, 2006

Bipartisanship

Finally someone is willing to say that partisanship is not a dirty word, and that those who whine and moan about the lack of civility and the surfeit of partisanship are often the most partisan people in the world:

What "civility and bipartisanship"? Is it this?

"I'm worried that too many people, both in politics and out, don't appreciate the seriousness of the threat to American security and the evil of the enemy that faces us - more evil or as evil as Nazism and probably more dangerous that the Soviet Communists we fought during the long Cold War," Lieberman said.

"If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England. It will strengthen them and they will strike again."

Because I frankly don't see what is so very fucking "civil" about Lieberman accusing anyone who voted against him of giving aid and comfort to a greater evil than the Nazis and a greater menace than Stalin. And why is it "bipartisan" to borrow GOP talking points and use the British terror plot to smear a Democratic politician who is making an argument shared by most Americans? That's not "bipartisanship." That's arrogant stupidity and a vicious slap in the face.


"Bipartisanship" is the cheap, thin curtain that partisans hide behind so the media won't call them on their most outrageous slurs and attacks. Anyone who comes up to you and says "I hate rabid partisanship on both sides" either:

1- really only hates rabid partisanship on one side, or
2- is so ignorant of what both sides stand for that he/she is incapable of making any kind of decision about how the country should be governed.

How I wish people would stop getting these cases of the vapors and understand that what they call "rabid partisanship" is nothing more than offering a set of clear choices and viewpoints. Not all of them always fit into a liberal or conservative box, and there are often more than two approaches to a problem. But the voices of "bipartisanship" seem like they want to either be told one definitive answer (as if there is one), or they want to use the word "bipartisanship" without accepting its premises, that both sides get a fair hearing and an equal voice. It's nonsensical, and the people who spout it are nonsensical people.

|