Ellington

As a 30-year-old Mississippian who never strongly identified with a particular party, I am excited to call myself an Obama Democrat. During the first 100 days of this administration, the Democrats made great strides in how they communicated with constituents to reflect the will of their respective districts. The outcome has been a strong majority in Washington that reflects the diversity of opinions and priorities of the American people.

The Democrats' pro-active style of coming together to enact change has been Obama's modus operandi since he came into the public eye, and we are seeing promising strides in areas such as health care, energy sustainability, education, infrastructure investment and financial regulation as a result.

However, my greatest fear as we move into this new era of enlightened policy-making is that the Republican Party will opt out of the discussion entirely and marginalize itself into extinction. While Democrats have shown themselves to be an effective representative party, it would be detrimental to lose a coherent conservative argument in policy discussions. It seems that the growing Republican meme is that the party's message is sound; but that it's inability to execute that philosophy has gotten them into trouble today. In this unyielding dedication to its roots, the Republican Party is rallying around old, establishment leaders such as Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh and John McCain.

Cheney spent Mothers Day morning praising the conservative fortitude of Rush Limbaugh and essentially inviting former four-star general and Reagan National Security Adviser Colin Powell to become a Democrat. It is more than unfortunate that Cheney, one of the most visible Republican spokesmen, is also one of the most unpopular public officials of modern times. It is simply fantastical that he would use this platform to elevate a political voice more divisive and hated than his own.

The fact of the matter is America is changing, and the Republican Party refuses to respond. In an age of advancing communication and information technologies, the American people are just beginning to feel like they have real control over their government and want to use that control to strengthen their communities. Republicans are still committed to dismantling and disempowering any arm of government that doesn't protect a powerful business interest.

Republicans should do right by conservatism—and America—and start participating in our government rather than trying to strangle it. With Barack Obama maintaining a steady moderation toward our financial systems, gun control and the role of government in society, most moderate conservatives are gravitating to his side.

So why am I, an ardent Obama supporter, a little scared by this? Because the only thing worse than a two-party system is a one-party system. If the Republican Party abdicates its role as a constructive conservative body and opts instead to become the naysayer rabble-rouser, the Democratic Party will become the only choice for a vast majority of Americans and thus, less answerable to their constituencies.

Previous Comments

ID

147971

Comment

I share your fear that our two party system is collapsing under the weight of our own greed and our uniquely American ability to shun rational thought for blind faith. I supported Obama too after it became clear that McCain - Palin was not really a choice at all, but just self serving rhetoric and a re-hash of previously failed policies. I had previously supported conservative candidates because I believe the most important issues are fiscal responsibility, accountability, support of the basic functions of government while trimming the superfluous programs and defense of individual liberties and free markets. A Federal government of limited scope, I believe, can make our nation prosperous and then we can discuss the social ills from the local level. Where government can be responsive and efficient to the specific and unique needs of it's citizens. Since there was no national candidate who shared these ideals, at least none that had any chance of winning, it only made sense to set those issues aside and support a candidate who shared at least some of my values. Plus, I was just really disappointed with Bush's performance and McCain's campaign and choice of running mate. I don't believe that Obama or the Democrats can hold the moderate conservatives like me and probably you as his policies are passed and the effect they will have become clear. I believe the financial situation will become worse if we maintain the course he has set. Ultimately it was the economy that caused the downfall of the Republicans and the Democrats are following in their footsteps. They are doing nothing but throwing money at the problem and holding no one accountable for their failures as they make no reforms to the system. The same people who failed as watchdogs for the financial industry are now running the hen house. The excuses and whining about inherited problems can only save them for so long. As long as the Republican's remain in complete denial about the abandonment of their core principals they will never see where they went wrong. And if you don't know what's wrong it's gonna be real hard to fix it.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-05-21T11:11:24-06:00

ID

147977

Comment

Daniel I enjoyed the article;however, you have no need to fear. The Republicans are reloading. Jindal, Palin, and Steele are just a few of the fresh faces that they are trying to put on their brand to show the nation that they are open to discussion and they want to market their ideas to different groups. Unfortunately (Or fortunately ...I am a Democrat too) there most extreme members the Savages, Limbaughs, Coulters, Cheneys, etc.. get their messages out more effectively than the more moderate members like the Powells, the Snows, etc. Personally I hope it stays as is.

Author

Powerman

Date

2009-05-21T12:44:31-06:00

ID

148100

Comment

i disagree with your assessment of the policies Barack Obama is enacting WMartin. They actually seem to be very sound insofar as they are providing for stability and accountability in the midst of the worst economic crisis in over 50 years. The Obama administration, with the help of the Democratic legislative body, have appropriately used the TARP money of which the Bush administration squandered half of. In order to ensure some continuity of credit amidst the crumbling market, TARP money was used to set up government funds to back car loans and refinanced mortgages. It was also put toward car companies in order to facilitate a more measured and orderly slimming of an industry which would have certainly failed overnight causing shock waves throughout the nation. They have also managed to use that same money to prop up financial institutions while they orchestrate a steady winding out of the insane losses they accrued. The stimulus bill was a smart way to stack the cards at the beginning of this economic disaster. There were provisions to boost social safety nets so that states would not have to raise taxes or cut needed services as their unemployment rose. Needed investments were made in infrastructure and education (which have been largely ignored previously) allowing the government to strategically put money into the economy at a time when no one else is able to. They also made sure to have that money flow out over a period of years so as to provide a steady flow of demand during what is sure to be a few years of low growth as we unwind from the illusory GDP (and DOW) created by the packaging and repackaging of debt. As for the financial situation getting worse, it certainly will for a year or two. There is no way to avoid the unwinding needed after the extreme levels of debt created by Americans and the absolutely loony financial acrobatics performed by our institutions. However, i do not place much stock in the CBO projections of a 10 trillion dollar deficit in 10 years. That estimate is based on pretty dismal growth figures 5 and 10 years out. i personally have more faith in American ingenuity and the governing power exhibited by Obama. And anyway, the main deficit i saw our grandchildren inheriting was poor infrastructure, an energy economy which was not geared toward the future, a health care system which everyone agreed was only serving the insurance industry but no one could fix, an education system which was failing us, and an American Dream which had shifted from anyone can work hard and succeed to anyone can invest right and make bank. As we have seen the latter was a mirage. As far as claiming the Dems were the watchdogs, i can't agree. It was Republicans who made it possible for insurance companies to also become hedge funds. It was also the Republicans who fought to reduce the amount of capital insurance companies and banks had to have on hand. Leveraging yourself 30 to 1 is just not realistic. The government could have handled a bunch of deliquent home loans they had backed for poor people. The problem was no one knew where those loans were or how many times they had been leveraged. i also can't accept that recognizing that these problems originated before Jan. 20th is equivalent to excuses and whining. If the media and Republicans would stop acting like this was not true, the point would probably not have to be made. Powerman - Palin and Jindal seem to have already fallen out of favor...or perhaps they are being saved for closer to 2012 so they won't hurt themselves any further. As for Steele, he is too unoriginal in his thinking. The truth is that Republicans are making Limbaugh their leader by accepting his every statement as fact and apologizing to him when they disagree with him publically. Newt Gingrich is the character they have chosen to defend their health care platform on Meet the Press this Sunday. Cheney is probably the only one most of them are cringing about and i agree he is probably throwing his weight around and forcing himself on to the scene.

Author

daniel johnson

Date

2009-05-22T21:58:59-06:00

ID

148101

Comment

As for Obama being a moderate conservative... - he signed a bill today extending concealed gun carrying to national parks. - he has done everything in his power NOT to nationalize the banks. - he will continue the practice of preventive detention for some Guantanamo detainees which cannot be tried due to the botching of their cases and handling. - his governing style has emphasized states rights by allowing legislators to craft bills rather than handing over complete legislation penned by his administration. - he continually talks about personal responsibility - he has brought in industry leaders on every issue he deals with more often than he has brought in citizen groups. (of course i will say that he probably does this because he sides more with citizen groups personally and wants to be sure he is completely hearing their side)

Author

daniel johnson

Date

2009-05-22T22:06:33-06:00

ID

148118

Comment

Obama really needs a new label. i like Pragmatist, but it just isn't catchy enough. He is certainly a conservative progressive. It is a shame that Republicans have drug the label conservative through the mud. It can hardly be used to reference it's best ideals anymore.

Author

daniel johnson

Date

2009-05-23T08:54:05-06:00

ID

148124

Comment

We will have to agree to disagree Daniel. I am not sure where you see accountability in the actions that have been taken thus far, besides just blaming someone. There have been some hearings but nothing done to hold those responsible for their utter failure whether it be incompetence or outright fraud. As far as I know no one has even been fired (except the GM CEO) much less held criminally responsible for the fraud they perpetrated against the American people. Where is the reform to the system? So far most of the actions taken have been going to emormous lengths to preserve the status quo, whether by propping up companies that are too large to fail and doing nothing to correct the systemic failure of the institutions that were supposed to be watching them. I say again, the SAME PEOPLE are still guarding our economy. Only in Washington can one so pitifully fail and not lose their job. Ok, there was a credit card reform bill passed this week. Anything to address the cultural problem of living beyond our means that the reliance on credit and credit cards represent? Nope. All we hear is about how we need to thaw the credit markets so we can get back to normal. Well, the "normal" way of doing things is the path that led us to this point. The well of liquid capital wasn't frozen, it was almost empty. Our Dollars aren't based in wealth as much as they are based in confidence in our system. The only reason the paper in your wallet holds any value at all is the confidence that people have in the American system. Those that have shook the foundation of our system to it's core for their own greed need to be made examples of. The system that let us arrive at the precipice of disaster without correction or alarm needs to be meaningfully reformed publicly. All to restore the shaken confidence in the American capitalist economy. I voted for change. I actually had the audacity to hope that things could work differently. All of that is not to say that our new President won't do those things. In his defense, he has changed his policies in response to different ideas from his advisers. But the longer we continue without reform, the more the campaign promises of accountability and personal responsibility sound like just empty campaign rhetoric. And, in the case that they are forgotten, we will need a strong second party whether it is the Republicans or maybe a more reasonable party *facepalming at Ronni M's new blog about the Republicans* that could arise in their place to be able hold the President and the Democrats accountable to we, the people, that voted for them.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-05-23T10:45:44-06:00

ID

148128

Comment

You're certainly right that thus far, the main thrust of the administration has been to prop up the financial institutions without much discussion of exactly how those responsible will be held accountable. i tend to believe that they are just trying to put out the fire before taking stock of what caused it. i would keep an eye on Elizabeth Warren; watchdog of the TARP program. She has been very vocal about regulations which need to be changed. One significant policy which was spearheaded by her will be coming to fruition in the next few weeks; an actual Consumer Protection Agency. Obama has noted in his speeches on the financial crisis that unrealistic leveraging, short selling, and unregulated shadow credit markets were some of the elements which led us to where we find ourselves. i'll certainly be more comfortable when those things are codified into law. As you, i have been a little leery of Obama's talk of restoring the credit markets. But if you heard Tim Geithner on Meet the Press a few weeks ago, he actually responded to a question about how America could expect to change by stating that we would move from a culture who works to earn money, to a culture who works to fulfill themselves. i'm paraphrasing, but it was a pretty monumental thought to throw out there. i wouldn't lose faith just yet though. The credit card legislation was a good start. i'm looking for more too. i think we will see a lot of regulation. it will probably not totally satisfy me, but i think that is more a result of Obama's governing style which allows the legislation to filter through our elected representatives of which many have large financial institutions in their districts.

Author

daniel johnson

Date

2009-05-23T13:25:53-06:00

ID

148130

Comment

For a good idea of what national elections will look like if Cheney and company continue to run the party, maybe we should look at the Jackson mayoral election--hotly contested Democratic primary resulting in a presumptive winner before the general election. It doesn't get rid of contested elections or even ideological movements (what was Crisler's position if not equivalent to that of a Republican nominee?); it just shifts the focus from the election to the primary.

Author

Tom Head

Date

2009-05-23T15:35:15-06:00

ID

148134

Comment

i'm actually hoping that the shrinking of the Republican Party and the subsequent meaninglessness of their candidate will spawn some viable third party candidates...

Author

daniel johnson

Date

2009-05-24T02:08:09-06:00

ID

148137

Comment

Tom ~ one thing that concerns me about a scenario that finds the Democratic primary as the essential decider of the election is that it will water down the Progressive wing of the party. i'd much rather have sensible conservatives influencing the Republican candidate than having them pull the Democratic candidate further away from Progressive policy. Same goes for legislators. i'd rather see a balance of sensible conservative Republicans and progressive Democrats than extremist Republicans and moderate Democrats. i think that equation will ultimately yield less progressive policy. Of course, ideally i'd like to see Libertarians and the Green Party start getting broader representation in Congress.

Author

daniel johnson

Date

2009-05-24T08:33:05-06:00

ID

148140

Comment

That would be my main concern as well. The only benefit is that there would always be a core of conservatives who would only support an openly right-wing nominee, no matter what, which would mean that ideally their influence over the Democratic primary would be less than their influence over the general election is now. But in a perfect world, I agree--I'd like to see more parties, not fewer. And instant runoff voting so folks can support a third-party candidate without feeling guilty about it.

Author

Tom Head

Date

2009-05-24T08:50:02-06:00

ID

148155

Comment

Is there a strategy out there for achieving instant run-off voting or any group making a serious push for such?

Author

daniel johnson

Date

2009-05-25T08:04:21-06:00

ID

148156

Comment

Ross Perot used to talk about it every election cycle, then Ralph Nader did. But I don't think either major party's leadership really wants to see it.

Author

Tom Head

Date

2009-05-25T08:29:56-06:00