The morning after the morning after
Yesterday the boy toy and I went out for a celebratory brunch at Denny's, and later in the afternoon I ended up taking a short nap.
(OK, so it was part celebratory and partly because the boy toy wanted to try out the "Hobbit" menu. We both recommend the pumpkin pancakes.)
Seriously, I know that I haven't been commenting much about politics in this election cycle. Someone in my precarious financial situation is bound to be more focused on survival than someone who's observing from a more comfortable, stable spot. I think that comes straight out of something I learned in Psychology 101 or one of those other nearly forgotten "core courses" in college.
A few interesting links I've been reading over the last couple of days, some thanks to
twistedchick and others I found on my own:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/11/why-republican-party-needs-ditch-happy-meal-conservatism-if-they-want-win
http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/6593/the_great_religious_realignment
http://www.religiondispatches.org/books/sexandgender/6452/preaching_to_the_%E2%80%98moveable_middle%E2%80%99%3A_bishop_gene_robinson_on_marriage_equality_and_the_election
http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/joannabrooks/6594/the_speech_mitt_romney_never_gave
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-burnett/top-ten-reasons-romney-lost_b_2087664.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/republicans-face-murky-political-future-in-increasingly-diverse-us/2012/11/07/3b71e4f2-28e7-11e2-96b6-8e6a7524553f_story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/gay-marriage-republicans-should-move-on/2012/11/07/5eaf988c-28ed-11e2-96b6-8e6a7524553f_blog.html
(If any of these links don't survive my cutting and pasting, please let me know and I'll fix them.)
Bottom line is that, even though I consider myself a liberal Democrat, I would be happy to see the Republicans ditch the wingnuts and become a more diverse, if still conservative, party. I don't think the one-party-only mentality is good for small-d democracy.
Reasonable people can debate the size of government, the priorities of government, how much money should be allocated to various priorities, etc. etc. etc. and hash out their differences and come to a reasonable compromise solution in the best interests of the country. Unreasonable people hurl gigantic flaming buckets of dog poo at their "enemies" (i.e., people who don't think exactly like them) and then expect the enemies to vote for them out of shock and awe.
In my humble opinion, the GOP needs to take the fringe jobs out to the woodpile for a talk (is that the right metaphor?). If the tea partiers are going to be that intransigent, then maybe it's time to make the tea party into a formal Tea Party and get their own ballot spot for their purists. Because most Americans don't share their raging anger.
It's human nature to react negatively to "my way or the highway" thinking. Heck, I react negatively to that no matter who is thinking that. In 1990, when John Silber got the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in Massachusetts, I voted for the moderate Republican candidate, William Weld. I'd seen Silber up close and personal during my BU days, saw his intellectual arrogance, and refused to help inflict his attitude on the general populace.
Will the Republicans go back to the days of (gasp) Reagan and his friendship with Tip O'Neill, or Ted Kennedy's friendship with Orrin Hatch? Probably not if Mitch McConnell (ugh) has his way. Maybe he's afraid of the tea partiers challenging him in the GOP primary in 2014. Sucks to be him, I guess.
Here's one last interesting essay directed to the "right wing fanatics who put party before country, conspiracy before reality, and ideology before science and intellect." If you continue to put party before country, don't expect the country to agree.
This entry was originally posted at http://luscious-purple.dreamwidth.org/107067.html. Please feel free to comment either here or there.
(OK, so it was part celebratory and partly because the boy toy wanted to try out the "Hobbit" menu. We both recommend the pumpkin pancakes.)
Seriously, I know that I haven't been commenting much about politics in this election cycle. Someone in my precarious financial situation is bound to be more focused on survival than someone who's observing from a more comfortable, stable spot. I think that comes straight out of something I learned in Psychology 101 or one of those other nearly forgotten "core courses" in college.
A few interesting links I've been reading over the last couple of days, some thanks to
twistedchick and others I found on my own:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/11/why-republican-party-needs-ditch-happy-meal-conservatism-if-they-want-win
http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/6593/the_great_religious_realignment
http://www.religiondispatches.org/books/sexandgender/6452/preaching_to_the_%E2%80%98moveable_middle%E2%80%99%3A_bishop_gene_robinson_on_marriage_equality_and_the_election
http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/joannabrooks/6594/the_speech_mitt_romney_never_gave
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-burnett/top-ten-reasons-romney-lost_b_2087664.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/republicans-face-murky-political-future-in-increasingly-diverse-us/2012/11/07/3b71e4f2-28e7-11e2-96b6-8e6a7524553f_story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/gay-marriage-republicans-should-move-on/2012/11/07/5eaf988c-28ed-11e2-96b6-8e6a7524553f_blog.html
(If any of these links don't survive my cutting and pasting, please let me know and I'll fix them.)
Bottom line is that, even though I consider myself a liberal Democrat, I would be happy to see the Republicans ditch the wingnuts and become a more diverse, if still conservative, party. I don't think the one-party-only mentality is good for small-d democracy.
Reasonable people can debate the size of government, the priorities of government, how much money should be allocated to various priorities, etc. etc. etc. and hash out their differences and come to a reasonable compromise solution in the best interests of the country. Unreasonable people hurl gigantic flaming buckets of dog poo at their "enemies" (i.e., people who don't think exactly like them) and then expect the enemies to vote for them out of shock and awe.
In my humble opinion, the GOP needs to take the fringe jobs out to the woodpile for a talk (is that the right metaphor?). If the tea partiers are going to be that intransigent, then maybe it's time to make the tea party into a formal Tea Party and get their own ballot spot for their purists. Because most Americans don't share their raging anger.
It's human nature to react negatively to "my way or the highway" thinking. Heck, I react negatively to that no matter who is thinking that. In 1990, when John Silber got the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in Massachusetts, I voted for the moderate Republican candidate, William Weld. I'd seen Silber up close and personal during my BU days, saw his intellectual arrogance, and refused to help inflict his attitude on the general populace.
Will the Republicans go back to the days of (gasp) Reagan and his friendship with Tip O'Neill, or Ted Kennedy's friendship with Orrin Hatch? Probably not if Mitch McConnell (ugh) has his way. Maybe he's afraid of the tea partiers challenging him in the GOP primary in 2014. Sucks to be him, I guess.
Here's one last interesting essay directed to the "right wing fanatics who put party before country, conspiracy before reality, and ideology before science and intellect." If you continue to put party before country, don't expect the country to agree.
This entry was originally posted at http://luscious-purple.dreamwidth.org/107067.html. Please feel free to comment either here or there.