[vmarks]

This is an opportunity.

We have before us the opportunity to provide criticism and advice in a way that democrats, liberals, leftists of all flavors did not during the past eight years.

What this means is, there should be no cause for conservative versions of the attempt to name a sewer plant after the American President, tired refrains like Bushhitler, celebrity outbursts, creepy 'documentaries' (Moore, Stone, etc.), or the other things that have cheapened politics more than usual.

Criticism should be offered in unified pro-American tones, rather than anti-Obama screeds.

That's what I want to believe.

Do not mistake this as a call for moderation. Moderate Republicanism has lost. Moderation in defense of justice is no virtue.

What we've witnessed is Chicago-style politics - where the number of mouthpieces shouting nonsense drowns out the respectful and logical argument.

The question is, will any reticence be viewed incorrectly as weakness?
Is 'attack, attack, attack' the only way forward?

I say 'no.' Conservatives must state our plans in humor and grace, with boldness. Telling the truth with love beats the vinegar of 'attack.'

Telling a harsh truth is going to be necessary, but it must be done without descending into the pit of madness we've seen exhibited in the past 8 years.

Barack Obama is my president of the United States. I couldn't care less where he was born, what his name is, how old he is, or the color of his skin. He's not black. He's not white. He's not Asian-American or Mexican. He's not Chavez's brother or Islamic. I don't see Americans as members of groups. I see individual human beings. It is his ideas I am terrifically, tremendously worried about.

[stumblinmike]

I admire your sincere pledge, however the circumstances are a tad different. Bush had a united country after 9/11, said he was a uniter, then told anyone who didn't agree with him to pound sand. His secrecy in all aspects of governing, his administrations view that any disagreement with policy were tantamount to treason, and on and on, clearly make him a strong contender for worst president ever! I welcome your constructive criticism of our marvelous new president-elect. I think you will have few opportunities to assist this wonderful man!

[ironknee]

and i said,



alredy

[stumblinmike]

I like Nelson...

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

This is an opportunity.

We have before us the opportunity to provide criticism and advice in a way that democrats, liberals, leftists of all flavors did not during the past eight years.

What this means is, there should be no cause for conservative versions of the attempt to name a sewer plant after the American President, tired refrains like Bushhitler, celebrity outbursts, creepy 'documentaries' (Moore, Stone, etc.), or the other things that have cheapened politics more than usual.

Criticism should be offered in unified pro-American tones, rather than anti-Obama screeds.

That's what I want to believe.

Noble words, but unfortunately, many of your colleagues on the right are already up to the very tricks you are decrying. Just today, John Derbyshire of NRO was comparing Obama's community service goals to Hitler's concentration camps, and Stalin's gulags. Seriously. And we're just 3 days in, with nary an oath of office in sight.

But let me hit you with another persepective.

While it's noble to wish that we could agree to disagree respectfully, I also see a bit of the "liberals do that nasty down and dirty stuff, not us" in your post. Were you not around during the Clinton years, when Bill Clinton was accused of everything under the sun, including running drug cartels, having dozens of people murdered gangland-style, running an actual brothel out of the White House (no, not referring to Monica - an actual prostitution ring), and on and on?

The truth is, no one side has a monopoly on divisive, corrosive behavior when someone on the other side is occupying the White House. The right did it when Carter was in office. The left returned the favor when Reagan and Bush I were in office. The right went into full meltdown mode when Clinton was in office. The left were back at it when Bush II took office. Etc. Etc. With this kind of recent history, I would love for things to be civil, and have a "loyal opposition" with reasoned criticism, but I just can't see it happening. Call me cynical. I fully expect the nastiness to begin right now, in fact I'm surprised we haven't already seen an "Obama Death List" that supposedly chronicles all the people who have some relation to Obama who have died under "mysterious circumstances". Oooo, scary!

So while I hope and pray that you keep your differences with the Obama Administration civil, I do not expect your ideological companions (or mine, for that matter) to follow this example. But your post gives me hope - perhaps the country may not be ready for the "loyal opposition" you are speaking of, but we could at least try to create that environment here in the PWL. We shall see.

[subego]

Originally Posted by vmarks 

What we've witnessed is Chicago-style politics - where the number of mouthpieces shouting nonsense drowns out the respectful and logical argument.

The question is, will any reticence be viewed incorrectly as weakness?
Is 'attack, attack, attack' the only way forward?

I say 'no.'

[Condescending attack before presentation of "no attack" creed weakens overall argument, suggest rewrite. - ed.]

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man 

Noble words, but unfortunately, many of your colleagues on the right are already up to the very tricks you are decrying. Just today, John Derbyshire of NRO was comparing Obama's community service goals to Hitler's concentration camps, and Stalin's gulags. Seriously. And we're just 3 days in, with nary an oath of office in sight.

But let me hit you with another persepective.

While it's noble to wish that we could agree to disagree respectfully, I also see a bit of the "liberals do that nasty down and dirty stuff, not us" in your post. Were you not around during the Clinton years, when Bill Clinton was accused of everything under the sun, including running drug cartels, having dozens of people murdered gangland-style, running an actual brothel out of the White House (no, not referring to Monica - an actual prostitution ring), and on and on?

The truth is, no one side has a monopoly on divisive, corrosive behavior when someone on the other side is occupying the White House. The right did it when Carter was in office. The left returned the favor when Reagan and Bush I were in office. The right went into full meltdown mode when Clinton was in office. The left were back at it when Bush II took office. Etc. Etc. With this kind of recent history, I would love for things to be civil, and have a "loyal opposition" with reasoned criticism, but I just can't see it happening. Call me cynical. I fully expect the nastiness to begin right now, in fact I'm surprised we haven't already seen an "Obama Death List" that supposedly chronicles all the people who have some relation to Obama who have died under "mysterious circumstances". Oooo, scary!

So while I hope and pray that you keep your differences with the Obama Administration civil, I do not expect your ideological companions (or mine, for that matter) to follow this example. But your post gives me hope - perhaps the country may not be ready for the "loyal opposition" you are speaking of, but we could at least try to create that environment here in the PWL. We shall see.

Well said, I like you!

Here's how I feel: I don't care whether I agree with you or not, in fact I welcome being challenged, but I'm absolutely and totally fed up with all of the bottom feeding idiotic "arguments" along the lines of most of the things in my GML. vmarks, if you want to lead the way in getting people to make well thought out, intelligent and focused arguments, I welcome that!

I also agree that many on the left do the same thing, it's just that it's a little more identifiable and coordinated on the right now, at least in here.