David Broder's an idiot sometimes: reviewing latest op-ed

Independence Days

By David S. Broder
Thursday, September 21, 2006; Page A25

American politics reached a critical turn last week. The revolt of several Republican senators against President Bush's insistence on a free hand in treating terrorist detainees signaled the emergence of an independent force in elections and government.

This movement is not new, but the moral scale of the issue -- torture -- and the implications for both constitutional and international law give it an epic dimension, even if it is ultimately settled by compromise.

The senators involved -- John McCain, Lindsey Graham and John Warner -- were also instrumental in forming the "Gang of 14," the bipartisan bloc that seized control of the Senate last year and wrote the compromise that prevented a drastic change in the filibuster rule that otherwise would have triggered a bitter partisan divide.

These are not ordinary men. McCain, from Arizona, is probably the leading candidate for the 2008 presidential nomination. Graham, from South Carolina, is the star among the younger Republican senators. Warner, from Virginia, embodies the essence of traditional Reagan conservatism: patriotism, support for the military, civility.

They were joined in their opposition to Bush's call for extraordinary interrogation techniques by Colin Powell, the former secretary of state and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who is still, despite the controversies over his role in Iraq policy, one of the most admired Americans.

That these Republicans -- and others -- were ready to join the Democrats in rejecting Bush's plan caused the White House to scramble for alternatives and House Republican leaders to postpone a scheduled vote. The revolt goes well beyond three men.

What it really signals is a new movement in this country -- what you could rightly call the independence party. Its unifying theme can be found in the Declaration of Independence's language when Jefferson invoked "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind."

When Powell wrote that Bush's demand would compound the world's "doubt [about] the moral basis of our fight against terrorism," he was appealing to Jefferson's standard.

It is a standard this administration has flagrantly rejected. Bush was elected twice, over Democrats Al Gore and John Kerry, whose know-it-all arrogance rankled Midwesterners such as myself. The country thought Bush was a pleasant, down-to-earth guy who would not rock the boat. Instead, swayed by some inner impulse or the influence of Dick Cheney, he has proved to be lawless and reckless. He started a war he cannot finish, drove the government into debt and repeatedly defied the Constitution.

This paragraph,"Now, however, you can see the independence party forming -- on both sides of the aisle. They are mobilizing to resist not only Bush but also the extremist elements in American society -- the vituperative, foul-mouthed bloggers on the left" This in my opinion is just another example of Washington out of touch. Sure I'm new to blogging but throwing everyone who has a computer and an opinion on the state of affairs, in with the "left," is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The left according to me is defending the principles of Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, John Kennedy and Thomas Jefferson. My great-uncle was an entertainer employed by the Kennedys during Jack's Senate campaign, Tip O'Neil helped get another great-uncle a job and he sent flowers to his funeral and that of my great-aunt's(I'm descended from New-Englanders). These politicians I believe were what makes America great. And there's dozens and dozens of people who think the same way. That doesen't mean the left is in cahoots with anarchists and communists. This whole country as the Unitarian Rev. Theodore Parker would note, is born out of anger-Boston Tea Party, we've had a bloody civil war that came to be about freedom, we've had a women's sufferage movement, a Civil Rights Movement, We've had a Beat Movement and we've had a Reagan Revolution. All these and more are basically good people disagreeing with the status quo. That's what I am and that's what a lot of these left bloggers are. I am a blogger that supports Broder's evil left bloggers and yet at the same time I'm rooting for the Republicans like John Warner,my senator, like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Olympia Snowe, and former Secretary of State Colin Powell.  I wish Colin Powell paid more attention to his Powell doctrine and said that the Bush administration is just wrong attacking Iraq, but in my eyes, he's redemed himself by publicly siding with these Republican dissidents. Broder and the media make descent people so cartoonish. Other than that, its a good article.

Now, however, you can see the independence party forming -- on both sides of the aisle. They are mobilizing to resist not only Bush but also the extremist elements in American society -- the vituperative, foul-mouthed bloggers on the left and the doctrinaire religious extremists on the right who would convert their faith into a whipping post for their opponents.

The center is beginning to fight back. Michael Bloomberg, the Republican mayor of New York, is holding a fundraiser for Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Democrat running as an independent against the bloggers' favorite, Ned Lamont.

His election is important, as is Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee's in Rhode Island, because both would signal that independence is a virtue to be rewarded.

Joe Lieberman's election to the Senate "important," is bullcrap. Ned Lamont's election to the Senate is the more important one, and its again with making cartoonish figures.  Yes Lamont is against the war, but he's from Connecticut, I'll get to that in a minute, and so is the majority half of the country.  Conneticut is part of New England. And it was New England that was opposed to the war of 1812. Why am I bring this up, ok throughout the war of 1812, New England as represented by Daniel Webster, was opposed to the war because it hurt the local economy.  New England was also a refuge for Federalists and the Federalists held a convention at around the end of the war. It was called the Hartford Convention and it wanted to breakaway from the US. Yes, a good forty years before the Confederacy was formed, this alternative Confederacy was trying to get established.

So long story short, there's a long history of New England not liking wars-or at least some of them. Now beside Lamont being against the war, he is for universal healthcare. He gave coverage to his workers. Do you Mr. Broder know what its like to live without healthcare coverage? No, otherwise you wouldn't be supporting Mr. lobbiest himself, Joe Lieberman. Lieberman is against health care coverage of any kind because its a populist idea that Washington like the DLC,of which Lieberman is a member, likes to sweep under the rug.  In the end I believe Ned Lamont will win because he's becoming a fuller candidate and not just a one issue wonder.

Similarly important, though less publicized, is Republican Sen. Mike DeWine's race in Ohio. DeWine is an ally of McCain & Co. in forming a center for the Senate; his opponent, Democratic Rep. Sherrod Brown, is a loud advocate of protectionist policies that offer a false hope of solving our trade and job problems.

A "decent respect" begins at home, with an acknowledgment of public opinion. Americans are saying no to excess greenhouse gases and no to open borders; yes to embryonic stem cell research, yes to a path to earned citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants and yes to a living wage. Six more states are likely to approve increases in the minimum wage through ballot initiatives in November.

A congressional election with lots of new faces and a scare for many returning veterans is important as a signal to next year's likely leaders such as Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell and Democratic Rep. Nancy Pelosi that they can't design their strategies simply to satisfy the most rabid of their party's extremes; they have to govern down the center and work across party lines.

And that in turn would set the stage for a 2008 election in which the two branches of the independence movement -- Republican and Democratic -- could compete in a campaign that would, for a change, show a "decent respect" for the intelligence of the American people.

davidbroder@washpost.com
http://www.washingto...

Comments