We here at Raising Kaine are critical of Jerry Kilgore, and we don't make any apologies for it. Our criticism is not intended to bash him nor condemn him, but rather to point out problems with his policies through analysis and judgment, in order to open them up to dialogue for the greater good.We are worried about Virginia under the leadership of Jerry Kilgore. We worry that Kilgore's policies and partisanship will endanger the health of our state. We worry that he is unwilling to have his ideas challenged, and that if elected, he will do whatever he intends to do, no matter what the results, and no matter how much he fails the citizens of Virginia.
Maybe Jerry Kilgore doesn't understand the value of criticism. For instance, when we criticize him for ignoring the concept that people should be prohibited from purchasing large amounts of ingredients used in the production of methamphetamines, it is not because we dislike Jerry Kilgore, but because we dislike the distribution of methamphetamines in our communities.
Why are Republicans like Jerry Kilgore so afraid to be criticized, anyway? If they are supposed to represent the citizens and to be accountable for their actions, then criticism is intended to get them to do their job better. If they don't listen to criticism, it prevents them from thinking critically about their own decisions, and they will never fix their mistakes, if they won't acknowledge what they are in the first place.
While most politicians take criticism as a sign that their policies might need to be rethought, it seems that when this new breed of neo-conservative Republicans are criticized, they take it to as proof that they are absolutely correct!
If members of their own party criticize them, they find ways to criticize the criticizer, and drive him or her out of office. This is the same type of response people encounter with drug addicts at an intervention who try to discredit their accuser to deflect blame from themselves. This action makes their mistakes immaterial, and the addict blameless, but does nothing to solve the actual problem.
This is the nature of the neo-conservative mind. They are so completely enveloped in their own sense of self-righteousness that they take any form of criticism as reinforcement of their own opinion, and continue to make bad choices, no matter what the result. This means that Jerry Kilgore may never change, no matter how much we criticize him. Even if a majority of the citizens of Virginia stand against his policies to protect polluters and use education funds on his pet projects, he will still find willing supporters like Pat Robertson and George W. Bush who will support him in his wildest failures.
If you want accountability, elect Tim Kaine. Even if you don't like everything he stands for, you can still get him to listen to reason. Unlike Jerry Kilgore, Tim Kaine has traveled the state giving speeches at town hall meetings with diverse crowds of Virginians. He has encouraged his opponents to attend and to ask him tough questions -- even to criticize him -- so that he can better understand the concerns of ALL the citizens he wishes to represent.
Tim Kaine knows he isn't always right. As a leader with many years of experience in public office, he has had his ups and downs, made tough choices, and taken his share of criticism. But he has worked hard to get results, even if it meant going against his political beliefs. He has helped balance the budget, fight crime, improve education, and help lead Virginia back to being the best-managed state in the Nation.
At town-hall meetings, Tim Kaine is forced to apologize to the audience for the absence of Jerry Kilgore. He says that he is sorry that Jerry refused to be there to engage in a dialogue, because he prefers to take criticism and tough questions in person, rather than from a website, a press release, or a little decoder ring left on automobiles when no one else is around.
If Jerry Kilgore is unwilling to take criticism, or to have his ideas challenged in a public forum, than you have to question his ability to govern. Governors, more than anyone, face criticism and scrutiny far more than they take compliments. Ask Mark Warner, who has a 74% approval rating, if he hears more criticism than flattery, and he will likely tell you he takes more criticism - especially from Jerry Kilgore. Unfortunately, Jerry Kilgore refuses to face his opponents in public, so Tim Kaine is left to carry on the debate by himself, talking to voters and taking tough questions, while Jerry cowers behind his campaign staff avoiding any tough questions that might expose him as the out-of-touch, partisan hack he really is.
Isn't it strange that someone who wants to take on a position as important as Governor of Virginia is unwilling to hear the concerns of the voters? Isn't it strange that he is unwilling to defend himself or his beliefs in a public forum?
We believe that these actions raise a serious red flag, because when our leaders refuse to take criticism, our system of government fails, creating mistrust in the very institutions we depend on for our livelihood. Tim Kaine has proven himself willing to take responsibility for his actions. He is willing to hear the voices of opposition and criticism on the campaign trail as well as in the Governor's mansion, so that he can work with his opponents to make compromises that can get the job done. Taking criticism and defending your beliefs is what a good leader does, and if Jerry Kilgore is unwilling to do so, than he shouldn't be running for Governor, and shouldn't be elected to represent the great Commonwealth of Virginia.
It would just be too much for his delicate nature.
... the(Josh - 4/4/2006 11:28:03 PM)
... the most central feature of conservatism is deference: a psychologically internalized attitude on the part of the common people that the aristocracy are better people than they are. Modern-day liberals often theorize that conservatives use "social issues" as a way to mask economic objectives, but this is almost backward: the true goal of conservatism is to establish an aristocracy, which is a social and psychological condition of inequality. Economic inequality and regressive taxation, while certainly welcomed by the aristocracy, are best understood as a means to their actual goal, which is simply to be aristocrats. More generally, it is crucial to conservatism that the people must literally love the order that dominates them. Of course this notion sounds bizarre to modern ears, but it is perfectly overt in the writings of leading conservative theorists such as Burke. Democracy, for them, is not about the mechanisms of voting and office-holding. In fact conservatives hold a wide variety of opinions about such secondary formal matters. For conservatives, rather, democracy is a psychological condition. People who believe that the aristocracy rightfully dominates society because of its intrinsic superiority are conservatives; democrats, by contrast, believe that they are of equal social worth. Conservatism is the antithesis of democracy. This has been true for thousands of years. What is Conservatism by Philip Agre
The neo-conservatives, like Jerry Kilgore and George W. Bush will brook no dissent simply because they believe that those who would dissent are below them. The position of the Aristocrat is to be above, every action exists to reinforce a social class structure. Anything that calls that class structure into question is violently, and endlessly attacked until it is destroyed.
The purpose of conservatism is to create Aristocrats. Jerry Kilgore will brook no dissent, simply because he sees himself as better than those he would rule.