We’re Not in Lake Wobegon Anymore

G. - You ask us to be more introspective, to stop stereotyping Republicans, to temper our comments with love. You tell us you used to be a Democrat, but you don’t tell us why you are now a Republican, though it is implied that this has something to do with your religion. (If I’ve guessed wrong about that, forgive me.)

You are correct that Republicans embody as much diversity as those in the opposing camp. However, if you choose to identify yourself as a Republican, you will be identified with your party’s position on the issues that have been under discussion here. If you do not personally support these positions, then say so and tell us which are the ones with which you disagree.

I know it’s unpleasant for Republicans to confront their own public image when they step outside the confines of their group. I have seen this in my canvassing for Kerry. The anger of ex-Republicans is not with Clinton or Liberals or Kerry - it’s with their former party and its current leadership. They feel, evidently, even more betrayed than your garden variety liberal, as indeed they should.

You sound as if you are a pricipled person who has tried to live a life in line with his beliefs, and you have been willing to make financial sacrifices to do so. It seems that you will vote for a President who speaks to your principles, even though his actions and leadership may in fact utterly contravene those same ideals. That is very difficult for many of us to understand, thus the admittedly insulting term of “Kool-Aid Drinker.”

If you can explain how the actions of this administration fit with your world view, or how you have changed your world view to reconcile it with the world as we now see it under the current leadership, I’m sure many would be as fascinated as I to read that.

For the sake of mutual understanding, tell us more. Tell us why. Tell us how not to be afraid of you and for you and your Party.

Richard Nixon was the last Republican leader to feel a Christian obligation toward the poor?  No—what he really means is that he thinks that Richard Nixon was the last Republican leader to think that it is acceptable to use the power of the United States federal government, which includes the power to put you in jail for not complying with the tax code, to continue to redistribute income from those that earn a lot by virtue of their talents, skills, abilities and hard work, to those that don’t earn a lot.

To follow up on my previous comments—why does a Christian obligation to the poor translate into (increasingly) progressive income tax rates?  I think that a Christian obligation to the poor is a private matter, not a matter for income redistribution through the federal tax code.

Quick note to Joanne Roush: go back to the beginning of Garrison’s article, then look at the “Author Bio” box down the right column. This essay is from Garrison’s new book, “Homegrown Democrat”. You might be overdue for an Emily Latella moment, n’est pas?

The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few is the death knell of democracy?  I don’t know enough about history to say if this is true or not, however I suspect that if this has happened it is because the democracy was in name only and there was corruption at the top.  This “concentration of wealth” arguement is not valid justification for (increasingly) progressive income taxation.

Main problem is that we need a 2ns party let alone a 3rd party. Democrats are almost same as republicans in many ways with the exception of few femine,gay and in favour of evil trial lawyers. Howard dean was thrown out and Clintonism is there. Kerry is almost same, rather more stupid as compared to W. Pity pity pity.
He should have chosedn Ghephard as running mate rather than Edwards and another stupidity that he went after McCain without making sure that he would say yes.

One last comment—“...patriotism shouldn’t prevent people from asking hard questions of the man who was purportedly in charge of national security at the time”?  I agree, however using the word “purportedly” is a cheap shot at President Bush and Republicans.  Which Party’s president was in office when 1) the first WTC bombing happened, 2) American embassies in Africa were blown up and 3) the USS Cole was bombed?  I don’t think Democrats should get into discussions about “purportedly” being in charge of National Security.  Their record as a party is not good in this regard.

Richard Nixon felt a “Christian obligation?” Personally, it sickens me that he had the gall to call himself a Quaker.  The man was a criminal.  He should have been sharing a prison cell with Ronald Reagan!

Note to Stephanie Jacobs—with all due respect, and this comment comes in full acknowledgement of Watergate and Iran-Contra, yelling that Nixon and Reagan should have shared a prison cell doesn’t help anyone.  I could yell that Clinton should have been in there with them, but this doens’t help anyone either.  What we need is substantive debate on the important issues facing our country, like what we’re going to do about Social Security and Medicare, and how to deal with the fact that so many around the world want to do us harm.

I can’t help myself—this is too easy—is it not ironic that, in an article slamming Republicans, Keillor lauds Eisenhower for declining to get involved in Vietnam, when it was two Democrats—Kennedy and Johnson—who DID us involved in Vietnam?  And—more irony—it was the Republican Nixon who oversaw the end of the war.

One more thing—enough with the (implied) analogies between Vietnam and Iraq.  There are many many differences, but the most important is this: Republican Bush fought the Iraq war to win and did, while Democrat Johnson fought the Vietnam war with no plan to win other than really wanting to and thus lost.  Oh yeah—one more important, and related difference—American casualty total in Iraq: under 1,000, American casualty in Vietnam: 50,000.

I acknowledge that the jury is still out on post-war Iraq, but let’s stop equating the Iraq war and Vietnam war.

Thank you, Garrison Keillor; in particular, thank you for the last paragraph. It gives me courage to speak out, when I am much more comfortable not speaking out.

I wish a Prary Home Companion could do a skit about this! It is profoundly serious. You, as you often have, hit the nail on the head. The problem supercedes the Presidency. It must be a message that voters send out at all levels of legislation and judiciary. The real issue is letting folks know that THEY HAVE BEEN HAD! We need to get the apathetic angry enough to vote.

Jim Tuffield, San Diego

Thank you, thank you, Mr. Keillor for having the courage to write this and helping me dredge up the courage to speak up in my own small universe. Perhaps if enough of us do so, we will be successful in removing the current administration from office.

While I have only read a few posts here, I have still to read an argument from anyone that amounts to anything more than “I hate Geroge Bush and all Republicans because they’re bad people”.

To answer Justin Hornburg’s belief that it was two Democratic President’s Kennedy and Johnson that got us into the Viet Nam quagmire let me state that it was in fact a direct result of the Marshall Plan which began in the days after the conclusion of WWII. “In 1949 Truman and Acheson institued a program of direct U.S. Military and economic aid to the French effort in Indochina. Eisenhower and Dulles made the war even more evidently an American cause. Whereas under Truman the French still bore the bulk of the war costs, eisenhower upped both the share of the costs (to 80%) and the volume of Washington rhetoric. Eisenhower also authorized the dispatch of U.S. ground crews when AParis said it could not fulfill it’s own airpower requirements. Most significantly, when France decided to withdraw militarily from Indiochina in 1955, Eisenhower oprdered American advisors to take their place.” This is fronm page 279 of THE IRONY OF VIETNAM: THE SYSTEM WORKED written in 1979 by Gelb and Betts of the Brookings Institute.

Anyone that would like a concise and complete history of what happened and why we were involved in South East Asia in that period will find the answers in this book. My qualifications: I was an 11B40 and for those like Mr. Bush who have no knowledge of what that means, simply stated, I was a Lightweapons Infantryman in Viet Nam from April 1967 to April 1968. I earned the princely sum of .23 1/2 per hour 24/7 to kill the enemy as identified by my governments. In the ensuing years I have read over 400 books on Viet Nam trying to figure out what I was a part of and what happened to me because of it. 

All I ask is that people check your facts before you make a statement that is untrue.

To Lyle Shargent—I defer to your obviously superior knowledge of the history of Vietnam.  It was the author of the article (Keillor) who wrote that Eisenhower “… declined to rescue the French colonial army in Vietnam ...” This statement by the author would appear to be in contradiction to what you believe to be the truth.  It is interesting that the author is falsely building up past Republicans expressly for the purpose of tearing down current ones.

I thank you for your comment and the considerate way in which you made it.

Garrison Keillor is longing for the good old days when, for over forty years of being the minority party in the House and Senate, Republicans were content to eat the table scraps of their Democrat superiors. They were indeed “token Republicans”. As long as they stood in front of the cameras and smiled and said nice things about Democrat legislation, Republicans might hope to sit in on a committee hearing or two, perhaps get invited to a golf outing once in a while. It wasn’t a bad gig, really. Republicans didn’t have to have any ideas of their own (let alone fight for them), or, God forbid,(*gasp) be “confrontational”. They only had to be grateful and blissfully “bipartisan”.

But at some point (oh, probably in Bill Clinton’s first term) something went terribly wrong in the political culture of our society. I’m not sure if it was when Clinton announced that he was putting his wife (an unelected and unaccountable non-public figure beholdent to no one) in charge of socializing the American Health care system, or if it was the looming specter of higher and higher taxes (for those who actually pay them) to subsidize all of those wonderful social programs he though we all wanted.

Whatever the reason, American voters were given an alternative to the status quo and in 1994 elected a majority of Republicans to both the House and the Senate, AND THEY CONTINUE TO DO SO TO THIS DAY. So, it seems that Garrison Keillor doesn’t really have a problem with Republicans so much as Garrison Keillor has a problem with democracy and the choices of Americans. After all, Republicans have always been Republicans. It’s the American people that said “Enough!”.

We will all wait in breathless anticipation for Garrison Keillor’s next essay. Perhaps by then he will grow a spine and call the entire American electorate ”racist hairy-backed fundamentalist bullies with Bibles” instead of merely alluding to it.

You must be all of 15 years old. Read more, please.

Justin thank you for your comments. One final thought on VN and your last posting it was in fact Congress that dictated to Eisenhower not to rescue the French as Dien Bien Phu. The leaders in Congress required a unilateral intervention consisting of American Allies of which none were to be found. Only later was America able to drum up a few allies from South East Asia to meet Congresses requirements. Thailand, Camobia, Laos, Australia not many countries who had troops to put in the field or monies to help offset the cost of the war. Does any of this sound vaguely familiar to the current situation. There are many parallels to Iraq as to be very disquieting.

Good point, Lyle.  Again, your superior knowledge is obvious (and impressive).

As for Brad’s comment on Susan Dwightman’s post (at least I think his comment is in reaction to Dwightman’s post)—this is classic—Susan presents a reasoned argument and Brad’s reaction is to belittle her.  I harken back to one of my prior posts—where is the substantive objection to Bush beyond “I hate him”?

Justin,

There are now several hundred posts on this thread, beginning on Thursday. They are all available for you to read, and I would really recommend that you do so, rather than reading a “few posts” and then drawing sweeping generalizations about the posters from your small sample.

Many of the posts are very cogent and well-written, and are not one-dimensional. A number of them (including my first one) are from people who have at one time or another identified themselves as Republicans but, for many reasons (including those articulated by Garrison), do not now so identify or at least now have decided not to vote for W in order to bring the Republican Party back toward its own center.

Unlike some of the posters, I have not given up completely on the Republican party. If it were not for Senators Snow, Collins, Chafee, Campbell, (sometimes) McCain and others (depending on the issue), the radical changes in our body politic that Bush’s handlers envisioned would have prevailed. And we would all be the worse for that.

So, again, take the time that it will take you to read what has gone before and then comment. Unlike Lyle, you don’t have to face live fire and then read 400 books to try to make sense of the madness that our foreign policy sometimes thrusts good Americans into. You can just spend a few hours reading and then thinking about what has come before in this thread. I do think you will learn something from that exercise, including that your own political colleagues have not hesitated to be dishonest, scatalogical and simplistic in their responses on this thread. Civil discourse, and resolute action based on principle—regardless of political persuasion—is what will get us out of our current mess. Fortunately, God equipped us with one mouth and two ears to aid that process. 

And thanks, Lyle, for your service —then and now. Unlike the Swift Boat Apologists for Chickenhawk Draft-Dodgers, this Kerry supporter respects and is grateful for all veterans who put themselves in harm’s way. And like many posters on this thread, we believe that the best way we can support our troops who are in harm’s way tonight is to bring them home safely ... and soon.

Again good point Justin. One of the problems with opposing views. I do laud anyone with passion either side but in a respectful way please. No one listens when you are shouting at each other. Point counter-point that is the American way. That is one of the precious gems we are losing under the Patriot Act as it is written. When I have a Bill O’Reilly shouting at me to shut up and I have the Attorney General of my country telling toi watch what I say and think and do then I who have fought for freedom have a huge problem with people like that. When the President of my country tells me that I am either for him or against him I have a problem with that. It is my right to disagree and to state that disagreement as provided for me in the Constitution. I would as Mr. Bush to abide by what our founding fathers gave to us in the future to guarantee our freedoms.The Bill of Rights, the Constitution and Democracy are woth fighting and dying for and some us have fought for them.

You earlier asked about the Christian obligation of redistribution of wealth through progressive income tax and what you should be asking is if a person receives many benifits from a country based on its ability to provide the atmosphere in which said individual is able to amass a considerable fortune should that individual not be expected to share with his/her country some of their bounty? It really is not a part of any religious abligation but a political one.

One last note you stated that it took a Republican President to end the conflict in Viet Nam. This is true so far as you realize that Nixon led the war efforts for 7 of it’s 10 years. 1969 through the conclusion in April 30, 1975. Personally I do not want to see us inviolved in Iraq for 10 years.

I thank you for your kind consideration of all this.

To Bernie Ellis—thanks for your reasoned comments and good points.  I will indeed take the time to read some of the other posts in this thread.  You are right to ask me to not make judgements based on such a small sample.

I do not generally apologize for Republicans, but I felt that Keillor’s writing demonized Republicans with too broad a brush and in many cases unfairly and inaccurately.  I personally do not wish to be identified as a Republican—I prefer “conservative”, but not in the sense that that term has been portrayed as just the opposite of “liberal”.

I too, commend Lyle and all who have served our country in the military.  I have not, however I do not believe that it is fair to characterize Bush and Cheney and others as Chickenhawks.  I believe the implication is that because they did not get shot at in combat that they should not make decisions to commit our troops to battle.  They have to—this is the job of the Executive Branch.  [We can argue about whether or not Bush pulled strings to get out of going to Vietnam (I’m sure his name and connection helped), but that was a long time ago and he has never made his Vietnam-era accomplishments his main selling points.] They are in a job and they have to do it to the best of their judgement.  Again—we can argue about whether or not we agree with their judgement, but let’s not stoop to name-calling.  Children do that—adults can make reasoned arguments and understand each others’ perspectives, even if they don’t agree.

Garrison,

Just want to say, Love your Radio Show, and Love NPR, you are one of the best storytellers around. I even laughed it up when you had Franken on talking about your book lines.

I am a Republican, who lives in Georgia, and lived in Massachusetts for 19 years and I still find you funny.

Even though you have a great talent for waxing poetic, and storytelling, I find you very short on abilities to protect this country from Al Quaeda or any future attacks.

One Question for you, when have you ever been bullied by a fundamentalist Bible Thumper? Just curious, and it might make for a funny talk episode on your radio program.

And this statement of yours “Republicans: The No.1 reason the rest of the world thinks we’re deaf, dumb and dangerous.” You really need to get out of your small pond of Wobegon and get a grip, and realize that making sweeping generalizations about Republicans, Christians, and Southerners really just makes you look mean spirited.

You are in luck, Mr. Keillor, Mark Twain is here in your very hour of need and he has some kind words for you, to guide you. Mark Twain is telling you “GOOD BREEDING CONSISTS IN CONCEALING HOW MUCH WE THINK OF OURSELVES AND HOW LITTLE WE THINK OF THE OTHER PERSON”.

Keep the Faith, Keep the Humor, and I look forward to the next time I listen to NPR and you are doing your radio show.

God Bless America, God Bless our Troops, God Bless our President!

The answer is fairly easy. The Republicans lost power for over 20 yrs. after Eisenhower and didn’t win it back until Reagan. After the intervening setbacks of Vietnam and the oil shocks, they grasped it with a vengeance, attracting the reactionary classes.

Isn’t it great that we can live in a country where we can communicate like this and say whatever we want to say.  Many, many have died for that right!  Let us not forget...Bush has…

I am an American!  Loyal, patriotic, freedom-loving, God loving, and a veteran.

Now, who the hell gives a DAMN what political party I belong to?

I am an AMERICAN!  So are you all!  That should be first and foremost in all our hearts and minds.

Enticing people to vote based on Conservative or Liberal labeling is a sick joke on the American populus.  The finger-pointing and name-calling would cause our Founding Fathers to throw up their hands in disgust and wonder why they went through all their trouble creating this nation when such petty jealousies divide and polarize us all.

Neither Party has any advantage over the other in terms of offering a “better” government of the people, by the people and for the people.  Scoundrels occupy both Parties.  What is best for all Americans takes a back seat to what is best for the Party.  This is political PUKE!!

America was founded as a beacon of hope for ALL peoples, no matter where they come from or who they are.  We were promised life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness WITHOUT having to swear allegiance to any political bent.  Yet, both Parties position themselves to be portrayed as the ONLY solution to any problem.  And all those in opposition to their views are “un-American” or “un-Patriotic”.  HUMBUG!

We are ALL Americans!  Period.

If you were a starving Democrat, would your Republican next door neighbor deny you food for nourishment if you asked?

If you were a Republican left homeless from a terrible storm, would your Democrat neighbor deny you shelter from the storm?

Sure, it’s a political season.  We all have our opinions.  However, it dismays me to see the vitriole being spewed by the Parties in their efforts to convince voters that only THEIR Party is rational, reasonable and honest, at the expense of painting their opponents as the opposite.

WE ARE ALL AMERICANS!

Just as it is wrong to define ourselves as “black”, “white”, “Latino” or “Asian” subcultures, the term AMERICAN applies evenly to us all.

If you were travelling overseas and somebody asked you what nationality you were, would you answer Republican-American?  Or, Democrat-American?  NO YOU WOULDN"T!  So, why must you do that in our own country??

It is ludicrous to believe that only ONE Party believes in strong national defense and lower taxes for all.  It is folly to think that only ONE Party cares about school lunch programs and health care for our children.

It is just plain STUPID to judge a candidate on what he/she said or did 30-40 years ago as a youth!

And for those of you who don’t bother to vote, you deserve exactly what you get in return.  You have NO right or reason to complain about anything our government does or doesn’t do.  If you don’t care to participate in the democratic process of choosing our leaders, then you have no business voicing an opinion about the results!  You have chosen to abdicate your right to choose.  The only way to vindicate yourself is to RUN FOR OFFICE yourself!  If you don’t like your choices, then YOU become one of the choices to improve our political process and government.  Anything short of this makes you a hypocrite...enjoying the fruits of those who sacrificed on your behalf while criticizing those who do.

The deep divisions and polarization of our nation can only go so far before everything implodes upon us all.  Partisanship is leading our nation to a collapse of the democratic process.  Already we are seeing that certain factions are attempting to change our Constitution to reflect their own partisanship on fringe issues.  When our sacred law of the land can be entrenched in the meddling of petty divisions, then our very democracy is at terrible risk of destruction.

These are very dangerous times, and WE are our own worst enemies!

But, WE ARE ALL AMERICANS!

It’s time we begin to act like it again and put these polarizing attitudes behind us once and for all.

Shame on us all!  Please, Founding Fathers, forgive us!

I agree with much of what Don in Indy wrote.  Neither party has a lock on the right answers.

Thomas Brown—I agree with everything you said up to the last two words.  Why do you say that Bush has forgotten that many have died for our freedom of speech?

Dear Garrison: I have just returned to my home in Manhattan after spending the day marching in potest to the RNC and the Bush & Co. dictatorship. Thank-you for your comments, especially for putting 911 into proper context. As we are about to witness, over the next several days, 911, once again, wiill become the GOP’s misguided montra for the election of George W. Bush & Co. If today’s march turn-out is any indication, that montra and it’s conservative based choir will soon be retired.

Nobody saye it better than Garrison!!!
Thanks Mr.Keillor

Amen, Garrison!  As a life long Republican who has rarely voted that ticket lately I am appalled at where the party has gone.  The vitriol spewed by the platform alone should turn off any thinking American.  God Save our wonderful country this November.

Memo to Cowpox: the war is *over*! Also, were you looking for the ‘Crazy Tangents’ board, or did you actually intend to respond to the essay by Mr. Keillor?

Cowpox reminds me of two things: first, what George Carlin said about Civil War reenactors:

“Next time, use live ammunition, will you please?”

And second, what Morrissey said about copycat writers:

“If you must write prose and poems, the words you use should be your own-don’t plagiarize or take on loan.”

Please don’t drag William Blake into your personal anger problems, Cowpox. Open the phone book to the section on psychiatrists, point to one and pick up the phone.

Mr Keillor’s essay is splendid. 

But we can’t guide the immediate future by the good old Republicans of the 40’s or the snappy Democrat Harry Truman or Ronald Reagan a la Phil Collins.

We have to gather our common sense to vote as best we can.
We have to take information where we can, not just from where we like.  There were three different VietNams. I liked the first phase of VietNam and I still don’t like Jane Fonda.  Which time of VietNam or Jane Fonda gives us very little information now.

Some folks really like Bush because he is truly charming and cute.  Fewer people like Kelly because ‘he looks like a tribal mask.’ We have to put that aside.  It really is irrelevant.

Don’t waste time on tv ads; you know that they’re selling soap.
Neither presidential candidate is perfect.  If your sister is a screaming fan of Cheney, Dr Rice, or Bush the Younger, try to
think of something OK about those people.

‘The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned’
We need to raise our wisdom and sense and put away our easy
emotion.

Garrison,

Posted this at Posted by Anne on August 29, 2004 at 6:39 PM and you deleted this...wonder why...it seemed friendly enough. Guess you can not take criticizm.

Just want to say, Love your Radio Show, and Love NPR, you are one of the best storytellers around. I even laughed it up when you had Franken on talking about your book lines.

I am a Republican, who lives in Georgia, and lived in Massachusetts for 19 years and I still find you funny.

Even though you have a great talent for waxing poetic, and storytelling, I find you very short on abilities to protect this country from Al Quaeda or any future attacks.

One Question for you, when have you ever been bullied by a fundamentalist Bible Thumper? Just curious, and it might make for a funny talk episode on your radio program.

And this statement of yours “Republicans: The No.1 reason the rest of the world thinks we’re deaf, dumb and dangerous.” You really need to get out of your small pond of Wobegon and get a grip, and realize that making sweeping generalizations about Republicans, Christians, and Southerners really just makes you look mean spirited.

You are in luck, Mr. Keillor, Mark Twain is here in your very hour of need and he has some kind words for you, to guide you. Mark Twain is telling you “GOOD BREEDING CONSISTS IN CONCEALING HOW MUCH WE THINK OF OURSELVES AND HOW LITTLE WE THINK OF THE OTHER PERSON”.

Keep the Faith, Keep the Humor, and I look forward to the next time I listen to NPR and you are doing your radio show.

God Bless America, God Bless our Troops, God Bless our President!

Posted by Anne on August 29, 2004 at 6:39 PM

Bernie Ellis - What are you talking about? Did you think when I addressed a comment to ‘G.’ I meant Garrison Keillor? No, my sweet, I was trying to get the attention of Mr./Ms. van den Bosch. Emily Latella...hmmm. Was that on SNL years ago when it wasn’t really funny anymore?

Someone posted a few posts ago that he or she would appreciate me providing more information on why I left the Democratic party (or a liberal world-view) to become an Independent and then a Republican. I appreciate the question, for I take it as a sincere one. I also sense that there are some in this conversation thread - though not all - who would appreciate actually listening and learning from each other. So, in answer to your question, here is my response:

My journey from a McGovern Democrat to one about to vote for George Bush was actually a long one and the change was more incremental - with, as you can imagine, a final shove not too long ago. Yes, it was based upon my own crtical thinking to experiences and observations. Rather than provide you with a 30 page biograhy, let me provide a few highlights - here are images, descriptions, milestones to my change from a McGovern Democrat to a Bush Republican. These represent times (in chronological order)when I began to re-think and to re-examine:

1.  Listening to my friends and walking with them as they looked for employement after coming home from Viet Nam.

2.  Reading Waldon Pond by D. T.

3.  Reading in the Rolling Stone that Bob Dylan and the Rolling Stones all owned share in the same real estate as Frank Sinatra.

4.  Listening to countless professors in three graduate programs avoid anything approaching a discussion on morality or moral clarity (they were so morally confused).

5.  As I studied philosophy and history. As I learned about presuppostions, world-views, paradigms, and the track record of Marxism (millions starved in USSR, Africa, etc.).

6.  As I observed “activist liberals” discussing tactics for political action in a Grand Rapids, Michigan inner city church - grinding their ciggarette butts in the floor with delight in utter disregard and without even a hint of gratitude.

7.  Watching someone in a large gathering simply ask a question of Indepednet candidate for president, John Anderson, about his position on abortion - and then getting booed from the entire audience for simply asking the questiom.

8.  Hearing a collegue in a Canadian Christian high school faculty lounge verbally express her hope that more American soldiers would be killed in Lebonon so that the Americans would learn a lesson. And, then, watch as not one of my collegues even blinked an eye or said a word.

9.  Becoming a father and raising a child - for the most part - by myself. I became more conservative with each passing day.

10. Representing Head Start and interacting with people working in migrant and tribal programs as well as in various government agencies: I soon diascovered that the people assigned to solve a problem are eventually so invested in their careers and thus end up resisting changes that would actually help solve the problems (e.g. resistence to welfare reform and to universal full-day kindergarten).

11. Representing a liberal arts college in Canada and interacting with business people as I solicited financial contributions. Then, coming back to hear members of the faculty make snide remarks about the very people who had made significant donations for their very salaries.

12. Studying logic and teaching public speaking. istening to countless persuasive speeches on various public policy topics of the day.

13. Re-evaluating my life experiences as I matured and realized that good and evil do very much exist and that moral clarity is and must be available. I realized that such a text was available and the wisdome of the ages was - in fact - true.

14. Dealing with the suicide death of my closest friend and the mental illness of my sister. Strugling with my family to care for my sister and her four children. Observing what and who - in the final analysis - was there to help and who was not.

15. Reading many books and articles from various perspecives. Debating both sides.

16. Waking up to September 11, 2001 and watching as so many around me simply went into denial.

17. Countless conversations with liberals, independents, and conservatives via email, discussions groups, and blogs (including my own).

18. Years of relfection on my own shortcomings, on my own accomplishments, and on human nature as I have experienced and observed it.

These are 18 items that give you at least a flavor for why I moved incrementally from a Democrat to a Republican. I do not believe anyone or any group owns or has a corner on the truth. I think we are all quite fallible. We need each other and we can - and we must - learn from each other.

No, as someone mentioned, my name is not German, it is Dutch.

And yes, my religion has influenced my political beliefs. I believe that we are all religious - we all serve a god of our own making or God. There is no one who does not put his or her first and final trust in someone or something.

That’s enough for now. Since you asked.

Hey Garrison, I always enjoy your words...but I have one disagreement.  In your words of August 26th, ....."This is a great country and it wasn’t made so by angry people”...You are wrong.... Angry people gave the “Tea Party”...Angry people changed the way slaves were treated...Angry people, black and white, brought about the civil rights movement and changed laws and history. Angry women changed laws, and the way women were treated....  Anger has changed many things to make this country truly grrrreat!!  Anger will get bush and his cronies out of office!!

Thanks for speaking for all of us.  I’m from a large family, half of whom are Republicans, and we can’t talk about politics.  This ban has been in effect ever since the 2000 election when I spoke out against W.  Come on!  How can good people support these criminals who have hold of our country.  New Zealand does sound good.  My son’s girlfriend is learning Dutch.  Canada, how many of us can you take?  Better yet, VOTE KERRY.

Yuma—what crimes have “these criminals” committed?

J. Peters, were not the British very angry about the Tea Party? And those Southern plantation owners were hopping mad - so angry that they left the Union (while calling Lincoln a baboon!). Angry people resisted the civil rights movement and enacted many of the harshest and most unjust laws of our history.

Angry people can indeed change things for the better - toward public justice - BUT they must check their anger - channel it - for the achievement of justice. Unchecked anger never accomplished anything. Repeat, unchjecked anger never accomplished anything. No one changes as a result of being yeled at or being insulted by his or her neighbor of fellow American.

Unchecked anger against the strawmen “Republicans” and “Bush” will simply usher in four more years of an administration that many of you hope would go away. Your mission will be defeated by your own unchecked anger.

Name calling? You do it and then you accuse others of doing it. Does the same hypocricy exist on the “other side” as well. You bet it does. We are all human and we are all Americans. How about if we all check our anger and begin listening to each other.

What a novel concept.

There comes a time when Tories and Rebels sit down and actually compromise to build a country. There comes a time when Northerners and Southerners make peace and build a country. There comes a time when men and women begin working together to raise families and work in the workplace to build a country.

When will we begin to listen to each other and consider each other - without the self-righteousness and the unchecked anger of today’s discourse? When will we realize that “we” (you, or us, or they) are not the enemy. When will we begin to work together, again?

It starts by “checking” our anger and listening to each other.

so, if the republicans win this time, I ADVOCATE A TAX REVOLT. Lets just stop paying for the folly.

But the anger is so much fun isn’t it? Better to lose an election than to give up me precious anger. Oh, me precious. Oh me precious. Oh me loves it. Me anger.

Clinton killed Vince Foster!
Oh, me precious anger.
Bush kills babies!
Oh me precious anger.
Me loves my anger.

Me leaves this country. Yes, Me leaves this country. And me takes me anger with me where’re me goes. Yes, me does. Me precious.

G. van den Bosch - That was me that inquired about your journey. Thank you for sharing some of your steps with us. What is so remarkable to me is that it would seem we are around the same age and have had many similar experiences. Your list is one of disappointments and disillusionment with the bright ideals and promise many of us felt in the 60’s and well into the 70’s.

I owned my own business for many years, and I paid every employee a good living wage and provided excellent benefits. I did not make much money and when I sold the business I didn’t get much for it. But I can always say I did the right thing and everyone who ever worked for me or with me would tell you that as well. I think there are lots of people like me who found ways to serve the common good, though not in so-called public service.

It’s hard for me to relate to your items that seem to illustrate bad manners (booing, grinding butts on the church hall floor, backstabbing, expressing appalling opinions). I’m also surprised by your two expressions of your need for moral clarity in the context of it coming from outside yourself.

I have read your list twice and have tried to see how these things would lead you to support President Bush. The Republican Party does not seem to me to be offering anything you seem to be looking for in your life. I’ve been watching them develop their platform for the convention. Have you had time to catch any of this on CSpan? I don’t expect you to change your mind, and it was brave of you to reveal so much of yourself, but I still don’t get it. What are the Republicans offering you that makes you want to keep them in power?

I hate to ask for more, but could you please sum up for us?

To van den Bosch—thanks for your commentary.  It is very insightful and right on point.  We need less anger and more thoughfulness.

Mostly directed to Justin Hornburg. You seem to be intellegent.You argue with conviction and put down others with a version of the facts,but you wish to paint your picture with an odd pallet of colors.
Our so called friends and allies,the french and germans were against our going into Iraq because they had their own oil contracts with Saddam Hussein and weapons contracts as well.With the U.S. entering into Iraq ,we were bound to find out these things and they are embarrassing poliltically.
The one thing that I took particular offense at was when Doug Lane described Lynddie England as a “wretched lowlife reservist”. People like mr.Lane make me ill. I try not to get into name calling but this really stuck a knife into me.Obviously mr.Lane has not had the remotes contact with combat.I don’t like bringing my combat experiences into this mix,but I have knowledge that I have to impart.I DO NOT condone what Pfc.England and her peers did,but I think that I can understand A reason for what happened. First, not all people are created as equal,we all have frailties and weaknesses. When you share life and death situations with your peers you bond and have an affinity with each other.What they think influences your thoughts and actions.You want to help,protect,and defend these people.If you believe that you are not appreciated by the people that you are risking your life for,you begin to not care about them as humans and only care for your own.When you feel that your government has lost concern for you and your welfare,you pull yourself into a smaller group,such as your squad or platoon.When you hear daily that these people that you are to protect are animals or ragheads or whatever derogatory term is common you start to believe these things.When you fellow soldiers are being killed daily by the people that you see everyday you become very callous about them and their feelings.When you have fear,anxiety,uncertainty,and anger everyday,you become hateful and vengeful,especially when you can’t get at the real people who are responsible and then you go the wrong way and can do the wrong things.These people were not wretched lowlifes!These were people. These were people that have had their lives radically changed,turned upside down. These people probably thought that they were in the service to get an education,so that they could get ahead and have a better life.I volunteered for the army,and for vietnam,but because I was 19 and very impressionable and trusted my government I thought that I was doing the right thing.The point is that I did volunteer and thought that I knew why I was there.These people did not get that luxury.
And finally,some of you people still aren’t getting it.It’s not about democrats or republicans.It is about politcians who have no relationship with their constituents.No desire to help their people,no concern for their well being,welfare,or health concerns.For the most part these politicians don’t even live amoung their constituents.They live in their own enclave amoungst themselves,except when they want to be re-elected.They get into that same mindset that the wretched lowlifes of Iraq do,in that they don’t understand why their constituents don’t appreciate them or understand what they are doing to to help them.
Oh,by the way,our founding fathers were not saints.They had the same foibles that every other person had and has to this day.They were selfish,petty,and jealous among other things.They were able to put together a government by compromising and making deals.They were not saints,so think of that when you invokes their names as if they were saints.Ed P.

Joanne, you are kind to ask. Thank you.

Re: I’m also surprised by your two expressions of your need for moral clarity in the context of it coming from outside yourself.

Joanne, I do not think that highly of myself to find a source for moral clarity within myself. Certainly not in my heart nor in my reason - for I know full well how fallible and easily swayed I am. Some of the most unspeakable horrors of the last century were committed by people finding moral clarity within themselves. *We* are not to be trusted for moral clarity. Such clarity comes - as you describe it - from an outside source.

The Republic party is anything but perfect - that is for certain. But that party is at least striving for moral clarity. It appears the other parties have a difficult time even mentioning - as a fellow grad student once said in one of my classes - “the ‘ m’ word”.

It appears the only thing evil in the other party is he (or she or they) who fight(s) evil. It appears “fighting” is evil for the other party - at least for now. I happen to believe that fighting evil is good.

Yes, I often watch C-Span, though not now as I am spednding - belive it or not - time with family. So, no, I did not see what you described.

Re: What are the Republicans offering you that makes you want to keep them in power?

Moral clarity. Recognition that it is better to earn than to be given. Recognition that there are indeed people trying to kill others and us and they will - in fact - kill us - unless they are stopped. The Republicans are more serious about this (sorry, you can believe that John Kerry or Ralph Nadar will protct you and your families if you wish, I simply do not).

Obviously, there is more, but that is enough for now.

Again, thanks for asking - and for considering. Of such is dialogue and it is tjrough dialogue - not through angry shouting - that we will finally get back to building our country together - once again
(ala the Golden Age of the 50s, the Age of Camelot, etc.).

Here’s to actually listening to each other.

Ed P. you have dropped the pearls of wisdom in the middle of your piece! Fear, anxiety, uncertainty - this is the state which our government seeks to instill in us daily with repeated terror alerts, stories about terrorists tampering with drugs; media items about insecure borders, chemical plants, nuclear plants, ports; constant bugabooing day in and day out about all the danger, danger, danger all around us. It’s such a trasparent tactic that I’m amazed at how many people allow this fear to infect their thoughts and actions.

Listen up: if these things are true and disaster is on the way, there is little you can do about it. Roosevelt was right when he said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. We all need to give ourselves a good slap and pull ourselves together right this minute.

I personally believe that we will have to deal with both foreign and domestic terrorism for a long time to come. The world is awash in weapons of major and minor destruction, and most of them are labeled Made In The USA. You can take the attitude that some demogogic leader cult can protect you, or you can resign yourself to start thinking with your head about what needs to be done to provide a reasonable level of security for the nation. You cannot hope to secure yourself or your loved ones 100%, but you can strive to be strong and clear headed, to look for leaders who don’t blow smoke up your ass about how they’re winning the ‘war on terror’. The ‘terror’ is in your head. You can make yourself a victim of terror even if there is never another attack anywhere in the world. You can live in fear until the inevitable end of your days. Or not. Choose and move on.

If you’re ready for a President that inspires hope, courage, and common purpose, then consider alternatives to George W. Bush. He’s just not making the grade in this department and he has managed by his own actions to so polarize people (love him/hate him) that he can never hope to lead in an effective way.

I don’t like to slam folks into boxes, but I have to say my experience with Republican Party supporters the past 20 years has been that they love to create division in order to achieve power, and then claim to be uniters who can’t understand why those who disagree with them can’t make an effort to get along. It’s so high school. All this ‘gotcha’ crap all the time, and all the bald-faced institutionalized lying. I can easily understand why the poiticians do it, but I can’t grasp what is going on in the minds of so many of my fellow citizens.

Who said English Majors serve no useful purpose? Bravo!

Dear NPR;

I would like to share with you what I think really happened on 9/11. First of all if you really want to know you have to go back to the first Gulf War in 1991 when the U.S. was about to invade Bagdad. 

Saddam pleaded to their cheif ally, Russia, to come to their aid so theyr finally did.  Russia ordered the Americans out of the country and the very next morning President Clinton declared that the major objective of the war had been completed so the American troops were ordered to pull out of the region, leaving Saddam in power.

After that the free world began buying oil from Russia but there was a major problem with that.  The oil in the Caspian Sea area was/is essentially landlocked meaning that it is very hard to get to market. 

The best way around that problem was to build a pipeline across Afganistan.  You probably remember the war that Russia fought with Afganistan to get access to the best route to the Mediterrian Sea.  Well, after several years of fighting with Afganistan, Russia was unable to win the right to cross the Afgan mountains with their oil piplines.

That brings us back to Bush and his desire to overthrow the Iraqi governmemt.  Bush and the other people in power in Washington, D.C. then made a deal with the Russian leaders that if the Americans would overthrow the Afganistan resistance that Russia would then allow us to overthrow Saddam.

Well, look at it that is what happened.  But to get the American people to support the war on Afganistan a tramatic event had to happen.  Move forward to 9/11 and remember that for no good reason our government blamed those events on Saddam. 

After that there was a widespread panic and desire to overthrow Saddam and his Telliban which we had previously been supporting during their war with Russia.  After going over to Afganistan and nuetralizing the Warlords there and before Osama was even captured Russia gave us permission to overthrow the Iraqi people so Bush declared that to make the world a safer place from future terriost attacks we shoudl overthrow Saddam and capture his vast oilfields.

The best way that I can think of to get the Iraq people on our side is to upgrade their country by giving them portable electrical generators and air-conditioners that they can use until we restore their main power units. After that we can give them refrigerators so that they might start enjoying some of their newly acquired freedom from Saddam and emerge from the third world status that they are in right now.

Thank you,

Henry A. Park

Joanne, I am a Republican. Do you find me devisive? Is your experience with me in this conversation one of creating division?

Or, do you sense that I am a uniter? A peace-maker? Do you have a sense that I am honest? That I am a good father? A good brother? Do you have a sense that I hold people who are vulnerable to be worthy? Do you suspect that I attempt to follow the wisdom as summarized in the “sermon on the mount” a couple of thousand years ago? Do you have a sense - as you review my comments here - that I thirst after justice and mercy. That I wake up each morning to put such thirst into concrete action?

Do you have that sense? Honestly?

Here is my point: I am a Republican. And I will vote for Bush.

Please re-consider your stereotypes. That is what I am challenging. And I make that challenge to myself as well.

Someone once said, “a soft answer turneth away wrath.” Let us turn away from wrath. Wrath has never built anything. It has only destroyed - families, relationships, commnities, and even nations. Let us turn away from wrath.

Please challenge yourself to move beyond the stereotypes presented by the media and by our own fears and misunderstandings. Consider that there are people - in red and in blue “states” - who love this country and seek justice for their fellow citizens. Consider that we are Americans together and that we must put aside the anger and the self-righteousness - as good as they feel - to return to the hard work of building each other and our country up once again.

G. van den Bosch - Thank you. I’m sure you realize that I don’t agree that moral clarity can only come from outside, by which I assume you mean your god. I believe the opposite. What is amazing to me is that while you feel it is appropriate and even necessary to look to a political party for moral clarity, you do not seem to believe it is appropriate to look to your government to care for those who cannot care for themselves in our society. Children should not be allowed to live in poverty, elderly people should not go without medicine, no one should be denied health care. If we wish to consider ourselves a moral nation, we should never yield to the temptation to believe that our only choice is to kill or be killed, nor countenance torture, nor institutionalize the taking of human life. We should seek to be merciful and just in our dealings, not aggressive and bullying. Charity begins at home, but the world is our home, so our charity must be borderless. This is my moral vision and I can see it clearly, just as I could when I was a young woman protesting the carnage in Viet Nam.

Yes we all need to talk more, I suppose, and again I appreciate your sharing. Now I’ve taken my turn and I hope you will consider what I’ve said to you. I don’t think you are evil, but I believe you may have turned away from some of what was finest in you when you were a McGovern Democrat.

Joanne, I’ve got to call it a night, but before I walk away from my screen, let me quickly respond:

1.  I do *not* look to my government for moral clarity. I look to what I believe to be a revelation provided by God for my / our moral clarity. For me, this is the Bible. For others, it may be the Torah, etc.

2. I believe we are all responsible for the care of those who cannot care for themselves. I used to represent Head Start at the state and national levels and I am proud of that service. I am a Republican - not a Libertarian.

3. Sad to say, but we are grownups here: Sometimes the choice *is* to kill or to be killed. No need to go over our fight against the Nazis, for example. Nor is it necessary - I hope - to remind us of the lives lost to make people free during the American Civil War. Sometimes the moral choice is to kill or be killed (of such is our choice today, make no mistake ... and wishing it were no so will not make it go away) Killing evil is not evil. Murder is evil. There is a moral difference between force and violence - between killing and murder.

4. Charity is borderless - to an extent. But I will not call on you to help pay for my daughter’s clothing as she returns to school. That is *my* responsibility. Nonetheless, we have a moral obligations to protect ourselves and our families. We also have a moral obligation to stop genocide. Children’s prison. There was such in Iraq. We shut it down. What about the Sudan? Shall we simply watch the genocide and wish it would stop?

Joanne, I read what you said carefully and I agree re-examination is always good. I will always be careful to reform myself to what is good and just. And I will do so with a sense of moral certainty.
What was finest in me as a McGovern Democrat was made more certain through discernment over the years.

Thanks for the challenge ... and good night.

It’s one thing to become more conservative with the passing years, but it’s another to let your perception stand still and not realize that the Republican Party has long since passed from conservatism into the hate-filled, anti-American organization it is today.

It’s strange to me that there are a lot of moderate Republicans who don’t seem to realize their party is being run by hypocrites and lunatics, by bigoted hate-mongers and subliterate fools. They seem surprised when I tell them this is how the Republican Party is perceived, as though time has passed them by and they have simply ignored the changes that have been going on in their party since the late 1970s.

I long for the days Mr. Keillor speaks of, when Republicans were a necessary part of the political process, because they WERE conservative, and they were reasonable, and their conservative reasoning counterbalanced the emotional rhetoric of liberal Democrats. But those days are long gone and they ended with the rise of Ronald Reagan.

The Democratic Party has too many liberal extremists for my taste, but at least the thinking people are still at the top instead of at the bottom, as they are in the Republican Party.

If there are any reasonable Republicans like Mr. van den Bosch out there listening, you need to overthrow these wild-eyed radicals who are ruining your party and ruining the country with their pandering dissimulation and their unbridled intolerance.

A nice bit of “Bush-bashing”; however, The ONLY
way Kerry will ever be President of the USA is
if God wants to punish a wicked and unrepentant
nation with much grief and tribulation.  Kerry would be just the person for the job, and would make Bush look like a rank amature.  RCK

Soldier on! Thank you for insightful, well thought out facts to help counter the flow of BS. As a religious conservative I have been ousted by my family for not swallowing the witch burner rhetoric. Wake up “compassionate conservatives” our hour is NOW!!!!

Thank you for insightful, well written stuff that some of my cohorts will still open their well scrubbed minds to. As a religious conservative I burn with shame to see the TV preachers use God’s holy name to endorse this hypocrit. I have been ousted from my family because I won’t swallow this witch burner mentality. I call on all “compassionate conservatives” to lend their voices to shout down this perversion of the Bible and our religion to feed the greedy and starve the needy. Shame on those who go along to get along. Someone has had to stand against the prevailing winds in many church errors (racism for one example). Join and stop this evil man.

Oh how I share your passion!  Thank you and another AMEN from another old lady.

G. Van Der Bosch,
I want to start by saying that you have come closer than any Republican in this exchange to being a truly exemplary person. I do get the feeling you practice what you preach. I will also add that I have an IQ of 135, a bachelors degree from college, and I’m a former Southern Baptist who was baptized into the church at the age of 9. I do know what I’m talking about.

You ask Liberals to be more kind, understanding and broad minded. How many letters of similar nature have you sent to Rush Limbau, Pat Robertson, or your beloved President? It seems to me that for 40 years now Liberals have been “weighing issues,” “seeking dialogue,” and trying to be fair. While we pondered, the Radical Right has gathered their forces stabbed us in the back and slit our throats. It was your own presidential candidate, Pat Buchanan, who declared a “Culture War” and urged his fundamentalist supporters to take it to the streets, if necessary. You urge Liberals to be kind, forgiving, and embracing, as if there had even been one shred of such high minded ideals in your own party.

I am a Gay man, G, and any Christian who thinks I should be subject to a death penalty, and a number of Christian leaders have spoken that sentiment in clear public terms is most certainly my “enemy.” Any moralistic judgmental bigot who stands outside my dead friends memorial service praying for his damnation is most certainly my enemy. I have been in a solid committed relationship for TWELVE YEARS! A heck of a lot longer than many of the serial marriages of the moral arbiters who want to “defend heterosexual marriage” by denying my access to it. If you want to defend marriage, out law divorce for straight people! Yes, anyone who says I cannot love and devote myself to whichever human being I choose is my enemy.

In five or six years my nephews will be old enough to be drafted. Any and all gods willing, by then Iraq will be a memory but there will be no shortage of new unnecessary wars for the military industrial complex to goad the government into fighting. Anyone willing to sacrifice those precious boys blood for ill gotten profits and the bloated egos of cowardly men is my enemy.

I’m self employed, struggling mightily toward the kind of self sufficiency your party gives lip service to. I pay almost 15% of my income into a social security system that is annually drained for the sake of pork barrel special interests which your party is every bit as guilty of as any other. There is no money left for a “personal retirement fund” no matter how generous your tax breaks, and yet your party has every intention of making sure social security wont be there for me when I retire. There are people in this world making hundreds of times my salary and paying no income tax at all, but I don’t have enough money to finagle a similar tax shelter. There are businesses thousands of times larger than my own humble endeavors that receive millions of dollars a year, of which my oppressive taxes are a part, while my efforts don’t merit a single dime. You dare to embrace those policies and then claim the moral high ground???

I can’t afford insurance and because I don’t have it the healthcare industry routinely charges me as much as ten times as much as they charge insurance companies for the same treatment. The drug companies charge Americans many times as much as people in other countries are charged and your party dares to claim our “free market system” superior to any other? It undoubtedly is for those with the affluence to buy stock in it.

I don’t smoke marijuana or tobacco. I tried marijuana. I did inhale. I didn’t enjoy it. My property is my property, bought with my own hard earned money. I think I should be allowed to grow anything I want for my own consumption. It doesn’t matter whether that is Tobacco, tomatoes, pot plants, or Belladonna to kill myself when the fascists knock down my door and come to take me away, anybody who wants to tell me I’m free to buy poisonous cigarettes and alcohol from corporate sources but can’t grow any plant that I want to, on my own property, is my enemy.
Currently, The FBI can secretly search my house, filter my email, track the books I read in the library, and the purchases I make with my credit cards. If I had the chance to speak out to loudly, or effectively, against this creeping fascism I might well find myself mysteriously on a “no fly” list unable to travel at will, and with no recourse or appeal. Your party thinks the government should have still greater powers to oppress my personal freedom. Pardon me for being blunt, but anybody who thinks these powers are not being misused now, and wont be misused even more egregiously in the future is a gullible idiot, and yes, anybody who thinks this state of affairs is excusable or acceptable is my enemy.

I could go on for pages. You seem like an intelligent, rational, even sincere, person. Are your eyes open? Are you honestly evaluating the party you support. Is the illusory fantasy of “moral certainty” so compelling in and of itself that you care not for substance?

I’m sincerely sorry your ideals were shaken and your utopian view of the world disappointed. There are shallow, ignorant, and yes, even evil people everywhere. I know from personal experience the backbone of the conservative Christian church, which itself is the backbone of the modern Republican Party is made up of people apparently like yourself. People who have, in spite of being reassured that “Jesus their PERSONAL Savior” and that God has an individual interest in them, been paradoxically convinced that they are so unworthy that they must depend on some outside higher authority to dictate their standards and ideals to them. This in spite of the fact those arbiters are every bit as human as the people they lead. Desperation for some shred of certainty in an uncertain world gives these people the tolerance to overlook even the most breathtaking moral lapses from their “leaders” while self righteousness allows their leaders to guiltlessly commit the most grossly venal of wrongs with God’s approval. Hypocrisy thy name is Conservative Christianity. What would Jesus do, indeed?! I no longer believe God smiles with particular ardor on Republicans OR democrats.

You were kind enough to share all the reasons that you become disillusioned with liberal philosophy. Among others, I too appreciate that. However, you offered very little about what the Republicans have done to impress you, beyond cloaking their own self interest, self righteousness, and personal agendas, in a veneer of moral superiority. Please do convert me. My mind is open, despite what you may think. Show my the 24 carat gold lining inside the sulfurous cloud that is George Bush. Given the fact that I do not own stock in Haliburton Corp., received mere pocket change in Tax relief, am as frightened and revolted by the actions my own government as by our alleged terrorist enemies, and do not have a hollow core of personal insecurity that must be validated by idol (with or without feet of clay)puking forth debased moral certainty, what is there about George Bush that I should admire? His drug addiction? his cowardice? His consistent failure in every business enterprise he’s attempted? His scholastic ineptitude? His complete lack of both curiosity and intellectual aspiration? Certainly not his compassion, humility, and unflinching honesty, because he has none.

Have you visited the FDR memorial in Washington DC? I did this passed spring. The dozen or so quotes from Roosevelt literally brought tears to my eyes. I felt embarrassed that I was so ignorant of how great a man he was and I dispared to think there was a single “statesman” in America today who could speak such high minded ideals with even a pretense of sincerity.

G. Van Der Bosch,
I want to start by saying that you have come closer than any Republican in this exchange to being a truly exemplary person. I do get the feeling you practice what you preach. I will also add that I have an IQ of 135, a bachelors degree from college, and I’m a former Southern Baptist who was baptized into the church at the age of 9. I do know what I’m talking about.

You ask Liberals to be more kind, understanding and broad minded. How many letters of similar nature have you sent to Rush Limbau, Pat Robertson, or your beloved President? It seems to me that for 40 years now Liberals have been “weighing issues,” “seeking dialogue,” and trying to be fair. While we pondered, the Radical Right has gathered their forces stabbed us in the back and slit our throats. It was your own presidential candidate, Pat Buchanan, who declared a “Culture War” and urged his fundamentalist supporters to take it to the streets, if necessary. You urge Liberals to be kind, forgiving, and embracing, as if there had even been one shred of such high minded ideals in your own party.

I am a Gay man, G, and any Christian who thinks I should be subject to a death penalty, and a number of Christian leaders have spoken that sentiment in clear public terms is most certainly my “enemy.” Any moralistic judgmental bigot who stands outside my dead friends memorial service praying for his damnation is most certainly my enemy. I have been in a solid committed relationship for TWELVE YEARS! A heck of a lot longer than many of the serial marriages of the moral arbiters who want to “defend heterosexual marriage” by denying my access to it. If you want to defend marriage, out law divorce for straight people! Yes, anyone who says I cannot love and devote myself to whichever human being I choose is my enemy.

In five or six years my nephews will be old enough to be drafted. Any and all gods willing, by then Iraq will be a memory but there will be no shortage of new unnecessary wars for the military industrial complex to goad the government into fighting. Anyone willing to sacrifice those precious boys blood for ill gotten profits and the bloated egos of cowardly men is my enemy.

I’m self employed, struggling mightily toward the kind of self sufficiency your party gives lip service to. I pay almost 15% of my income into a social security system that is annually drained for the sake of pork barrel special interests which your party is every bit as guilty of as any other. There is no money left for a “personal retirement fund” no matter how generous your tax breaks, and yet your party has every intention of making sure social security wont be there for me when I retire. There are people in this world making hundreds of times my salary and paying no income tax at all, but I don’t have enough money to finagle a similar tax shelter. There are businesses thousands of times larger than my own humble endeavors that receive millions of dollars a year, of which my oppressive taxes are a part, while my efforts don’t merit a single dime. You dare to embrace those policies and then claim the moral high ground???

I can’t afford insurance and because I don’t have it the healthcare industry routinely charges me as much as ten times as much as they charge insurance companies for the same treatment. The drug companies charge Americans many times as much as people in other countries are charged and your party dares to claim our “free market system” superior to any other? It undoubtedly is for those with the affluence to buy stock in it.

I don’t smoke marijuana or tobacco. I tried marijuana. I did inhale. I didn’t enjoy it. My property is my property, bought with my own hard earned money. I think I should be allowed to grow anything I want for my own consumption. It doesn’t matter whether that is Tobacco, tomatoes, pot plants, or Belladonna to kill myself when the fascists knock down my door and come to take me away, anybody who wants to tell me I’m free to buy poisonous cigarettes and alcohol from corporate sources but can’t grow any plant that I want to, on my own property, is my enemy.
Currently, The FBI can secretly search my house, filter my email, track the books I read in the library, and the purchases I make with my credit cards. If I had the chance to speak out to loudly, or effectively, against this creeping fascism I might well find myself mysteriously on a “no fly” list unable to travel at will, and with no recourse or appeal. Your party thinks the government should have still greater powers to oppress my personal freedom. Pardon me for being blunt, but anybody who thinks these powers are not being misused now, and wont be misused even more egregiously in the future is a gullible idiot, and yes, anybody who thinks this state of affairs is excusable or acceptable is my enemy.

I could go on for pages. You seem like an intelligent, rational, even sincere, person. Are your eyes open? Are you honestly evaluating the party you support. Is the illusory fantasy of “moral certainty” so compelling in and of itself that you care not for substance?

I’m sincerely sorry your ideals were shaken and your utopian view of the world disappointed. There are shallow, ignorant, and yes, even evil people everywhere. I know from personal experience the backbone of the conservative Christian church, which itself is the backbone of the modern Republican Party is made up of people apparently like yourself. People who have, in spite of being reassured that “Jesus their PERSONAL Savior” and that God has an individual interest in them, been paradoxically convinced that they are so unworthy that they must depend on some outside higher authority to dictate their standards and ideals to them. This in spite of the fact those arbiters are every bit as human as the people they lead. Desperation for some shred of certainty in an uncertain world gives these people the tolerance to overlook even the most breathtaking moral lapses from their “leaders” while self righteousness allows their leaders to guiltlessly commit the most grossly venal of wrongs with God’s approval. Hypocrisy thy name is Conservative Christianity. What would Jesus do, indeed?! I no longer believe God smiles with particular ardor on Republicans OR democrats.

You were kind enough to share all the reasons that you become disillusioned with liberal philosophy. Among others, I too appreciate that. However, you offered very little about what the Republicans have done to impress you, beyond cloaking their own self interest, self righteousness, and personal agendas, in a veneer of moral superiority. Please do convert me. My mind is open, despite what you may think. Show my the 24 carat gold lining inside the sulfurous cloud that is George Bush. Given the fact that I do not own stock in Haliburton Corp., received mere pocket change in Tax relief, am as frightened and revolted by the actions my own government as by our alleged terrorist enemies, and do not have a hollow core of personal insecurity that must be validated by idol (with or without feet of clay)puking forth debased moral certainty, what is there about George Bush that I should admire? His drug addiction? his cowardice? His consistent failure in every business enterprise he’s attempted? His scholastic ineptitude? His complete lack of both curiosity and intellectual aspiration? Certainly not his compassion, humility, and unflinching honesty, because he has none.

Have you visited the FDR memorial in Washington DC? I did this past spring. The dozen or so quotes from Roosevelt literally brought tears to my eyes. I felt embarrassed that I was so ignorant of how great a man he was and I dispared to think there was a single “statesman” in America today who could speak such high minded ideals with even a pretense of sincerity.

It’s time to stop this wishy washy pandering to Republicans. Republicans are the party of ‘of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations.’ Anyone who supports the Republican agenda deserves to be despised.

The trick of how to respect your opponents when they don’t respect you is very difficult. I had the same problem over here in England during the Thatcher years of the 1980s. Many of my friends (normal, decent people) supported her and her policies while not realizing the damage that was being done. The only thing to do is explain over and over again why they are wrong-it is a long and drawn out process but it works eventually.

Also you do get to keep your friends!

Aside from the fact that I disagree with most of G.W. Bush’s policies/actions (Environment, War on Terrorism, Energy Policy, Economics, ...) there is one thing that strikes me again and again. To quote Bush:
“I don’t like discussion. I prefer clarity.”
What kind of accommodation can be made with an attitude like that?

Cheney says that he is “not introspective. [he doesn’t] like looking back. How can he learn from his mistakes?

... and what about this Karl Rove joker?

It seems to me that G.W. Bush is not a President. He just isn’t that bright. Bush is a political figurehead for a regime orchestrated by Karl Rove to implement plans conceived by Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz as motivated by big oil (including Enron), pharacuticals (Pharma) and agriculture (Monsanto).

The vote from the Supreme Court that put Bush in office was cast by Clarence Thomas, previously an attorney for Monsanto.

Freedom to choose? Try to find a corn chip that hasn’t been genetically modified. Hard to tell? Guess what, Bush is against labeling. Milk without growth hormones? The real cause of death “by natural causes?”

I think about all of the intelligent Americans out there, who are relatively well informed who still want to support Bush, and sigh. The only thing I can think is that their values are vastly different than mine.

Mr Keillor,

Thank you for a most thought-provoking essay.
I think you touched on some important issues.

But all praise to your correspondent Ronald James.

Bring on the revolution !

Until the residents of the USA take up their responsibililty and abolish their political system, there is no hope of meaningful reform.
If you wish to have democracy, you must have participation. That is, not just a single vote once every 4 years, for vague promises that are quickly abandoned.

You need, at least, binding citizen-instituted referenda, and you need to see your own history of state secrets.
If you don’t know your history, you are doomed to repeat it. If you can’t actively respond to that knowledge, you’re a prisoner.

I can hardly comprehend the disaster your Mr Bush has wrought. But he must be reelected, so he can be charged, indicted, impeached, and imprisoned for the crimes he has instigated.
I don’t see the Kerry crowd holding him to account, or substantially changing domestic or foreign policy.
Why bother ? Just write the cheque to someone else. If Bush et al go free, what’s to stop the next tyrannical miscreant from doing the same or worse ?

Dante’s hell may well be reserved for those that remain neutral in times of crisis, but there might still be room left for those that perpetuate your dilemna by other means.

Good luck, America. Your election is a worthless charade as you only have two right-wing members of the same party. By eliminating Nader, Kucinich and others, you have already adopted the black-white discourse that guarantees you will never hear the real problems, let alone find solutions.
Even if they couldn’t or didn’t win, you could still listen to them ? No ?

“Democrats” and “Republicans” look all the same to me. Like sheep. With blinkers.

To Bruce—I can’t speak (or write) for van den Bosch, but I’d like to respond to your post.  This is not in support of the Republican Party (which I think is almost as bad as the Democratic Party!) but a defense of some of what are commonly thought of as “conservative” principles.  Again—Republicans do not always govern as conservatives.

What we need in this country is LESS GOVERNMENT, especially at the federal level.  I agree that if you want to grow something on your property, you should be able to (as long as it doesn’t infringe on your neighbors’ rights somehow). 

With respect to your complaint about paying your 15% FICA tax, what I think we need is to have NO FICA tax at all because we need to have NO federally-mandated inter-generational income transfer scheme (which is what Social Security is).  Yes—I think we should eliminate Social Security (I would do it only for those under 40 on 1/1/05, but that’s a subject for another debate).

As for FDR—I don’t know of which statements you write, but I do know this.  FDR was President when a lot of legislation was passed and signed that created the welfare state that we have toda, with its too-large, instrusive federal government and bureaucracy.

I will be voting for Pres. Bush in November just like I did in 2000 (it didn’t “count”—I live in Michigan).  I will vote for him, not because I think he’s perfect or because I support everything he has done, but because he has 1) done what in his judgement he needed to do to protect this country (Afghanistan and, yes, Iraq) and 2) he is more likely to govern as a conservative than John Kerry is (despite the Medicare drug bill, campaign finance reform, and other decidedly non-conservative legislation he’s signed).

Thanks for reading.

I have never laughed and cried so much at the same time.  Thanks Garrison.

G. van den Bosch - G. van den Bosch –
1. Excuse my mistake, but before you ‘outed’ yourself, you did not come right out and refer to the Bible as your source of moral clarity, and you did state that you were seeking moral clarity in your political leaders, hence my mistake. It is clear now that you are seeking leadership that agrees with your interpretation of the Bible, in word if not in deed. Thank you for clarifying that point. Please don’t pretend that you give equal credence or respect to the principles embodied in the Torah, Koran, or any other spiritual tradition. And it would be a healthy step to also acknowledge that you are a member of a group or church whose interpretation of the Bible is only one of many among practicing Christians.

2. Head Start is on the Republican hit list and will be gone very soon if Bush prevails. That is simply a fact. You can also say goodbye to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Housing programs, etc. I don’t know how things are where you are, but our churches and community groups are already collapsing under the burden of providing basic necessities for the homeless and hungry in our area. Incidentally, we have one of the lowest rates of unemployment in the country, yet poverty is rampant and visible.

3. Please don’t condescend to me. I stated that we should never believe that our ONLY option is to kill or be killed. I believe that true spiritual leaders from Christ to Ghandi have made this point the centerpiece of their teachings. I believe this tendency to think in such narrow terms is the sign of an immature mind. It is not a matter of wishing things were different, it is a matter of working to make them so. May I remind you that you are not God, and it is highly unlikely that God speaks through your candidate.

4. If you own a home, I will tell you that we all help you pay for your daughter’s clothes in the form of your mortgage interest and property tax deductions. We also paid your way when you worked for Head Start. By all means protect your family. The best way to do that is to see all the world as your family, including Iraqi children for example. Your points about Sudan and children imprisoned in Iraq are silly because I’ve already stated my position on those things.

Finally, I hope you will look carefully at the platform, policies and actions of the politicians you support for election. Obviously, you shall have to choose between the lesser of two evils and it will always be so for someone who is struggling to live in congruence with any humanitarian value system. However, it is an effort that must be made. Think Atticus Finch.

You are most welcome – and good morning!

Ah, more liberal nonsense.  Funny how often the term “rhetoric” is used.  Rhetoric is usually unsubstantiated speech.  I didn’t find much of this article to be justified with any substantial arguments behind it.  Just a bunch of name calling.  Much similar to the Democratic platform of today--rhetoric.

“Hypocrisies shine like cat turds in the moonlight!” I think Twain would be proud.

For one of the few times I find myself disagreeing with Mr. Keillor.  To say that the country is in hock “up to the hubcaps” doesn’t begin to plumb the depth of the debt.  Vote!!!

All the usage of colorful adverbs and adjectives probably isn’t required, but you caught the sad truth.  Through it made it a great read.

For those that think only the Republicans can deal with threats to America - I agree with the awareness
not with the implementation.

It’s a good time to remember what made America!

Adastra

Prayer for all Americans:those of faith or not.
Dear Higher Being(even higher power than George W Bush), Please know we are on the side of each of our God and not stating that God is on side. Please guide and protect the people of the United States who need your Grace more than any time in the history of our country.Yes, George bush must be defeated, but we are not praying just to have you decide an election, but rather to guide us to see the difference between EVIL and GOOD! Please help us to know that it is through love and respect and careing for one another that George Walker Bush will not be relected and never again to be in national government!  Amen

Before I sign off for good (38 emails this morning was a bit much), I owe Joanne a “Never Mind” myself. I do appreciate her drawing G. out on his political evolution, and the moral contradictions therein. If I were a fundamentalist Christian, I would have a hard time reconciling the immorality of the Republican party—the lying (WMD, nonservice in the National Guard, rampant cocaine use W can’t bring himself to admit), the cheating (Enron, serial marriages among those most opposed to granting gays equal protection under the law, putting candidates in nomination—as the Republicans did in Illinois—who ask their wives for public blow jobs) and the stealing (Halliburton, ever-expanding budget deficits). I would wonder whether my Bible contains a loop-hole under “Thou shalt not kill” that allows the slaughter of tens of thousands of innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq. I would wonder at the mercy of an Administration that wants to deny medical cannabis to dying cancer patients and to imprison their caregivers, while turning a blind eye (and perhaps worse) to the largest opium crop EVER harvested in Afghanistan.

The introduction of the fundamentalist Christian influence in our politics not only dishonors the wisdom of our founding fathers (and mothers) to keep church and state separate, but it puts us in a position to be unfavorably compared with the Taliban. They too believed that their actions were/are divinely inspired, and they seem to have a similar respect for women as our own “divinely inspired” politicians who want to deny women the right to choose their own lives and paths.

So to me, the moral decision this time is easy. I will vote for John Kerry, who quoted Lincoln so eloquently at the Democratic convention that we should not arrogantly brag—as the Republicans do—that “God is on (their) side” and instead humbly pray every day that “we are on God’s side.” My God made the heavens and the earth, and She put me here to be of service and to protect Her creation. So the moral choice for me is easy: Defend women. Defend children. Defend all peoples on the earth. Defend America. Defend the earth. Defeat Bush.

Thanks, Garrison, for stimulating so much heat and light this weekend. Now it’s time to go register more reawakening Americans, and throw the self-righteous and immoral bastards out. How’s that for a moral imperative? If Bush’s ignorance and arrogance has accomplished a reawakening of our democracy, then “it (truly) is all good.”

Good morning, a quick comment before I head off to work:

Joanne, our conversation here is illustrative for me on how difficul