On George Tiller

When I first heard the news about the murder of Dr. George Tiller, two feelings came to the fore: one of shock and the other of dread.

I don't have explain the shock, but I feel I need to share the reason for the dread. My reasoning is that once the news of this spread, bloggers and columnists would start pointing fingers and using this shocking event for political ends. And of course, it has begun.

Now, I have to say that I am pro-choice. But I am always amazed at how some use this as a way to paint those who are pro-life as zealots waiting to lead the next crazy person to shoot a doctor. Or, that if they think abortion is murder, that they must support the killing of Dr. Tiller.

This is nonsense. I disagree with those on the pro-life side, but I have enough sense to know that most of them are good, decent folks. They would not hurt a fly.

So, what about the Bill O'Reilly's of the world who have used pretty strong rhetoric over the years? Well, let us remember that those who opposed President Bush also used pretty harsh language over the past eight years as well. If something had happened to the President at that point, would we hold those who used passionate speech responsible?

I'm not saying that people should say what they want about issues. I think we have become a very uncivil society in many ways. But I have a hard time seeing a direct link between those who call abortion doctors, "baby killers" and those who actually end up committing violence.

The sad fact is, whether it's the abortion, or war or any other push button issue, you are bound to find someone who uses over-the-top speech to stir up those in the crowds. But that doesn't mean that it will lead to someone getting a gun and it should not be used as an excuse to shut down the other side.

Maybe the unconfortable thing about this is that there might be no good answer. It could be a troubled mind that just decided to kill someone for no good reason, I don't know.

But I wish the finger pointing would stop. Unless O'Reilly and others told this person to kill someone, then we to not provide an answer as much as greive with those left behind after this tragedy.

"Onlyforward," Indeed

I was checking out Rebuild the Party, an effort to help reshape the GOP and saw this message from a person whose online name is "Onlyforward." I've highlighted some sections that I think are important:

Many years back I voted for Reagan and Bush 1. This year I spent election day making phone calls to get out the vote for Obama. The Republicans have lost me as a voter until they make major changes to the party, so here's my take

1) Can the negativity. As a PA (Pennsylvania?) voter, I got tons of mail telling me to vote for Barack Obama- he'll lower my taxes, he'll help uninsured people, he'll bring me a moon full of green cheese. I got tons of mail telling me not to vote for Obama because he was a secret Muslim socialist terrorist. I'm not really sure who the other guy in the election was- I never heard anything about him or his policies.

Folks, the divide and conquer, get out the base and fearmonger your way to 50.1% of the vote method is *dead*. It should have died after the vile attacks on Senator McCain's family in the 2000 SC primary, but for some odd reason McCain decided to pal around with the same guys who slandered his adopted daughter. I have two adopted kids who look a lot like Bridget- why would I *ever* vote for a candidate from a party that would do that?

Obama offered something positive. You might not like what he offered, but at least he put it out there. McCain ran on nothing but “Don’t vote for the scary guy”

2) Run on ideas, not personalities. I hear lots of talk about Palin in 2012, Jindal in 2012, yet nowhere do I hear a discussion of what they believe in. The Republican party used to be a party of ideas. There’s a great heritage of conservative thought from the early days of Buckley and Goldwater. What happened? We’ve let Bush pervert the idea of conservatism to the point where a guy who runs up a huge federal deficit, creates badly designed massive federal programs like the Medicare drug benefit and who follows a highly interventionist foreign policy is considered a conservative. Hunh? If I want an enormous federal government I’ll vote Democratic- at least they have a clue how to run it.

3) Ignore Rush Limbaugh, Hannity and the theocrats when it comes to those ideas. Running on “We hate gays, we hate abortions, we hate sex ed, we hate stem cell research, we hate evolution, we hate educated elitists” ticket sounds great when you look at turning out the ~30% of the electorate that’s firmly in the Dark Ages, but the rest of the world has moved on, including most of the young voters. Yes, I know abortion is the hot button item- but maybe we could spend a bit of that energy coming up with sane policies to reduce teen pregnancy, to encourage adoption and to help young mothers? Hint- the rest of the first world does this, and they have lower abortion rates than we do.

Drop the gay thing entirely. This is a long term massive loser- young voters simply don’t care about this, and in 20-30 years you’re going to look like the folks who argued for Virginia in Loving v. Virginia.

4) Start working slowly and quietly, but *now*. When the democrats put up stuff you don’t like, don’t scream and yell “Socialist!”. Instead, offer a *coherent*, intelligent counterproposal. Work to remove the worst chunks of the legislation, and take credit for killing the ugly pork and overreaches. Do *not* filibuster everything- all this will do is give the Democrats 61 senate seats in 2010.

I’ve got more, but this is too long already, so we can start there.

It's a good start. One hopes Michael Steele is listening.

Two Moderate GOP Groups Team Up

From the Hill Blog:

The Republican Majority for Choice recently announced plans to form partnerships with the WISH List - Women in the House and Senate - and with other groups who share the ideals of limited government intrusion and a commitment to the core conservative fiscal policy that once made the GOP so strong. Enthusiasm for these efforts from Republicans across the country was overwhelming. Consistent in their support was an understanding that the GOP cannot survive as a regional Party driven mainly by divisive wedge issues.

The last election showed us what happens when the GOP abandons its core agenda of smaller government, fiscal responsibility and individual freedom. In suburbs across the country, voters who the GOP once relied on chose to support Democratic candidates. A recent study by Muhlenberg College’s Institute of Public Opinion conducted in the key swing state of Pennsylvania showed GOP voters were defecting in record numbers. Sixty-seven percent of those who switched in the last election self-describe as in favor reproductive rights. Fifty-three percent said the Party had become too extreme in its positions and one third supported the sentiment they left the party because of the influence of the religious right on the GOP’s social positions. If the GOP does not change and become a true big tent these voters will not be coming back.

Social fundamentalists who criticize RMC for creating partnerships to promote a broader common-sense agenda also seem to think these defections are good. They have failed to connect the dots — moderates in important swing states left the GOP and the GOP lost elections. Demanding 100% adherence to an extreme single issue agenda seems more important to them than the future success of the GOP. It’s this attitude that will further marginalize the Republican Party and relegate us to a permanent minority.

Despite these nay-sayers we remain optimistic that a true big tent GOP is within reach. We know through our own polling that 81% of Republican voters support a GOP Platform that says we can agree to disagree on social issues. New leadership at the Party, the NRCC and NRSC seem to recognize the vital role of moderate Republicans in winning elections. More importantly, they seem to understand that the GOP must focus on core fiscal conservative values and NOT divisive wedge issues to gain back the trust of voters.

H/T: Real Republican Majority Blog

Gone, Baby, Gone?

"To my friends in the Northeast, get ready, baby, it is time to turn it on and work, and work to do what we always do well - and that is win. We are going to win again in the Northeast. We're going to continue to win in the South. We are going to win with a new storm in the Midwest. And we're going to get to the West, we're going to lock it down, and we're going to win there too."
-Michael Steele, Republican National Committee Chair, January 30, 2009.

Many people see the election of Michael Steele as the start of the GOP revivial. I surely hope so. In his acceptance speech, he talked about winning again in the Northeast. Some have hoped this means running candidates that will win in what was once a GOP bastion. One would hope that is what he is talking about. The GOP has basically become a regional party, having stregth only in the South. The hard line focus on social issues have driven people away from the GOP especially in areas like the Northeast. David Frum highlights a recent poll that shows how GOP support has cratered in Pennsylvania. Frum reads from the Mulhenburg College poll:

As recently as May 2006, the Democrats held a 550,000 person lead in party registration in the Keystone State. By November 2008, that lead had grown to 1,200,000.

Yeah, I bolded that 1.2 million number. So, what is causing the GOP to hemorrage in the Keystone State? Well...

Most described themselves as moderate, 37 percent, or liberal, 27 percent -- an obvious contrast to a party overwhelmingly composed of voters who describe themselves as conservative...

...A strong majority of the switchers, 67 percent, also described themselves as in favor of abortion rights...

...Forty-six percent said they were closer to the Democratic Party on taxes, and 38 percent said they were closer to the Democratic Party's position on issues such as gay marriage and abortion and roughly a third agreed with the statement, "The influence of the religious right on the Republican Party's social positions led me to leave the party."

Now those who listen to Rush Limbaugh probably don't give a hoot about those of us who are moderates. Most will say "good riddance." For them, trying to appease "RINOs" would mean become a weak copy of the GOP.

But that doesn't have to be the case. One would have to assume that a lot of these voters supported the elder Bush and even Reagan. These are not wishy-washy people.

If the Republicans want to win back the Northeast, it means running candidates that fit that region of the country. They need to support candidates that might (horrors of horrors) support abortion rights, or gay rights. Social conservatives can run well in the South, but in areas like the Northeast, candidates need to be more moderate.

The question is if Steele can get the RNC to be more flexible and try to win back those moderate voters. I want to be hopeful, but when a majority of Republicans think Sarah Palin is the future of the GOP, one has to wonder.

Time will tell if he ready to represent in the Northeast and elsewhere, because, baby, this is serious.