Klein: The difference between the GOP & Democratic Party has never been clearer

[zoogs]

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/3/17/11254506/republican--democratic-parties-garland

"The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics," [congressional scholars Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein, in 2012] wrote. "It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.

"When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country’s challenges."

The op-ed hit like a bomb. Mann and Ornstein were institutionalists with wide respect in both parties — Ornstein, in fact, worked (and still works) for the conservative American Enterprise Institute. For them to call out one party as "the core of the problem" in American governance was to violate all the rules of polite Washington society. Their diagnosis was controversial at the time, to put it lightly.

It is obviously correct now.

Good stuff from Klein. He's not going out on a limb, merely summarizing, but it's worth the read.

The salient point is that it isn't merely the Trump phenomenon, it isn't merely the Tea Party. It's the power players, too, and they've been at this game of obstruction for years, all the while claiming they were the victims, not perpetrators of intransigence.

 

As Klein writes, "There is a deep pull in political punditry toward asserting symmetry between the two political parties — whatever sins one party is guilty of, surely the other party is no better." To borrow a few words from the face of the 2016 establishment, let's dispense with this fiction. They know exactly what they're doing, and always have.

[TGHusker]

We are most assuredly at 'dysfunction junction'. There are 2 ditches here that the repubs have to avoid:

1. During the pre-1994 election and the Contract wt America take over of the House by Repubs (first time I think since 1952) & esp before the 1980 Reagan revolution when the repubs gained the Senate- the repubs were mostly 'window dressing' the loyal opposition. They were an almost permanent minority and were glad for the crumbs of bread they received.

2. Ditch 2 is what we are seeing now. The repubs tasted blood by now having tasted power. They have became embolden and now try to take 'uncompromising' positions that aren't working. All out of fear of being perceived as a gasp - a moderate. Moderation is the new cuss word in republican circles. I also think that this track also pushes people to the extremes on the dem side to counteract.

 

Time for some statesmen to rise up in both parties. The Dem leader of the Senate, Reid, and the repub leader, McConnell keep throwing insults at each other's leadership (or lack thereof). So we won't see it there. But sometime someone(s) are going to have to step up boldly in HUMILITY and reach out to the other side. Otherwise this dysfunction will continue. The only other option is to turn back the clock to 1979 where one party held all of the cards. Let them run it for a while and when their plans fail - then replace them --- that would be a repeat of the last 35 years and it ended up to where we are today.

 

Maybe it is time for a real 3rd party option.

[cm husker]

What do people hope to achieve through congressional compromise?

 

I don't agree with almost any republican social position, but economically, for example, compromise on the tax front means pay offs to corporate interests and voting interests, usually at the cost of middle class earners (only source of enough tax revenue) and future earners (who will be paying off the debt load).

 

Compromises in economic policies do not work.

 

The unfortunate thing is that while republicans nibble at the edges of responsible and sensible reform (eg major tax reform), at the end of the day, they still are all too happy to provide a payoff to their own special interests, which is what democrats do unapologetically.

[BigRedBuster]

It is possible that we won't have a 3rd party. That isn't because there won't be a NEW party. It's because the Republican party might be completely done.

 

And....in my mind...that's a good thing.

 

Now, what we need to do is make sure it's not the American conservative version of Iraq post Saddam. We can't allow crazies to take over and ruin any chance that a reasonable conservative voice grows and becomes main stream. My fear is....like in Iraq....only the crazy extremes will be able to garner any form of power and we won't be better off and maybe even worse off.

 

This may take several election cycles to completely work it's way through. So, we might not know what we will ultimately have until 8-10 years down the road. I firmly believe there is a very large group on the conservative side of politics that are searching for that political voice that isn't lead by extremes. One that we can actually support when you see them open their mouths.

[Creighton Duke]

Oh man....Ezra Klein....hahaha

[funhusker]

Oh man....Creighton Duke....hahahaha

 

 

 

Sorry, but this type of attitude frustrates me. It is your right to dislike an author, and to let the thread know of your dislike. But if you feel the need to take the effort to tell us of your dislikes, or distrust, can you at least make the effort to explain "why"?

 

As an indifferent observer, if I read Ezra's piece that includes quotes and assertions based on his observations, and your simple response of "ah, man, whatever"....I would tend to side with the person who at least attempted to participate in a conversation...

[Creighton Duke]

Klein's writings are misandrist at best and dangerous to men, particularly college men, at worst. This kid disgusts me.

[funhusker]

Klein's writings are misandrist at best and dangerous to men, particularly college men, at worst. This kid disgusts me.

Thank you....

 

So you're not saying he is wrong....he just doesn't like men?

 

I'm assuming, since the article really wasn't about "college men".

[Creighton Duke]

I only briefly looked at the article linked...

 

My disdain for Klein dates back... a few years.

[funhusker]

gotcha..

 

I have a quick trigger this week. I was going back and forth with a family member, and he would discredit whole articles I cited because one of the four authors happened to work for a Democratic President (never mind the years he also worked for Republican ones)

[Creighton Duke]

gotcha..

 

I have a quick trigger this week. I was going back and forth with a family member, and he would discredit whole articles I cited because one of the four authors happened to work for a Democratic President (never mind the years he also worked for Republican ones)

Haha...looks like we both have the same itchy trigger today/this week. I apologize for being brusque. I welcome all writings and points of view from those from all political spectrums, (whether I agree with them or not is a different story!) However, Klein has written some truly sinister stuff in the past, hence my reaction when I see him linked.

 

That being said...let's hope we can both chill out and enjoy some tourney games!

[zoogs]

Klein's writings are misandrist at best and dangerous to men, particularly college men, at worst. This kid disgusts me.

 

You'll forgive me if I can't take those hysterical characterizations seriously from an unabashed admirer of Donald Trump.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree, on (I suspect) a very fundamental level.

[Creighton Duke]

 

Klein's writings are misandrist at best and dangerous to men, particularly college men, at worst. This kid disgusts me.

 

You'll forgive me if I can't take those hysterical characterizations seriously from an unabashed admirer of Donald Trump.

 

I will always forgive you Zoogs. Google is your friend. Don't take my word for it.

 

EDIT: To your edit, possibly. I'm not sure what level you're referring to. But you're a good mod and I'll always forgive you.

[Moesker]

Not sure there is much difference when the final four consists of a fascist, a theocrat, a socialist and a crook.

[ZRod]

Not sure there is much difference when the final four consists of a fascist, a theocrat, a socialist and a crook.

Who's who? Those can all cover 2 to 4 candidates.