Live Q&As

You are wise.  Learnign to dsitinguish between conclusions with which we disagree (on either side), and  presuming the worst about each others motives and beliefs, is CRUCIAL.  Thank you for saying so.

In fact, I don not think that there is broad agreement about the need to reduce income disparity, but I also do not think it matters so much.  As you point out, I think there IS broad agreement about reducing the number of  kids who go to bed hungy each night, espeically in the world's richest nation.  If responding to THAT was our goal, there is no doubt in my mind that we could and would be successful in doing so.

I guess I don't see how one can reaonably isolate one side as the one to blame.  We ahve two houses of Congress -- one lead by Republicans and the other lead by Democrats, and neither leadership or the majority which follow them has behaved well.  In fact, the President was shot down more regularly in the Senate by his own party thyan he was by Republicans!

Rather than meeting in the middle, I think we need to re-establish concensus about where we want to go, and then go there together.  It needs to be less about horse-trading and more about a shared vision which is crafted by both sides.

It may feel good to have written that, and you may even be correct, at least partially so, but it's hardly an effective approach.  Do you actually think there isn't hate spewed forth on both sides?  Do you not think that even if it it not equal (itelf a debatable conclusion), we can improve things w/o cleaning our own respective houses?  Are you prepared to stop lableing people racist in order to create the context in which one could demand that "they" stop calling people moochers?

I certainly appreciate your feelings, and even feel them myself -- from time to time -- but in truth we have ENORMOUS power. 

Let's start by admitting that pretty much all people vote their own self-interest, even if they define it in different ways.  Then let's ask what interests we have that need to be better served and argue for them.  If, as you say, the mjority of avg. folks are left out, that represents a huge number of people -- people who need to stop being depressed about how things are, and focus on making them how they could be.

The dangers of lines drawn in the sand, as you point out, cannot be underestimated.  Instead of the sort of pragmatic suppleness which the President promises (forget whether you agree its how he governs or is good at creating it even when he wants to), Republicans have dug in, re-trenched, and stiffened their necks.  N ot a recipe for success in a culture that celebrates dynamism.  Until Republicans figure out how to integrate conservatism and more fluid/dynmaic responses to the problems we face as a nation, they are likely to keep losing elections.

The dangers of lines drawn in the sand, as you point out, cannot be underestimated.  Instead of the sort of pragmatic suppleness which the President promises (forget whether you agree its how he governs or is good at creating it even when he wants to), Republicans have dug in, re-trenched, and stiffened their necks.  N ot a recipe for success in a culture that celebrates dynamism.  Until Republicans figure out how to integrate conservatism and more fluid/dynmaic responses to the problems we face as a nation, they are likely to keep losing elections.

I totally agree about the role for both brakes and accelerators on any vehicle, including the engines of government.  And I think that were politicians able to think of it that way, they would appreciate the necessity, yes necessity, of even those in the opposition with whom they most deeply disagree.

Both sides tend to reward those political players who present themselves as messiah-like figures who possess all the wisdom and policies with which the nation can be saved from whatever ills it suffers.  That is the definition of a snale oil salesman, and it doesnt matter if he or she if republican or democrat.

We need each other, and as soon as we have leaders who not only appreciate that, but talk about it and govern accordingly, we can get moving again.  The challenge today is that the last time thigns were this bad, it took an external enemy to mobilize us in that regard, and that is a rather dangerous way to build unity and efficacy.

So your argument is that pundits are not equal, but as long as they are proven right by the results they predicted, they ARE constructive?  Would you have made the same case had Mitt Romney won?

Pundits are not meant to be neutral, so I am not sure what bothers you.  We agree that they should be honest about their lack of neutrality, but the people you mentioned certainly are -- sometimes to the point of obnoxiousness to the "other" side, in my opinion.  and for the record that is exactly how I feel about their counter-parts on the left.

The things that troubles me is when pundits, or just regular people, are so attached to electoral victory, or having suffered defeat, they choose to keep re-fighting the same ideological battles, instead of figuring our how their views can contribute to creating shared solutions in light of emergent political realities.

I am not sure that the change in Republican posture can be attributed to Dixiecrats, though I appreciate how it elegantly answers a bunch of questions.  Nor do I think the issues date to 2000.  In fact, they go back much further -- at least to the anger created among Democrats by ronald Reagan's victory.  And in truth, much of it goes back to the anger and disappointment created by teh war in Vietnam and the Watergate scandal.

Politcs lost it's enchanting qualities many years ago, and in the face of such disenchantment, we have not figured out how to re-enchant it.  How do we raise the bar on politcs when it is all so public and when pretty much anyone who wants to be heard can find an outlet for their views, however angry or mean-spirited they may be, let alone based on no factual information? 

Both sides have this problem and neither has figured out how best to respond by doing anything other than playing to their rerspective bases, which become more base with each passing year.  How we recover a sense of politics as sacred, w/o limiting participation -- that's the real challenge you describe.

That's about as accurate, fair and constructive as those who decry Democrats as socialists bent on destroying private wealth, who hate white people.  Both you and those who make such claims about Democrats are the ones who are soiling our shared politcal landscape and you owe us all an apology.

sorry to be so tough on you, but the rage you are pedaling has no place in constructive politcal engagement.  But as you yourself said, you have no interest in constructing anything,  You simply want to relelage Republicans to Oblvion,  How sadly ironic that that is what you imagine them saying about you. 

Sausage indeed, but sacred sausage it is.  In fact, no apologies shousl be offered for taking all of the otherwise difficult to use "nasty bits" of an animal and turning them into tasty and noutricious foods.  In fact that IS the gaol of good politcs:  take what you have, however disagreeable it may be, and turn into something productive!

And yes, 100 times yes, to the dangerous of absolutist/purists arguments.  They are NEVER in anybody's long-term best interest.

It's a little weird to describe this as being about people who have no interest in taking personal responsibility, when the election was won by two guys, each of whose lives has been about doing just that!  One need not like or agree with either the President of the VP to acknowledge that.

Rather than pretend about the facts, as an excuse for not bringing the valuable insights of conservative thinking to today's political reality, why not ask where given what you believe, you could actually make a positive difference.  You choose to jeer when you could be playing the game!  I know that it's more fun to stand on teh side lines and heckle, but it kind of blows your committment ot taking responsibility out of the water. 

No, we can get along when we continue to insist on presuming the worst about each other, as you do, nor when we presume to know another person's mind.

And to be clear, this is NOT about just getting along. It's about addressing the poliitcal paralysis which will harm us all.  Just as some presume that a rising tide will lift all boats, not only in teh water, but in an economy, we should all appreciate that continuing to do business as usual will sink us all.  Your righteous indignation from the left, will not spare you any more than it will those on the right who engage in teh same kind of thinking.

It took a hundred years to overcome many of the wounds created by the Civil War, and in our much more fast-paced and increasingly globalized world, that's not something we can afford.  But you are correct that this is not a unique moment .  It is however uniquely ripe with potential.  Why?  Because it is our moment -- our  moment to make a difference, to pull away from polarization and the cliffs (fsical and otherwise) from which we will plunge if we fail to do so.