Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Schadenfreude

I'd be lying if I didn't admit to being pleased about this.

Of course, my optimism is tempered by watching close to NOTHING productive come of any "investigation" during the last 5 years, so I'll refrain from cartwheels just yet.

8 comments:

Lily said...

Just heard- about time! One wonders how much faster it might have progressed if a dirty dress got thrown into the mix.

Cantankerous Bitch said...

Kinda OT, but -
While reading threads about the National Enquirer's claim that Bush is drinking again, someone chirped up to remind us that it was the Enquirer that "broke" the Lewinsky story. /snort

Lily said...

Well, why don't repubs ever make a mess?
Then again, that mess cost us how many thousands in redeemable Starr tokens?

Cantankerous Bitch said...

I think the question is why doesn't the general public care about the messes Repubs *have* made. Could it be as pathetically simple as "no sex scandal = no interest"?

Renee said...

Oh Christ - I hope not CB. The word on the street in my little worktown of New Hope, PA is THANK- FUCKING-GOD!

Followed closely by, "I wonder if the Dems are going to use this information to reclaim the White House."

Is it too early to for the Dems to start the Replubican Blame-Game?

Cantankerous Bitch said...

Not too early, I just wonder if they have the stones for it.

Lily said...

Why don't they? I mean, the high road never got them anywhere. Kerry sat there and took shots at his 'war hero' record when Bush didn't even serve. This sin't mud flinging, this is reality. How many times will we say "aren't they gonna say anything???? "
Ok I am no democrat lover but I think secretly, as unacademic as this will sound to you reasonable readers- I think that part of why I can't freakin stand them is that they are so spineless.
There was a sign in DC saying "laura's a lush" and I kept hearing people say "what does that mean?Isn't she a librarian? "
yeah, a drunk driving killing people librarian. And let's not get going on the cocaine..
Yeah, maybe Clinton inhaled, they all inhaled, and it made them feel too groovy to be vindictive. What explains it???

Cantankerous Bitch said...

I'm so torn on the high road vs. low road that I hardly know what to do with myself. Part of me is tempted to insist that the Dems take some lessons from The Rovian Overlord and take advantage of the fact that like it or not, the voting public is susceptible to, and motivated by, character assasination and ridicule. However, I'm all but certain this is a function of my desperation over the relative powerlessness of the left.

On the other hand, I think there's something to be said for the high ground, in that I think a huge portion of Americans are sick and tired of the constant vitriol coming from the far right and left wings. If politics has ever felt slimier, I'm not sure when it was (including Watergate). The left and the right both sneer at "centrism" (however ill-defined) and insist that any move toward the middle is the death knell of party ideals.

I don't necessarily agree, though my reasons may be atypical. Every time I take one of those political compass quizzes, I end up somewhere to the left of Ghandi, but my willingness to move toward the center is a matter of pragmatism. It worked for Bill Clinton, and despite the noise from the right about the Lewinsky mess, it looked to me as if the country was in pretty fine shape during his administration. I may be terribly naive (something I'm always willing to concede) but it seems that a utilitarian approach may be the only thing that gives us any traction in the coming years -- policies/candidates that serve the greatest good, or at a minimum, appease the largest number of voters.

Clearly my assumption is that the majority of Americans are inherently more centrist than either wing will have us believe, and in this I may very well be wrong. But each opinion poll I read seems to support the idea that large numbers of voters are fairly middle-of-the-road on everything from choice to defense.

If both parties refuse to acknowledge this in the name of ideological purity, while I understand the temptation, I don't know that it's practical. All I do know is that if we (the so-called "activist" Dems) insist on a profound swing to the left in an effort to compensate for the disaster that is the Bush adminstration, backlash is all but inevitable. I don't know about any of you, but I'm tired of the pendulum ride, and I'd like to leave my son a legacy that is less like a roller coaster and more like a functional republic.