The cast of Law & Order is pretty busy these days. First, Fred Thompson, who plays District Attorney Arthur Branch is flirting with a run for presidency as a Republican, and now longtime Democrat Sam Waterston, who plays Executive A.D.A. Jack McCoy is lending his name to Unity08, a group calling for a moderate presidential ticket that would have one Republican and one Democrat:
*sigh* You know, it all sound real nice, and it's phrased in such a way as to make it hard to question, but this is The Astute Bloggers where conventional wisdom is always questioned.
There are many cliches that shape our lives: Violence never solved anything; Treat others as you would want to be treated; Takes one to know one!; etc. A unity ticket is a nice thought, but it shows an incredible amount of ignorance to our current political state of affairs and, for that matter, the affairs of man in general. It's easy to say that the politicians aren't representing the majority of the people, but is this really true? We have the power to change things with our votes, yet the Congress is sharply divided. We can blame 427 groups and big money all we want, but ultimately, we're the ones that put them there. The thought that a unity ticket is somehow gonna stop these extreme forces in politics from having an impact is not only ignorant, it's laughable. What about the Congress, Sam? We've pretty much got "unity" there. The other day we had a vote to abandon the troops in Iraq that passed 218-212. That's just a 3 vote swing from perfect "unity." How's this working out do you think? Oh, that's right, Congress is full of extremists, we need moderates there to work together. So other than supporting our troops or not supporting our troops, there's a third choice?
It all makes me appreciate my parents. They had enough respect for me and my brothers to honest with us on many of life's tenets. Is it true violence never solved anything? "No," my parents told me, "it solved the Hitler problem pretty effectively, and it would've solved the Stalin problem if Truman had had any guts!"
"There's a huge majority of the American people who are ready for this, who are not represented in the current system. And this is an opportunity for those people to speak up," the actor said.
"I think by its existence it will have a beneficial effect on anybody who's running for president, because they will be obliged to look over their other shoulder at the center, and not simply address the partisan factions that have so much sway in primaries," Waterston said.
The aspirations of Unity '08 actually go a bit beyond the traditional meaning of bipartisanship – in that GOP and Democratic party leaders would not be calling the shots when Unity08 decides who will be on its slate of candidates.
On its website, the group says "Unity08 believes neither of today's major parties reflects the aspirations, fears or will of the majority of Americans. Both have polarized and alienated the people. Both are unduly influenced by single-issue groups. Both are excessively dominated by money."
*sigh* You know, it all sound real nice, and it's phrased in such a way as to make it hard to question, but this is The Astute Bloggers where conventional wisdom is always questioned.
There are many cliches that shape our lives: Violence never solved anything; Treat others as you would want to be treated; Takes one to know one!; etc. A unity ticket is a nice thought, but it shows an incredible amount of ignorance to our current political state of affairs and, for that matter, the affairs of man in general. It's easy to say that the politicians aren't representing the majority of the people, but is this really true? We have the power to change things with our votes, yet the Congress is sharply divided. We can blame 427 groups and big money all we want, but ultimately, we're the ones that put them there. The thought that a unity ticket is somehow gonna stop these extreme forces in politics from having an impact is not only ignorant, it's laughable. What about the Congress, Sam? We've pretty much got "unity" there. The other day we had a vote to abandon the troops in Iraq that passed 218-212. That's just a 3 vote swing from perfect "unity." How's this working out do you think? Oh, that's right, Congress is full of extremists, we need moderates there to work together. So other than supporting our troops or not supporting our troops, there's a third choice?
It all makes me appreciate my parents. They had enough respect for me and my brothers to honest with us on many of life's tenets. Is it true violence never solved anything? "No," my parents told me, "it solved the Hitler problem pretty effectively, and it would've solved the Stalin problem if Truman had had any guts!"
1 comment:
this is the type of party line which mccain will jump on, and thereby elect obama just as perot elected clinton.
hugo chavez wants unity in his country too - so he (like mugabe and most leftists) will outlaw pother parties.
we do NOT need more unity in partisan terms, we just need unity against our common foes.
we need debate in this country, and the two party system does do that.
the real problem with the dems is that they are dominated by doves and leftists and the policies they advocate are proven to fail.
splitting the difference between a good policy and a bad policy does not make better policy; it makes a muddle.
we need two good candidates who will well articulate their constituents values:
and tat means a tax-cut/spending cut, anti-illegal immigration hawk for the GOP
and a pro choice pro gay dove for the dems.
if sam doesn't like the dems anymore he should vote GOP.
BTW: i think his abe lincoln performances have awakened the inner GOP'er in sam..
Post a Comment