P. Scott Cummins is one of the cooler folks I've met through blogging. He holds a law degree and is a recovering corporate worker bee. Scott lives in the Seattle neighborhood of Magnolia, and takes care of his two daughters while his lovely wife Kathleen does the power suit thing (actually she's way more stylish than that). He also does scads of community and school volunteer work, and has been very involved in a charity efforts in Uganda. This moderate Republican happens to be very plugged-in, and as a long-time local boy has an elephant's memory, you might say, of Seattle's political culture. Which he sees as relevant to the national political landscape right now.
I'll let Scott explain. He has some piquant perspectives to share about what "reaching out" means to Democrats, now that they're asking Republicans to get nicey-nicey after Bush's victory, plus GOP gains in Congress and The Senate.
Cummins advises that , "....In response, Republicans need to assess....with what manner of “reach out” do Democrats operate in areas where they have taken over," such as Seattle.
Then he digs in:
Consider the Seattle political landscape of today. A Republican working in Seattle city government begs a reporter not to “out” him for fear of workplace retaliation. City advisory boards, commissions and volunteer councils are cleansed of Republican involvement by Democratic operatives who, by turn, control nominations, define selection criteria, and vet candidates. City Department Managers meanwhile provide similar access to public employee union bosses. All to ensure the iron-fisted grip of Democrats – concerned by their mere 85% standing among the electorate!All in all, Democrats need to face up to the unique forms of fundamentalism which mark their brand of politics. As a Republican who is pro-choice, pro-environment, support gay partnership and against the death penalty – my place in the party has never been questioned – nor has my strong advocacy of those positions. Instead, Republican Party leaders have had to reconsider their own perspectives as President Bush has repeatedly enunciated that he would not oppose state-based legislated domestic partnerships for gay couples. This is hardly the fundamentalist theocracy that the Michael Moore-inspired Democrats are screaming about. On the other hand, try holding pro-life and Evangelical Christian viewpoints – and then seek any position of leadership in the Democratic Party. Which party has the more broad, inclusive and “big tent’ perspective now?
Seattle’s “company town” experience under Democratic rule provides the Republicans with all they need to know about how their opponents would operate nationwide if they could. Democrats in Seattle have a thirty year record of paltry outreach aimed at healing between the parties. When given the chance, they enforce a juggernaut and consolidate upon every perquisite. It is in keeping with their worldview - and as it is now clear – a politically fundamentalist worldview. Without understanding that, and without changing that, Democrats show every inclination of becoming a political party in permanent decline.
Pink: the new black.
Squid: the new Viagra.
Democrats: the new fundamentalists?
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at November 19, 2004 11:57 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.rosenblog.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/586
I would like to believe that Mr. Cummins' description of local Democrats as closed-minded and exclusionary, while Seattle Republicans are open-minded and inclusive, is true. More than likely, however, he is only characterizing the behavior of a party that is in power and serious about staying that way, versus a small minority that can afford to be tolerant because they have very little influence on events (locally, anyway).
Perhaps we can only say of local Republicans what Nietzsche once said about modern Christians: Not their principles but their impotence keeps them from burning us alive.
(I know, I'm too cynical.)
Posted by: Tom Rekdal at November 19, 2004 07:40 PMFor Tom: I don't know if this might help alleviate your understandable cynicism, but speaking as a conservative Republican who not only lives in the very red state of Virginia, but even in the very red town of Lynchburg (home of Jerry Falwell, who holds great sway with our city council):
Nietzche's assertion fails, at least at the local level here. Even here, almost every speck of intolerance that I see on a daily basis comes from the left, not the right. I think Matt has a point here, that the new intolerance is endemic to the Democratic party everywhere.
Example: Although Lynchburg is a very quiet, low-key, law-and-order town because of our conservative populace, we still have an amazingly large gay community and nobody gives them any grief. In return, they don't feel a need to have nude, vulgar "Pride" marches down our main street at every holiday, a la San Francisco and many other "liberal" bastions. Falwell hates the idea of people "drinkin' and dancin' at the same establishment" and routinely opposes business licenses for same - and routinely loses the battle. Conservatives are hugely in the majority here, yet hugely and regularly thwart the narrow-mindedness of the Falwells amongst us.
Posted by: Jeff at November 20, 2004 08:19 PM