The McCain-Lieberman Party

Jeff Jarvis likes the idea–doesn’t offer any plausible evidence that it could be successful, but says prettily that he likes it–and quotes David Brooks saying this very keen thing:

The McCain-Lieberman Party begins with a rejection of the Sunni-Shiite style of politics itself. It rejects those whose emotional attachment to their party is so all-consuming it becomes a form of tribalism, and who believe the only way to get American voters to respond is through aggression and stridency.
The flamers in the established parties tell themselves that their enemies are so vicious they have to be vicious too. . . .
The McCain-Lieberman Party counters with constant reminders that country comes before party, that in politics a little passion energizes but unmarshaled passion corrupts, and that more people want to vote for civility than for venom.

One thing that keeps me from watching C-SPAN is that it also occasionally shows the Australian, Canadian, and British parliaments. These deliberative bodies have men more eloquent, debates more substantive, and civility more convincing than anything that you could see in the House or the Senate. That isn’t because our guys aren’t as good. It is because their political consultants have told them that you aren’t as good as the Brits, Aussies, or Canucks. And of course that is not true. So: the McCain-Lieberman Party. And we may once again have the world’s greatest deliberative body.

Comments are closed.