Thursday, January 10, 2008

Vibinc says it's WHAT that's more important than WHO we elect in a President

Vibinc has a really solid post that you need to read. Here's a taste:

I want a President that will lead the conversation to the left. Someone who will vigorously debunk the right wing conventional wisdom that has trapped us in the spiral of stagnation. Who will fight like hell to make sure that America is living up to the grand ideals that make America great.

Go read the rest!


leftwingcarolinablue said...

One question, two parts: does Vibinc's and liberalism's conversation include everyone or does it ultimately resemble Susan Estrich's essay that "Separate is Better?"

LeftWingCracker said...

Who in the hell has paid attention to Susan Estrich since she ran Dukakis' campaign into the ground 20 years ago?

Liberalism rocks, so care to elaborate?

leftwingcarolinablue said...

Enough people pay attention to put her essay in a freshman composition reader. Enough people pay attention to advocate that nonwhiteanglosaxonheterosexualchristianmales form their own enclaves and communities rather than struggling toward integration in a welcoming, inclusive human community. Enough people pay attention who do not either remember or choose to forget the disastrous way she mismanaged Dukukis' campaign or, logically, that he let her "run it into the ground." Rather than connecting her mismanagement with wondering about her essay, these same people are--correctly in significant ways, but not completely--blaming Lee Atwater and Jim Baker for Dukakis losing in 1988. I'll agree, however, with your metaphor that liberalism rocks. With Estrich and her ilk as examples of those liberals seeking power--albeit in different forms than 20 years ago, but power nonetheless-- liberalism is crashing itself onto the rocks of its own destruction.
Still more, today's post-liberals need to answer the question that if Estrich is, in fact, right that separate is better, then how does that not make the last 150 years of civil rights agaitation, protest and blood, sweat and tears little more than a farce? If liberalism means what it verbally advocates, then working toward and proclaiming the idea of inclusion does not thereby mean to include so as to separate. If we humans--and, thanks to Al Gore here, all creation--are all in this together, then let's work toward that and try to advocate the sense of common and beloved community.