Obstruct

Some of the other nattering nabobs are saying (as they always will say after losing an election) that the Democratic Party should move further to the right in an attempt to reclaim some of the folks that they have lost.

There is only one thing that they are saying that I actually agree with: the Democrats shouldn't be afraid to use unambiguous moral language in order to communicate their ideas. Absolutely. Too many Democrats are, indeed, squeamish of using that sort of language. But moral language is not only accurate, but emotionally moving, and we should use it.

But the Democrats sure as HELL shouldn't follow the right by defining "moral values" as disgusting crapola like "hating gay people." What they should do instead is communicate ideas like this:

"Health care is a moral value."

"Conquering poverty is a moral value."

"Peace is a moral value."

The moral values issue should be OURS.

You get the idea: add your own slogan.

But they should NOT simply cave in to the right-wingers for fear of seeming "obstructionist." That's nonsense. People will get turned off IF the Democrats are seen as obstructing simply to obstuct, But they will respect the Democrats obstructing an agenda which is anathema to their principles. As long as they communicate that fact.

Look what the Republicans did when Clinton was elected the first time.

They obstructed, obstructed, obstructed. In fact, Bob Dole Bob Dole said it was his JOB to obstruct. They didn't even TALK about "compromise." It was simply not an option.

And two years later, they took control of Congress.

If you aren't willing to fight, people get the impression that you have nothing worth fighting FOR.

And why would they vote for an agenda that you aren't even willing to defend yourself?