Sandberg: Searching for ‘decent Chuck Percys’
By Amy Sandberg
The Republican Party has a long and venerable tradition. It produced Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan. It was founded by anti-slavery activists, and promotes free markets, personal responsibility, and a no-nonsense foreign policy.
Amy Sandberg
Many moons ago, I worked for a Republican U.S. senator from Illinois, Charles Percy, who represented everything that was good about his party. He was a man of devout faith, a pragmatist and a capitalist. He was not, however, a zealot. During his years in the Senate, Percy supported tighter gun control, housing subsidies for the poor, and opposed two of Richard Nixon’s Supreme Court nominees. In 1973, Percy called for an independent prosecutor to investigate Watergate. The novelist Richard Ford, coined a phrase “decent Chuck Percy Republicans,” referring to Republicans who were consensus builders and did what was right for their country rather than always doing what was politically expedient.
Republicans today are a different breed. They take issue with any positions they see as smacking of socialism even if — as in the case of the individual mandate — the idea was originally theirs. They make pledges to false idols not to raise taxes and have adopted an aggressive we-are-number-one militaristic posture as the sine qua non of conservative foreign policy. Once the party of isolationism and protectionism, Neocons launch pre-emptive wars, and defend a military budget that is greater than the combined spending of the next 14 largest nations.
And if one of them were to say something like the following? “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.” They would be branded a socialist and condemned for being dangerously naive and unpatriotic. Which is interesting, because the quote above is from Republican president Dwight D. Eisenhower. Hard to believe how much the Republican Party has changed in the past half-century, isn’t it?
With the rise of the tea party, Republican politics has become a zero-sum game. It is no longer about bringing two points of view together and blending the best of both in the interests of the American people, as was Chuck Percy’s style. It’s become about winning, at all costs and trying to demolish the other side. A respectful debate that acknowledges some value in the other side’s point of view has disappeared. Science, which has over the past few centuries gained a certain amount of credibility in the world, is trumped by ideology and ironically is dismissed as biased and self-serving. The propaganda of Big Money has convinced the little guy that government is their enemy. The little guy doesn’t see that the only thing standing between him and Big Money eating him up is that a strong government serves to protect him and take care of the interests of the whole country, not simply the entitled few.
And that’s not the worst of it. Theo-cons have accumulated so much influence over the party that the major legislative issues in recent years have not been job creation, but rather the criminalization of abortion, opposition to legalized same-sex marriage, and eliminating low-income women’s access to contraception and basic health care. For a party that wants government out of our lives, it certainly spends a lot of time telling us what to do.
And so my question to Dick Lyles is “Where have all the Dwight Eisenhowers and ‘decent Chuck Percy Republicans’ gone?” For that matter, where have Richard Nixon (who signed the Voting Rights Act of 1970 and supported hiring quotas for minorities) and Ronald Reagan (who saved Social Security in 1983, and repeatedly ignored the fundamental conservative dogma that taxes should never be raised) gone? Stated otherwise, what has the Republican Party done with its tradition of pragmatism and consensus building??
Reach Sandberg at sandberg8462@yahoo.com.
Related posts:
Short URL: http://www.pomeradonews.com/?p=26726
Posted by Staff
on Jul 11 2012. Filed under Columnists.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
Amy, it is my opinion that Eisenhower made his statement “Every gun that is made, every warship launched,—–" out of frustration because he knew he had no choice but to build our military to keep up with the Communist threat. Russia had just developed and tested an A bomb and were continuing to build their war machinery. Reagan called their bluff and they collapsed only to rebuild once again to become a major threat. Without a strong military we will be sitting ducks from the crazies such as N Korea, Iran and, just maybe, Pakistan and China along with the jihad crowd. Our only defense has to be a strong offense. Ideology won't cut it. Would you rather be a little bit hungry or dead?
Just look what has happened since Barack Hussein Obama went to the Middle East to apologize for America's lack of sensitivity towards the Muslim world. Anti Americanism is at an all time high in most of the Middle East
BTW, are you sure you want to discuss the hairdos of Trump, Palin and Bachman?
Now now Tom, We may not agree on much politically, but I've come to have some grudging respect for you. Please don't make me change my mind with your disingenuous remark about Eisenhower's intent. I know that you know that Eisenhower vehemently opposed military buildup and the "military-industrial complex". In fact the quote above was taken out of context for the purpose of saving column inches. It is from a speech Ike gave in 1953 entitled "The Chance for Peace".You can find the complete transcript here: http://www.edchange.org/multicultural/speeches/ik...
As far as fear goes, I spoke to fear and here is what fear told me: “My weapons are that I talk fast, and I get very close to your face. Then you get completely unnerved, and you do whatever I say. If you don’t do what I tell you, I have no power. You can listen to me, and you can have respect for me. You can even be convinced by me. But if you don’t do what I say, I have no power.”
While I do agree with you that we need a strong national defense, I don't agree that we need to be spending on defense twice what we did during the Clinton administration. We don't need to impose or sell democracy to other nations. It sells itself as places like Libya and Egypt are testimony.
Did I not get the talking point memo on using our president's middle name every time we mention him? Am I supposed to fear his middle name as well as Russia, China and North Korea?
Amy, I don't know how you came to the conclusion that my remarks about Ike were disingenuous. May I restate to clarify?
President Dwight David Eisenhower, who was vehemently opposed to a military buildup because the cost to do so would take away from the welfare of our people, was frustrated because he knew of the Communist objective was to turn the world into a Communist state which, he thought, would be worse. He, reluctantly, was the originator of the military buildup that has occurred over the past 60 years or so.
As for "As far as fear goes, I spoke to fear and here is what fear told me: “My weapons are that I talk fast, and I get very close to your face. ——–" I really don't recall where President Barack Hussein Obama made that speech. Was it recent?
I suggest you read the speech in in its entirety. He doesn't sound very reluctant to me.
Amy,
Why do you think Fox News is bad? There is a reason that they have the highest ratings in cable news. It is because they provide the best coverage and analysis of the current events. Their numbers more than double CNN and MSNBC. Do you think that maybe America is sick of the Liberal media bias from the mainstream media? There is a reason that they have been number 1 for quite some time.
Because something is the most popular, doesn't make it the best. I could give you a million examples but I'll use the example Lady Madonna…not that I have anything against her music, it's just wouldn't be the best representation of good music if aliens landed and we had to explain ourselves. Also, if Fox is so wonderful why are its viewers so poorly informed? http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/11/21/fairlei...
I actually watch Fox at the gym. Very entertaining. I also watch the Colbert Report, listen to NPR, read the SD UnionTrib, Sunday New York Times, US News, Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine and read nonfiction books. Can't rely to heavily on one source if you want to avoid bias–of any kind.
Wow Amy! It's so great to hear you are void of bias. You sure had me fooled.
That's like having a zero power coefficient. Everything cancels each other out.
My last word.
You're a clever one Tom–always trying to twist my words. I didn't say I was without bias–we all have it. I was making the point that a well-rounded diet will hopefully balance out the biases there are in the media. Just like your donut hole you had for breakfast will hopefully be balanced out by that spinach salad you have for lunch ;-)
Jason, you must know when everything else fails the libs blame Fox or President George Walker Bush. Seems like it is occurring more frequently as we get more into the the failed policies of the Obama administration. If he wins in Nov. it will be because of the mindless robots who are locked in to his personality beam, just as many Californians are locked in on a moon beam..
Jason, you must know when everything else fails the libs blame Fox or President George Walker Bush. Seems like it is occurring more frequently as we get more into the the failed policies of the Obama administration. If he wins in Nov. it will be because of the mindless robots who are locked in to his personality beam, just as many Californians are locked in on a moon beam..
I agree with all you've stated here, Amy. I admire your spirit in taking this and many troubling issues head on in a public forum.
I, also am baffled by the huge disconnect in our political system. I despise having to call out the GOP, but that seems to be the where the front line action is. The Republican Party has synchronized, in lock-step to destroy, well this president, for sure, but in so doing has driven us, our economy, our reputation into the ground. Now, I do understand moderate, which I also believe still exist, Republicans outrage at attacks on their party. That I believe is an in-bred, deep-rooted impulse handed down from father to son. How many from either side have ever voted for any candidate of the other? I am by no means lauding the Dems. What I believe would go a long way for both sides, hence for us, would be to get lobbying money out of Washington. Two time tested axioms come to mind: "Money is the root of all evil." & "Absolute power, corrupts absolutely". Case in point, 95% of all Americans agree that genetically modified food should be labeled (http://gefoodlabels.org/gmo-labeling/polls-on-gmo-labeling/) yet, the Senate, the Democratically controlled Senate btw voted 73-26 against it. (Over 50 nations, including all of Europe, label GMO foods.) Now why would they do that? hmmm lobbying dollars perhaps? How about $572,000,000 USD (paid out to hmm whom?) to get the bill modified for their agenda. This practice is repeated over and over from industry to industry from Federal institution to Federal institution. If, we the citizens are to stand any sort of chance the influence peddling must cease.
Much to the previous posters chagrin, I also believe Barack Hussein Obama is the real deal, a great president, and a great American. The American dream is still alive and that's a very powerful force. I only wish the House & Senate weren't so polarized and that they were more into being public servants, than corporate whores.
WOW! More than the allowed number of words! How did you rate? Is someone getting special privileges from the powers that be at Pomerado Publishing?
Guest, are you suggesting the editorial staff at PP blew their cover?
Too scary to imagine!
Actually, Peter is a Facebook friend of mine who saw the link to the column on my Facebook page. No relation to Pomerado News that I know of. He's just one of those odd birds who thinks I make a good point, and isn't ashamed to use his real name.
Amy, should you share the same philosophy/ideology with another a simple silent relationship may be all that's needed to gain favor. Just pointing out your naivete.:))
I have absolutely no understanding of the editorial slant at PP. I know in years past they were slanted to the left, with the likes of you, Gerold Firl and Bob Emery but with the addition of Dick Lyles and Allen Hemphill they appear much more balanced with their coverage. It would be good to keep it there, like Fox News. :))
You betcha Tom! Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean the Pomerado News Group isn't out to getcha.
Amy, are you using double talk on this poor, innocent soul?
Last word.