For the past decade, we've heard increasingly little about that. Bush was blatantly a big government conservative, responsible for Medicare D and No Child Left Behind as well as the abuses of civil liberties following the creation of the Department of Homeland Security; neither McCain nor Huckabee had much sympathy for "small government" policies; and the big selling points of the Republican Party have been opposition to abortion and to same-sex marriage. Now, in contrast, we see the Tea Party people not simply saying that they want fiscal conservatism, but making a point of not wanting to campaign on "values voter" issues limit their appeal to that group. That strikes me as an improvement. Of course, I'm part of the "socially liberal and fiscally conservative" faction, and find the theocrats and the progressives equally repulsive.
But even if you flatly disagree with their ideas, calling them by abusive names is not legitimate debate. Take what they say and show what's wrong with it. Namecalling is the tactic of a playground bully, not of a citizen of a free society.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
zvi and
no subject
Date: 2010-03-19 07:43 am (UTC)But even if you flatly disagree with their ideas, calling them by abusive names is not legitimate debate. Take what they say and show what's wrong with it. Namecalling is the tactic of a playground bully, not of a citizen of a free society.