Saturday, December 26, 2009

Ruth Marcus forgets the "if it's wrong, it's wrong" theory

While Ruth Marcus is attempting to make a point in Democrats and Politics as Usual, she also demonstrates some politics as usual behavior of her own. Justification by claiming the "other guys" did it or did something worse. This is the opposite of the "if it is wrong, it is wrong" theory. Especially this part because she forgets something very important:

If anything, the Democratic deal-making looks tame by comparison to the Republican arm-twisting in advance of -- and during -- the House vote on the prescription drug program for Medicare in 2003. In the most egregious example, then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, offered to endorse the son of retiring Michigan Republican Nick Smith if he agreed to vote "yes" on the bill. Somehow I don't recall the Limbaughs of the world getting the vapors over DeLay's behavior.

The Democrats at the time made a huge deal about this, it was in fact one of the ethic violations that DeLay was cited for. Our party called for him to resign, Democrats used DeLay as an example of why they should be elected. There were some major histronics over it, which means, Democrats did the exact thing Republicans are doing now, politics as usual...and instead of demanding better behavior from our own? Some justify it...which means just as I predicted during the presidential campaign, there is no change, there is not even any hope there will be change because we don't demand better from our own party. It will always be politics as usual for those who do not embrace a very simple ideal. "If it's wrong? It's wrong."


Jack Davis said...

Hi, I'm a first time visitor to your site. This is a very thoughtful post.The ad hominem tu quoque argument Marcus uses is so common in politics, isn't it? I once criticized Fox News as being biased in a book review, and a critic pulled out the "MSNBC is biased, too" line. I had to explain that his point was irrelevant.

Lisa Renee said...

Thanks Jack and thanks for visiting. This is a common argument and one that I believe helps perpetuate irresponsibility in politics. All too often too much time is spent pointing out the "evils" in others as opposed to leading by example.

I believe the Democratic Party could create change and make the system a better one, but for that to happen we need to be able to be honest in critique of our own. While the "other party" can't be allowed to skirt responsibility, it rings hollow when our party has handled something in a similar manner.

However, since too many voters have a short attention span, as well as the media at times, few call either side on it...