







This Aug. 25, 2008 file photo shows former Republican Rep. Jim Leach, R-Iowa, addressing the crowd at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall, file)
Jim Leach served 30 years in Congress. These days, he has harsh words for the state of American democracy, but delivers them in the same calm, measured tone that was his trademark.
“It’s clear an awful lot of citizens in American have lost confidence in institutions of government. They have become disrespectful of their leaders. They’ve become disrespectful of other belief systems and of each other,” Leach said Friday at the University of Northern Iowa.
These days, Leach serves as chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities. He travels the country in that role and often gives speeches about the need for civility in politics. He bemoans the current political climate, in which political parties seek candidates who hold pure their ideology and punish those who compromise, often by supporting a more pure candidate running as a primary challenger.
Leach feels the long-held tradition of respecting the other sides argument has gone by the wayside, and often opposing sides are just talking past each other, rather than looking for common ground.
How do you feel about Leach’s views? Do you think it’s possible to restore civility to the current political discourse? If so, how could that be accomplished?
I think Mr. Leach needs to rethink his assessment. It is the people these elected officials are supposed to be serving who have been severely disrespected. When we pay for representation and end up with a lame duck Senate and Congress, neither of which has done anything significant to earn the very generous salary and perks these folks are paid, the public has a right to become sour. His view supports my contention that our elected officials have come under the notion that we’re here to serve them, when in fact, it’s the opposite – or is supposed to be. I think it’s a classic example of how far out of touch with reality our entire political bodies have become.
The calls for civility always start to increase when the progressives are losing the debate on substance. It is no a call to civility. It is an attempt to silence.
“Leach feels the long-held tradition of respecting the other sides argument has gone by the wayside, and often opposing sides are just talking past each other, rather than looking for common ground.”
If……If…. that is what progressives want., then lead by example. Maybe the President can lead by example (insert joke here) But by example progressives dont want civility, stooping to barnyard epitaphs is NOT civil
We arrived at the Oval Office for our 45-minute interview … on the morning of October 11th. … As we left the Oval Office, executive editor Eric Bates told Obama that he had asked his six-year-old if there was anything she wanted him to say to the president. … [S]he said, ‘Tell him: You can do it.’ Obama grinned. … ‘You know, kids have good instincts,’ Obama offered. ‘They look at the other guy and say, “Well, that’s a bullsh—er, I can tell.” ’ ”
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/10/25/romney_s_a_bullshitter_obama_tells_rolling_stone.html
I’m more anxious to see some integrity return to the campaigns.
It used to be that a campaign would put out an ad that, by mistake or intentionally, made a false statement. This error would be pointed out and the campaign would modify or withdraw the ad once they are called out for making a false statement. This year, there are several examples of campaigns making blatantly false statements, being advised of the errors in their statements and they continue to run the ads anyway.
A member of Romney’s staff said recently that they were not going to let fact checkers run their campaign. He was, effectively, saying that they will knowingly run ads they know contain false statements.
That illustrates a lack of integrity and that bothers me more than a lack of civility.
In 2008 the sign I displayed in my yard for my candidate of choice was stolen. This election cycle I purchased a spare. Sure enough, this morning I found the first one slashed with a knife, crumpled up and tossed into a neighbors yard. I have very little hope for the restoration of political civility in a nation where people act like juvenile delinquents.
Well you got the republicans in congress who thinks compromising is only their way or the highway. You got Romney friends buying the company that makes the voting machines and software for them for a lot of the states. You got republicans saying that getting raped and pregnant is a gift from God. The day after President Obama was sworn in the republicans met in Washington to map a plan to do what ever it took to ensure that he was only a one term president no matter what. With all the above how can there be any civility in politics.
When were politics ever civil?
Lemme see
1950s—Joe McCarthy, HUAC, Korean War, Nuclear Terror, Republicans exploit Red Scare, virtual civil war over desegregation and the right to vote, Eisenhower sends in troops to protect school children in Little Rock
1960s—-war over civil rights continues, Mississippi Freedom Summer, people are murdered for registering to vote, nuclear scare, things are ugly in Congress as Dixiecrats block everything, Kennedy murdered, brief hiatus in the hostilities allows Johnson to ram Civil Rights legislation and MediCare through over vehement Dixiecrat objections, Republicans oppose MediCare as Socialism, Vietnam deflects attention away from domestic issues and things get really ugly, Los Angeles, Detroit, Chicago, Washington DC see major riots, King is murdered and virtually every city of any size burns.
1970s—Nixon raises the art of corruption and abuse of power to new heights, Agnew dismisses all opponents as “nattering nabobs of negativism” until he is forced to step down amid well founded accusations of taking bribes, Watergate, Nixon resigns, Carter becomes president as nation goes into a glazed eyed state of political exhaustion, stagflation, energy crisis, embassy in Tehran seized by Iranian students, staff held hostage
1980s—Reagan defeats Carter, hostages released amid rrumors of an “October Surprise”, nation slides into the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, recovery won’t happen for another three and a half years, it’s Morning in America as Reagan resurrects the Cold War, covertly supports proxie wars in Central America, War on Drugs declared as Ollie North funds Contras through cocaine deals, Nuclear War panic escalates, 241 Marines blown up in Lebanon, US invades Greneda, Reagan begins a slow slide into senile dementia, Bush defeats Dukakis and refers to political opponents as the “L” word, bank failures and the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression
1990s—Desert Storm, economic downturn continues, Clinton defeats Bush, economy recovers, Gingrich becomes Speaker of the House, string of investigations of phony scandals, increasing tensions between House and White House, Clinton reelected followed by impeachment over a phony scandal, Gingerich ends political career as most hated man in America
2000—Bush loses the popular vote but becomes president anyway in an election marred by election fraud, 9/11, Iraq War, Afganistan War, increasing repression at home in the name of Homeland Security. skyrocketing deficits, increasing debts, allies detaching themselves form American foreign policy as quickly as possible, Bush relected in an election marred by fraud, Katrina, Bush showing signs that excessive drinking at an early age can cause long term damage. End of his term is marked by the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression
Obama is elected amid high expectations followed by gridlock as Republicans vow to destroy the President by any means necessary.
So what else is new
Though I’m an independent with Democrat leanings I always voted for Jim Leach when I was in his district ( and Grassley as well — no more ! ). I respected him as a honest and thoughtful moderate of statesman stature. The Republican party has little use for the likes of him today — they label them “RINO”.
Something that is different in the last few decades versus prior is the constant drumbeat from Demagogues on the right. They foster divisiveness rather than compromise and cooperation for the common good as well as demonize government. They may well be the greatest danger for the future of the Republic.
Compromise and cooperation is how we got here. Both Dems and Repubs supporting each others unholy alliances. The compromise that must be made now is to compromise on a smaller constitutional federal govt with emumerated powers. Europe is is the model Dems have been chasing and it has proven to be unsustainable. It is time to return to a federal govt that preceded FDR’s New Deal, and LBJ’s Great Society.
Willliamson
You mean Warren G Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover.
OK, time line
Twentieth century Presidents that I assume please you (lower taxes, fewer regulations, hands off government)
Warren G Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover 1921-1933
Great Depression 1929–1940
Farm Depression 1921–1940
Ronald Reagan 1981–1989
Triple Dip Recession 1980; 1981-1983; 1987-1992
Farm Crisis 1981–1986
GWH Bush 1989–1993
Recession 1987–1992
GW Bush
Recession 2001–2003
Great Recession 2007–2009
Roberta I will explain it to you, Both Republicans and Democrats have expanded the power of the Federal govt past its constitutional enumerated powers. Both parties crave the power to spend money. The only way to spend money it to take it from the people. The govt has no money, it can only take money from the people. I can go through each of you items and show how the govt hand created the problem and then, Like FDR, created a solution that needs fixing, ie. Social Security.
With all due rspect Mr Williamson, I’m not interested. Your post indicates that down bottom you’re a nihilist.and have nothing to offer
As I see it, neither candidate has any – so called “plans”, other than wanting to be top dog, to correct the problems heaped on the citizens by the previous (GWB) administration. One would have to admit the severe depression was averted by the democrats even though they were fought tooth and nail by an uncompromising republican party that did everything they could to destroy what would have been the cure for many of the ills. Neither party is offering any sort of solution to the problems, but are very studious in tearing down their opponents with the effort to gain power with empty promises that cannot work so long as there is no cooperation between either party. This is why there is no confidence that the problems will ever be solved by our senators and representatives regardless of who wins the election, with the end result of a government crippled by continuous arguing and bickering and lack of cooperation.
John Tedesco,
I don’t think you’ve been paying attention.
The Republican plan for economic prosperity is tax cuts plus deregulation. You listen to the negative ads and there’s always a positive in there somewhere. Republican attack ads are fairly consistent—-job killing taxes and regulations on job creating “small” business. Romney is the best choice why? because he’s spent his life in the private sector. Fingers crossed that we don’t check his actual resume. Romney has been clear. He intends to reorganize government such that it conforms to a business model, more specifically the business model to be found in venture capitalism. Which leads me to wonder if by that he means hostile takeover, downsizing, privatizing, selling off public assets, and outsourcing to China
Obama has been equally clear. Not only in what he’s said but also in what he’s done. He’s classic Keynesian. Prosperity is achieved by investing in infrastructure—roads and bridges and education et al. and by putting money into the hands of people who will spend it (demand side) via tax cuts for lower income people, Social Security, unemployment compensation, food stamps, government rebates for certain purchases and government support for loans for homes and education. Obama also believes that access to affordable health is essential because the current system of access is an expensive burden on everyone, that laws supporting fair and equitable pay, increases in the minimum wage, support for labor unions, and an overhaul of immigration law are also necessary so that workers are not played off against each other in a race to the bottom.
If you’re more interested in “cultural” issues, the line between Obama and Romney, Democrats and Republicans is also very clear
Democrats support public education, NPR, Public Television, libraries, parks, the arts. Republicans don’t.
Also
Democrats, including Obama, are pro-choice in that they are more inclined to let women make their own reproductive health care choices. They are also more inclined to support Gay Rights, immmigration reform (the Dream Act), Affirmative Action, and enforcement of anti-discrimination laws. Democrats are also more inclusionary in their rhetoric. Their stand on voting is to make voting and registering to vote as easy as possible
Republicans are Pro-Life. They tend not to favor exceptions for rape, incest, or health of the mother. Some even favor granting rights to the unborn fromt he moment of cconception. They favor DOMA and promote traditional gender roles. Immigration reform is mostly off the table with the clearest expression of their preferences being “self deportation”. Their rhetoric tends toward the exclusionary to the point where they’ve alienated over 96% of black voters and three quarters of Hispanic. In addition, a lot of women feel that Republicans have declared war on them. They also favor restrictions on voting in the form of voter IDs and limitations on early and absentee voting
Foreign policy?
Democrats follow Winston Churchill’s line of “jaw jaw is better than war war”
Republicans prefer “war war is better than jaw jaw”
I think even you, as wary and as cynical as your post is, can see the difference because you did admit “the severe depression was averted by the democrats even though they were fought tooth and nail by an uncompromising republican party”