I read Lorie Byrds latest article at the Examiner and couldn’t help but feel exactly the same way she does:
The GOP drama was occasioned by the immigration debate in the Senate last week. The bill had many flaws and I am glad it did not succeed. I came to that conclusion by reading about the various provisions of the bill and arguments for and against it.
What repelled me from entering the debate, though, was the childish name-calling that bounced back and forth between many supporters and opponents of the bill, as well as some who even took quotes out of context to manipulate the statements and perceived intentions of their opponents.
There were powerful arguments to be made on the facts, and some did just that. Unfortunately, though, some in the GOP decided the way to succeed was to revert to the tactics they have criticized those on the other side of the aisle for engaging in for so many years. I wonder if they realize how many supporters they risk alienating if they continue down the road of trading accusations like “traitor” and “bigot” in future debates.
I was drawn to the Republican Party as a teenager, and have happily remained a Republican, in large measure due to the tendency among its advocates to argue facts and appeal to logic, rather than solely emotion.
In the case of the recent immigration debate, the public desperately needed facts about the bill and its possible ramifications. In addition to facts, emotion does play an important role in political debate. Passion is what moves the public to call and write their congressmen and to venture out on a rainy day to vote. What too often passed as passion and factual debate on this issue, however, were attacks hurled from those on both sides of the issue.
A blogger writing at the conservative blog Sister Toldjah wrote, “I think the Republican Party has lost its collective mind … I’m appalled at some of the rhetoric, tactics, blatant hypocrisy and pot-calling-the-kettle-black that has been on display on both sides of the conservative aisle on the immigration issue, and I say this as someone who isn’t in any side’s ‘camp’ but is just frustrated on the whole with how the debate was conducted.”
While I was not sad that the bill failed, neither did I jump for joy. The last few months we have seen the Paulbots eating the brains of fellow Republicans, and many lefties I suspect, and now with the immigration situation a whole new camp inside the party has felt the need to tear apart members of their own party who may disagree with them limb from limb…..saving the worst for Bush.
It’s sad. Just when we need to stick together we revert to the tactics of the far left and in the end do everything possible to tear down this President and wash away any chance at political success in 2008.
So while I disagree with Bush on this matter neither was I blind to the fact that he supported this kind of bill seven years ago. I knew the bill of goods when I voted for him. I disagree, will send letters to leaders in Congress, but I will not tear down this President nor my fellow Republicans just because I disagree with them on this issue.
See author page
