Yesterday I had a brief yet interesting conversation with my best friend about the Iraqi elections and the abhorrent goal-post moving responses from the media and other liberal voices. We both agreed that it's sad to see the reaction from people and political groups who would normally be cheering the strides towards democracy exhibited by the Iraqis who are instead whining about the legitimacy and the participation percentages.
Here's the problem I have.
For a healthy democracy to flourish, there needs to be at a minimum two sides (if not more) to each issue so that there can be healthy debate that actively progresses the issues to a better outcome. The more sides you have to a debate, the better your perspective of how each person is affected by the outcome. Obviously, you can go too far with this and get to the point that you have so many sides debating things that nothing ever gets done (see: Canada), but the general idea is to improve the discourse by keeping the discussion about the issues, including as much factual information as possible.
Unfortunately, it seems that lately the left side of the political debates in the US as well as the rest of the world have been sorely lacking in anything but ad hominem garbage. If I read one more comparison of George Bush to Hitler I will literally shoot blood from my eye sockets. This is what is passing for healthy debate from the left these days, and the effect is a lowered level of discourse that slows down positive progressive resolutions.
The right has been guilty of the same thing during Clintons tenure, as too many pundits focused on his pathetic sexual encounters instead of his fumbling of international issues. Clinton himself admitted he let down the world by ignoring the Rwandan massacres for too long. He also failed to properly respond to International Islamic terrorism, and we all know how that worked out.
There is a great blog listed to the right known as Babalu, written by one Val Prieto, and it deals primarily with Cuba -as Val puts it- "an island on the net without a bearded dictator". Val was recently interviewed by the Miami Herald, and he made the front page. Unfortunately, some people decided that Val's critique of the great Bearded one and his hellhole of a country were off base and he shouldn't write such horrible things about their dear leader.
Here's an example of some of the positive discourse-
My Dear Perieto Starting off with what you call Free and what I call Free. The Journalist in America cannot be free to write What they want: Bush and his Hitler Group are taking care of that.......You're a Complete jerk You want News on Cuba I can fill you in on many things you know nothing about. The Truth about Cuba. 87% of the Cubans would vote for Castro 51% of Americans vote for Bush and the whole World hate him: I have to be careful what I say or the OOFAC will be after me and I will have to go to an American Jail: With my DD-214 Form ( You or your Daddy don't have one.) Your Daddy was to busy leaving Cuba with his money than to susport the Castro Goverment, and the Cuban People America screwed the Cubans Thru people like you. Get Balls and E Mail me George.
This is what I'm talking about. No, not all debates from the left are this ricidulous. But how many times do you have to hear people compare Bush to Hitler before you have stop and say -WOULD YOU PLEASE GO READ SOME FUCKING HISTORY ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST?????..............(ahem)....
Okay sorry. Had to rant. Rant over- kitties for everyone!!!