OK, I’m not THAT good at it. I always want to say, “What are you, NUTS ? How can you continue to support that stupid, hypocritical……” etc., etc.
But while discussing torture in Steven D’s excellent diary, I realized that I have actually had some successes by contrasting the values I know my Republican co-workers hold with the behavior of the current administration:
Those people in the White House aren’t Republicans.
Republicans have moral clarity. They don’t condone torture. Republicans believe in the rule of law. They don’t have one set of rules for us and another for everybody else. Republicans are honorable. They don’t disgrace and shame America. Republicans support the military. They don’t jeopardize our troops by violating the Geneva Convention. Republicans are logical. They know not to trust information obtained through torture. Republican are civilized. They do not stoop to embrace the tactics of our enemies. And Republicans don’t squander tax payers’ money on foreign adventures.
These folks in the White House are NOT Republicans.
These discussions have been focused on torture, but I think there are many areas amenable to this approach.
Please, Tribbers, if you think this can work, (and I HAVE had some people soften and admit that they voted for Bush, but can no longer support what he’s doing now), help me develop this from the narrow torture focus to an issue wide exercise in values clarification for our Republican neighbors.
I know from experience that backing them into a corner and forcing them to defend extreme positions that they don’t really believe is not the answer.
Got a friend who is somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun, and even he agrees that the administration is not Republican, nor for that matter conservative. After much badgering, I got him to admit that reasoned debate among equals is far preferable to spoon-fed b.s. that only polarizes the electorate.
He also agreed that there are some decent people in congress in both parties. Makes me think the only clear political enemies are in the executive branch. (Cunningham, et. al. notwithstanding).
I think we are seeing the tip of the iceberg.
When I listen to C-SPAN, I have noticed that the people now calling on the “Support Bush” line are almost exclusively of the “he’s a righteous, moral, Christian man, and America had better get right with God or we will be destroyed” persuasion. The moderate Republicans have gone silent.
It sounds as if you were able to badger him in a friendly way that didn’t shame, embarass or denigrate him.
Hard to badger someone I’ve known for nearly 50 years. At some point we both end up laughing at the foibles of the political class. Keep wondering what happened to common sense, then realize we’re talking about government. This fits:
Here’s an idea. Why not begin the conversation by asking, “What do Republicans believe, what do they stand for?” I have a feeling that what they come up with – or at least a lot of it – will be pretty far from the Bu$hCo agenda. Perfect opening.
Excellent!
You are right. There are lots of decent people who are proud to identify with their definition of Republicanism, and it bears not the slightest resemblance to the policies of this administration.
I like your idea. I should ask the question, then SHUT UP and listen to the answer. I doesn’t matter if I agree with them or not; what’s important is that they probably don’t agree with their own party leadership.
Thank you, Janet.