Now we all know I don't have that kind of power - especially Rick. Turns out, tonight he alerted me that he left a comment for all of us at that post (which you can read here). Unfortunately, my verbosity made the post scroll off days ago, so I'll give you Rick's response the space it deserves.
Thanks for responding to my rant, Rick. And okay, I'll let you back into the party. That's the cool thing about Democrats. We disagree, we argue, then we all have pie.
Guys, nowhere in my article do I say that Democrats didn't RESPOND to the Whoopi ridiculousness. They did: they played defense. My question is: when are we going to play OFFENSE?By the way, you can leave comments here - they'll be easier to find here than wallowing through the archives.
Ron Reagan played offense at the convention today: CHOP!--he sought to wedge off from their coaltion all Republicans who think it's insane to treat a blastocist that has the power to cure Parkinson's like it's a living, breathing person.
That kind of thinking is what my piece is about. Of course it took someone from outside the Democratic establishment to do it.
I would love to hear what you folks have to say about the main point of the essay: my questions about how the Democrats can take advantages of the structural weaknesses of the Republican to help build a long-term Democratic majority, which I think is the natural and desirable condition of American politics.
I probably won't check back on this comments thread too often, so discussion welcome at rperlstein@villagevoice.com.
As for the charge that what I'm advocating is an untoward aping of Republican incivility, I would ask: what's wrong with helping sane Republicans realize that the rest of their party is insane? Is pointing out that Republican free-trade purism is not in the interests of family-owned manufacturers hitting below the belt?
Regards, and dialogue welcome always,
Rick Perlstein
