Bipartisanship Vs. Democracy: The Third Way Fallacy

[AgingAmerican]

By Richard (RJ) Eskow

Clinton played the "centrist" angle brilliantly in the 1990s, artfully fusing Republican and Democratic positions and rescuing his own political fortunes. But times have changed, even if Washington's illusions have not.

Today the country's real center - the commonly-held set of goals and aspirations shared by Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike - has never been farther from the narrow right-leaning viewpoint that's still being peddled as a "centrism." If the White House and other Democrats buy into that illusion, as they seem to be doing, they'll lose the country.

Politicians and journalists in Washington cling to the belief that there's a better way to run government, one that dispenses with the messy process of debate and disagreement. Call it "the Third Way Fallacy." It suggests that all will be well if we just stop all the partisan "bickering" - "bickering" being a pejorative word for the political discourse that permits voters to distinguish one politician's views from another and vote accordingly. The Third Way approach would replace the quarrelsome democratic process with a system in which powerful people from both parties sit down amicably to "work things out," presumably in quiet - and private - places.

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010125015/bipartisanship-vs-democracy-third-way-fallacy

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. The problem is that hard core partisans on both side

(And the House) need to read the Constitution. The political system is messy, it is slow, but in the end it requires the c word.

[AgingAmerican]

2. Agree

And not one sided 'compromise'. It takes two to tango.

[randome]

3. A Democratic House in 2014 would render any 'third way' irrelevant.

Then we can really get to work at pushing this country forward.

[AgingAmerican]

4. Make the republicans filibuster

...The old fashioned way, by talking without end. That would help a lot too.