Democracy vs. Ideology

If political debates have become the new "must-see-TV", last night's Vice Presidential debate delivered something between what David Brooks called "'The Honeymooners' versus 'Family Ties'; Ed Norton versus Alex Keating."

To my mind, it was neither of these. It was less a debate and more a "Family Feud" with Martha Raddatz of ABC News functioning as half professional moderator and half Richard Dawson (he was my favorite) as host.

The Honeymooners

Joe did Delaware proud - and helped Obama more than anyone might have imagined. He never let young "Lyin' Ryan" get away with factual errors, frequently pointing out that "I was in the room with the President" when certain decisions were made.  He called him out on his lack of substance, saying at one point, “Stop talking about how you care about people,” he said. “Show me something.”

Mr. Ryan’s predictable response: You said the stimulus would fix the entire economy and it didn’t. But he had no responsible answer for increasing growth.

Ryan, for his part, demonstrated a surprising knowledge of foreign policy although it was disingenuous and bumbling. Again, he lacked substantive responses to the specifics of any Republican - much less the Romney-Ryan - plan for Iran's nuclear stockpiling, and agreed with the administration’s planned 2014 pullout from Afghanistan but still thought it was a bad idea, although he didn't really say why.

Ryan offered little in the way of economic proposals beyond the tried and untrue Republican solution of cutting taxes and spending and ridiculing the Obama administration’s stimulus program. The Vice President, who was in charge of that program, showed Mr. Ryan’s hypocrisy on the subject by pointing out that the congressman had asked for stimulus money for his state of Wisconsin, just as other Republicans did even as they vilified the program.

It's amazing to me that Romney-Ryan team continue to give us Republican policy "solutions" to the economy which mirror the very same Bush policies which got us into this mess in the first place. 

I had to give Ryan points, in defending Romney's hateful "47%" remark, when he pointedly said, “I think the vice president very well knows that sometimes the words don’t come out of your mouth the right way.” But Biden retorted sharply: “But I always say what I mean. And so does Romney.” 

Beyond the wearisome posturing and "war of words" that so many find so "entertaining", what I saw last night on the stage of Newlin Hall on the campus of Centre College in Danville, KY was an almost classic confrontation between Democracy and Ideology. 

Family Ties

Never was it more clear than when the conversation came 'round to the matter of abortion.  Despite Ryan's seemingly softer stance that, in a Romney-Ryan administration, abortion would be allowed in cases of rape, incest and the endangerment of the life of the woman, a dangerous truth was inadvertently told. You might have missed it if reproductive rights is not on your particular radar screen. 

Ryan made a predictable assertion that the issue was more an issue of "State's Rights". It was a clear admission - he admitted in a rare moment of truth-telling - that his position is shaped and formed by his Roman Catholicism. 

Biden, also a Roman Catholic, quickly pointed out that the next President will likely appoint the next two Supreme Court Judges - something Romney, a former Mormon bishop, has also mentioned as being important to his reelection, while saying that he does not see one law that he would change. 

Right. Get it? It's the old political "one-two" punch.

Ryan talks about how abortion should be determined in the individual state legislatures while Romney knows that, if he's President, he can appoint conservative judges to the Supreme Court and let them do all the heavy Tea Party lifting and reverse Roe v. Wade. 

Biden saw though all that and called it for what it is: "Malarkey". He said that his RC faith makes him who he is but he would never impose his religious beliefs on others, including the right of a woman to make her own decisions regarding what happens in and to her own body. 

The Romney-Ryan Republican administration would remove that right "by any means necessary" - attacking it on the state and federal level. Religious ideology and "state's rights" trump a woman's right to self-determination.

I know that, to many people, reproductive rights is a "social issue" that has little or nothing to do with the "more important" issues of the economy and unemployment, the debt and foreign policy. 

I want to suggest to you that reproductive rights is a bellwether issue which exposes what is at the heart of this political campaign. 

It is nothing less than Democracy vs. Ideology. 

That's why Romney-Ryan have got bupkus - zero, zip, nada, nothing - of any real substance to offer except their religious beliefs about what is right and who is good - no matter whose rights have to be compromised. Meanwhile, the entire Constitution - which they seemingly cherish - is trashed on the single constitutional issue of Religious Freedom.

They seem oblivious to the fact that Religious Freedom not only guarantees freedom OF religion but freedom FROM religion.  I'm not talking atheists here. I'm talking about the constitutional guarantee that no one will be forced to live under the religious ideologies of others. They also seem to have no clue that the "terrorists" they fear are religious ideologues whose perspective on women (and, wealth, poverty, human sexuality and religious freedom) is dangerously close to their own.

You hear it in the rhetoric of "takers" vs. "makers" and in Romney's despicable "47%" and Ryan's hateful "30%". You hear it in everything from the Republican tax plan, to their firm line on immigration to their aggressiveness on foreign policy - even suggesting that a war might be in the offing with Russia. 

It's not Democracy. It's religious ideology. 

Family Feud

Or, in Joe's words, it's "Malarkey!" - which is what you say because you can't say "Bull***t" on live, national network television.

How will this all play out with the people?

Well, we have two more Presidential debates - the next one coming up on Tuesday. The President will have an opportunity to redeem his last, lack-luster debate performance. I expect him to work Romney over, demanding specifics and exposing his flip-flops and lies.

Have you noticed that the President lost points for being a "gentleman" and keeping his cool while Romney rudely interrupted and talked over both the President and the Moderator, but some people are lambasting Biden for being "rude" and "aggressive" while Ryan seemed to keep his cool for most of the evening - except, of course, when he sat there, looking at Biden as he exposed his duplicity, giving him his distinctive Eddie Munster smirks?

Makes me laugh when it doesn't drive me to tears of frustration.

It won't make any difference to those who are solidly Republican or Democrat, but it will make a huge difference in (1) continuing to energize the Democratic base, (2) hardening the resolve of the Republicans to get the Black man out of the White House and (3) swaying those "independent" or "undecided" voters, some of whom will be persuaded by style and others by substance. 

On The Family Feud, it never really mattered how good your answer was or how charming you or your family appeared. As Richard Dawson used to say, "And, the survey says........".

I'm a Democrat but I'm also enough of an American to put solid money on the fact that democracy is higher on the list than ideology.