Last week two prominent Republicans spoke at the Democratic National Convention, eloquently explaining why they will be supporting the Democratic ticket this fall.
Former US congressman Jim Leach of Iowa said “it is clear to all Americans that something is out of kilter in our great republic,” and went on to describe four “great debates” in our nation’s history, showing how both Democrats and Republicans made positive contributions to them. “In troubled times,” Leach said, “it was understood that country comes before party, that in perilous moments mutual concern for the national interest must be the only factor in political judgments. This does not mean that debate within and between the political parties should not be vibrant. Yet what frustrates so many citizens is the lack of bipartisanship in Washington and the way today’s Republican Party has broken with its conservative heritage.”
The devoted reader of these notes may recall a post from March of this year that took conservatives to task for allowing the Republican Party to become a radical force serving special interests, undermining the Constitution, and poisoning the political atmosphere in this country. I cited a few bright exceptions—specifically, several who support the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Whether or not Leach supports impeachment, he is clearly one of the moderate Republicans I recall fondly from my youth and who seem to have become extinct in post-Reagan America.
Leach went on to make his case for change in November:
The party that once emphasized individual rights has gravitated in recent years toward regulating values. The party of military responsibility has taken us to war with a country that did not attack us. The party that formerly led the world in arms control has moved to undercut treaties crucial to the defense of the earth. The party that prides itself on conservation has abdicated its responsibilities in the face of global warming. And the party historically anchored in fiscal restraint has nearly doubled the national debt, squandering our precious resources in an undisciplined and unprecedented effort to finance a war with tax cuts.
America has seldom faced more critical choices: whether we should maintain an occupational force for decades in a country and region that resents western intervention or elect a leader who, in a carefully structured way, will bring our troops home from Iraq as the heroes they are. Whether it is wise to continue to project power largely alone with flickering support around the world or elect a leader who will follow the model of General Eisenhower and this president’s father and lead in concert with allies.
Whether it is prudent to borrow from future generations to pay for today’s reckless fiscal policies or elect a leader who will shore up our budgets and return to a strong dollar. Whether it is preferable to continue the policies that have weakened our position in the world, deepened our debt and widened social divisions or elect a leader who will emulate John F. Kennedy and relight a lamp of fairness at home and reassert an energizing mix of realism and idealism abroad.
The portfolio of challenges passed on to the next president will be as daunting as any since the Great Depression and World War II. This is not a time for politics as usual or for run-of-the-mill politicians. Little is riskier to the national interest than more of the same. America needs new ideas, new energy and a new generation of leadership.
Hence, I stand before you proud of my party’s contributions to American history but, as a citizen, proud as well of the good judgment of good people in this good party, in nominating a transcending candidate, an individual whom I am convinced will recapture the American dream and be a truly great president: the senator from Abraham Lincoln’s state—Barack Obama.
The other Republican who spoke last week at the Democratic convention is actually now a former Republican, and not just any Republican: it’s Susan Eisenhower, granddaughter of Dwight D. Eisenhower. A few days before her speech, she explained her decision to leave the Republican Party:
I have decided I can no longer be a registered Republican. For the first time in my life I announced my support for a Democratic candidate for the presidency, in February of this year. This was not an endorsement of the Democratic platform, nor was it a slap in the face to the Republican Party. It was an expression of support specifically for Senator Barack Obama. I had always intended to go back to party ranks after the election and work with my many dedicated friends and colleagues to help reshape the GOP, especially in the foreign-policy arena. But I now know I will be more effective focusing on our national and international problems than I will be in trying to reinvigorate a political organization that has already consumed nearly all of its moderate “seed corn.” And now, as the party threatens to trivialize what promised to be a serious debate on our future direction, it will alienate many young people who might have come into party ranks.
My decision came at the end of last week when it was demonstrated to the nation that McCain and this Bush White House have learned little in the last five years. They mishandled what became a crisis in the Caucasus, and this has undermined U.S. national security. At the same time, the McCain camp appears to be comfortable with running an unworthy Karl Rove–style political campaign. Will the McCain operation, and its sponsors, do anything to win?
Eisenhower explained why she switched her party affiliation to “independent”:
As an independent I want to be free of the constraints and burdens that have come with trying to make my own views explainable in the context of today’s party. Hijacked by a relatively small few, the GOP of today bears no resemblance to Lincoln, Roosevelt or Eisenhower’s party, or many of the other Republican administrations that came after. In my grandparents’ time, the thrust of the party was rooted in: a respect for the constitution; the defense of civil liberties; a commitment to fiscal responsibility; the pursuit and stewardship of America’s interests abroad; the use of multilateral international engagement and “soft power”; the advancement of civil rights; investment in infrastructure; environmental stewardship; the promotion of science and its discoveries; and a philosophical approach focused squarely on the future.
The decision was not an easy one, “since politics, like religion, is something learned on the knee of one’s parents and grandparents.” But there will be some joy in her new status, since she will be able to speak for herself, and “not as a member of a party that has, sadly, lost its way.”
Eisenhower mentioned Rove—here’s an update on the Rovian legacy in John McCain’s campaign, giving a sense of how nasty things will probably get. Part of me wants to go to sleep for two months and wake up on November 5 with Barack Obama the elected president. But most of me wants to be ready to dive in when the rumble really starts.
