The contract
November 3, 2006 10:04 PM   Subscribe

Just twelve years ago, in 1994, the Republican Party asked Americans "to restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives." This year, the Democrats are asking Americans "to keep(ing) our nation safe and expand(ing) opportunity for every American." If you're going to change guards, do the guards (old) (new) need to have a list? Or a list?
posted by SeeAych4 (7 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: even though it's an election week in the US, this is not really a great post.

So American political parties have platforms, and Scotland has an events guide called The List, and what the heck is this about again?
posted by brain_drain at 10:15 PM on November 3, 2006

Well, this is sort of a crappy post.

That being said, the post (along with a "where are they now" piece that ran in the WSJ either Thursday or Friday, I forget) reminded me of how I felt about the promises of the 104th Congress, during that campaign season when I was in my mid-twenties, a young adult with cynical Democratic parents. I remember reading the first eight bullets-- at the time they seemed almost revolutionary-- and wondering how anyone could possibly disagree with the substance of the message.

The Gingrich Republicans were going to clean up Washington.

Twelve years have passed, and in the meantime conservatism-- as it was preached in 1994-- has died. And to we Goldwater types, it's a tragedy worthy of Odysseus. The contract had a few points that laissez-faire advocates disagreed with (weakening of the exclusionary rule, money for babies), but as a whole, at the time, we found common ground with the fundies. It was fusionism at its very finest, and that's why the revolution (if only briefly) succeeded.

The Gingrich Republicans were going to clean up Washington.

I doubt that I need to explain what happened in the dozen years since then (because I imagine that even the most hardcore MeFi leftist can add two and two and muster a shred of empathy) but all I am left with is a profound sense of sadness. I am saddened that this movement, which was (most charitably) equal parts restraint, desert, and accountability, has devolved into the modern republican party. It is barely a shell of its former self.

Nice knowing you, Newt. You tried to stick a knife in Ron Paul's back just two years after you promised a freer market and more honest politics. I hope that he someday has a chance to spit in your eye, and I wish you had lived up to your promise. Your legacy has been betrayed (in part by you, no less), and I wonder if you were ever, at all, serious about what you had promised.
posted by Kwantsar at 11:01 PM on November 3, 2006

God, this country is screwed. In that order.
posted by luckypozzo at 12:22 AM on November 4, 2006

Those parentheses in your quotations. I do not think they mean what you think they mean.
posted by I Am Not a Lobster at 7:52 AM on November 4, 2006

You mean the "contract with America" was just empty PR? I'm shocked, shocked! Perhaps Ric Romero can investigate this.
posted by clevershark at 8:24 AM on November 4, 2006

Uh, so where does "Scotland’s best selling entertainment, events and lifestyle magazine." fit in to the conspiracy?
posted by Luddite at 1:23 PM on November 4, 2006

You mean to tell me, you actually, ever took some bullshit Newt Gingrich promised seriously???

posted by stenseng at 1:55 PM on November 4, 2006

« Older Doogie Howzaboutdat?   |   So, so sorry. Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments