In today’s Impromptus, I’m back on a theme of mine. (I may be boring, but at least I’m consistent.) There is a great, yawning gap between the two parties, the Democrats and the Republicans. There is too great a gap for my taste. I would prefer some kind of Eisenhoweresque “era of good feelings.”
This is the opposite of what many people say — people on the right, that is. They say, “There’s one big establishment party, the Republicrats.” Someone’s crazy — me or them. (I can see lots of readers pointing at me.)
Iain Martin has written on the same theme, concerning his country, Britain. There are Brits, too, who say there is one “establishment” party, the “LibLabCons” (i.e., the Liberal Democrats, the Labourites, and the Conservatives). Again, they and I are living on different planets, or at least seeing different things on the same planet.
Here is Martin:
Consider what is at stake. For all that it is fashionable to claim that the differences between the parties are vanishingly small, at the next election it will simply not be true. Mr Cameron and Mr Miliband have dramatically contrasting outlooks, rooted in radically different views of human nature.
Mr Miliband is quite clear that he is a high-tax statist, intensely suspicious of private enterprise and individual responsibility. Mr Cameron wants the state to be smaller and more effective, and individuals, families and businesses to have the freedom to create prosperity.
Every day, Barack Obama shows how different he is from Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, or John McCain and Sarah Palin. He shows it in his appointments, his policies, and so on. I’m a hopeless partisan — I’ve written a piece on this theme for The American Spectator — but I see the Republican party as the only thing standing between us and . . . well, the fundamentally transformed country that Obama promised in 2008.
Can’t say he’s a promise-breaker (except on health insurance and some other stuff).