Two parties, different rules

Just when I thought I had gotten out, I get pulled back in by the character assassinations in the last few weeks of Sen. Ben Nelson and other officials of the Democratic Party including the President himself.

I remember clearly a few years ago when I referred to President G.W. Bush as "Dubya" in this column and the response from the readers was immediate and not very complimentary. Several readers accused me of "disparaging" the office of the President and, regardless of who I voted for, it was my duty and obligation to support the President.

How things change when a Democrat gets elected. Rush Limbaugh said in his nationally broadcast radio program that he hopes Obama fails because if he doesn't, it means that the Democrats were right and the Republicans weren't. There was no mention in his diatribe about whether America wins or not, only partisan party politics.

Then we have the recent letters and columns trashing our U.S. Senator, Ben Nelson, who just happens to be from McCook. One letter criticized him for voting "Yes" on bringing the health care bill to the full Senate for debate, saying that a "no" vote later won't make up for his "yes" vote now.

A columnist for this newspaper wrote that he shouldn't be blamed for the problems we're currently experiencing because "I voted for the American," referring to the Presidential election between John McCain and Barack Obama.

The same columnist two weeks later accused Sen. Nelson of selling his vote, saying that surely he got more than the $300 million Sen. Landrieu from Louisiana received for her state with her "yes" vote that would move the debate to the full Senate.

Here's the thing about partisan politics: Whenever Sen. Nelson votes the way some of you think he should, (with the Republican minority) he's an independent, non-partisan grass-roots Nebraskan who's voting his conscience. But when his vote conflicts with your own views (voting with the Democratic majority), he's a turncoat who needs to be defeated in the next election. One of the things we learn in grade school is that we can't have it both ways but that is often lost on the electorate and the "political thinkers" of this state when an elected official dares to take a stance against the status quo. It happened to Chuck Hagel and now it's happening to Ben Nelson. Sen. Nelson always carries Lincoln and Omaha but rarely carries Red Willow County, his home county. Why is that?

Could it be that the major metropolitan areas have more displaced, homeless, forlorn, and hopeless voters than we do in Southwest Nebraska and they somehow think that Democrats care more about them than Republicans? That certainly could be one of the reasons because this country was founded on the principle that ALL men are created equal and deserve the same protections under the Constitution that everyone else has.

I should make my biases known here in regards to the Senator. I like him. I think he's an honest man who's trying to do the best he can do. When the Navy was dragging their feet over the investigation of my son's death, Sen. Nelson compelled them to give me an answer immediately and they did. I will always be deeply indebted to him for that.

I've talked with him on the phone from his Senate office, I've met with him in the house he grew up in that is now located on Norris Avenue across the street from Norris Park, and I've hosted a campaign rally for him at the Republican River Valley Events Center. I even have a copy of the singing CD he recorded , "Western Town" which, by the way, isn't too bad. Even though I'm not too fond of a couple of his aides, my comments about the Senator are indeed prejudiced because of my personal and professional admiration of him but the rest of this column isn't.

It's fairly obvious that our founding fathers desired an open and honest debate on ALL issues that come before its elected leaders. But we've become so polarized politically, an open and honest debate today is an impossibility. How else can you explain the entire body of Republicans voting against whatever the Democrats want? It's hard to find a unanimous consensus that the sun's going to come up in the East tomorrow but we have an entire group of lock-step, arm-in-arm, everybody else can go to hell, elected officials who oppose anything and everything the other party proposes.

Now I'm not na*ve enough to believe that everything my party proposes is either good or sound. I'm a pragmatist and a realist and I know that certain elements of each party sometimes point their party in a direction it shouldn't go. Democrats do it , Republicans do it, even Libertarians do it.

But to close our minds and not listen to the other side at all is unconscionable. It seems no one on either side of the aisle anymore is ever able to say "You may be right" or "I could be wrong."

And when our politics become that dogmatic, we all lose.