Fightin’ Ted Strickland

Lisa Kramer

Lisa Kramer is a contributing contributor at The League of Ordinary Gentlemen.

Related Post Roulette

5 Responses

  1. Robert Cheeks says:

    The GOP is bad but that’s no reason to vote Democrat.
    The problem with the commie-Dems is they are anti-American, e.g. against the first principles of the olde republic, also, they work assiduously to santify, in a secular sense, the slaughter of the innocents, and they adhere to a strange, foreign ideology that Americans who actually work for a living and have a memory of the past/history, find repulsive.
    My former governor is a statist and damn proud of it. I’m just delighted that he and his commie-Dem cohorts were thrown out of office in the great state of Ohio. Maybe, just maybe, the Tea Party is for real…we’ll see!Report

    • E-Dub in reply to Robert Cheeks says:

      Robert, I’m neither a Democrat nor a republican but I do work awfully hard and have an excellent memory and I have no idea what you’re talking about. lol

      Also, a cohort is a group, and should be used in the singular here. Cohorts in the plural would refer to multiple groups. It’s a common mistake to use it to refer to individuals.Report

  2. tom van dyke says:

    How inspiring to see a femaleperson [one Lisa Kramer] in the fray.

    I almost don’t want to disagree. Perhaps I’ll just note that once again, the question is boiled down to the quality of rhetoric, not the strength and content of actual political vision. But screw that—

    I recently looked up Harry Truman’s famous speech from 1952. My provisos are that the GOP has just re-found its own religion via the Tea Party thing, and that the Dems got their asses kicked in the 1952 election, despite Truman’s speech.

    Still, the Dems found their way back to electoral dominance, and in fairly short order. Ms. Kramer correctly reminds us that “fighting” has limited appeal to a country that would prefer to think of each other as “fellow Americans.” Whenever somebody starts talking about fighting, I figger it’s 50-50 they want to fight me. Pass. Mr. Truman has the floor:

    “The record the Democratic Party has made in the last 20 years is the greatest political asset any party ever had in the history of the world. We would be foolish to throw it away. There is nothing our enemies would like better and nothing that would do more to help them win an election.

    I’ve seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the fair Deal, and says he really doesn’t believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don’t want a phony Democrat. If it’s a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don’t want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign.

    But when a Democratic candidate goes out and explains what the New Deal and fair Deal really are–when he stands up like a man and puts the issues before the people–then Democrats can win, even in places where they have never won before. It has been proven time and again.

    We are getting a lot of suggestions to the effect that we ought to water down our platform and abandon parts of our program. These, my friends, are Trojan horse suggestions. I have been in politics for over 30 years, and I know what I am talking about, and I believe I know something about the business. One thing I am sure of: never, never throw away a winning program. This is so elementary that I suspect the people handing out this advice are not really well-wishers of the Democratic Party.

    More than that, I don’t believe they have the best interests of the American people at heart. There is something more important involved in our program than simply the success of a political party.

    The rights and the welfare of millions of Americans are involved in the pledges made in the Democratic platform of 1948 and in the program of this administration. And those rights and interests must not be betrayed.”

    The whole thing:

    Hey, go for it. That was a beautiful thing. Tellya the truth, I don’t think the current Great Orator ever put it as well, or more genuine or heartfelt, and that’s a complaint even from his supporters. And I happen to disagree with the new truism from Mario Cuomo that you campaign in poetry and govern in prose. FDR and Reagan governed in poetry, and JFK sent us to the moon with poetry.

    Having read my share of politics, history, philosophy, and wonkacracy, IMO, poetry is tremendously underrated. For some, esp the wonkacracy, it’s a human thing. You wouldn’t understand.

    “We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.”

    No, it wasn’t the Republicans or Ike or any of the other things. It was John Kennedy’s poetry—or Ted Sorenson’s—that put a man on the moon. That was cool.Report

    • DensityDuck in reply to tom van dyke says:

      Actually, it was JFK building on what Eisenhower had started. If it hadn’t been for ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons and spy satellites, we’d have never had the technological base that made JFK think we could put men on the Moon.Report

  3. Scott says:


    Please put down your poetry and read your history! It wasn’t some fuzzy headed liberal smoking dope an reading poetry that got us to the moon. It was was fear of the Soviets and imported Nazi rocket scientists like Wernher von Braun that got the US to the moon.Report