Debate Is Good If You Win. Not So Good Otherwise.

I love to debate my cousin by email. We've been doing it off and on for about a dozen years. He's a moderate conservative and I'm a moderate progressive. But for the sake of debate, we're both rabidly opposites. We've argued everything from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe with side trips to Bush and Obama. He's called me uneducated and uninformed while I call him an elitist aristocrat. He hates regulation while I point out the similarities of the now and the past. If I point to a flaw in a conservative position, he spends substantial efforts in finding the discrepancy in my findings and if he points a finger at a progressive ideal, I quickly prove beyond a shadow of doubt that he's wrong. I tell you this so you'll understand the righteous rightness of my position and his inept attempts to discredit the good of progressives everywhere. On some things we agree. We both think that Washington needs to be housecleaned. The Senate too. We both like the idea of term limits and we both agree that it's never going to happen. We both believe this because, while most people agree with us, most people feel that congress should all be thrown out except for their own special favorite son. Because they're all no good except for this one special favorite son, or daughter. So if you threw everyone out of congress except for the favorite sons and daughters, you really wouldn't be throwing anyone out, now would you? Another thing my cousin and I wouldn't miss is political parties. We do like New Years Eve parties though. About the only way that could happen is with a constitutional amendment to require open primaries where the top two vote getter run in the general election. Can you imagine the full court press the two parties would unleash on that idea?