Disagree without Destroying Each Other

Friday I linked to an Anchoress post about the tone of the recent debate on immigration. Today at the Examiner I discuss the need for the GOP to learn how to disagree without destroying each other.

There were powerful arguments to be made on the facts, and some did just that. Unfortunately, though, some in the GOP decided the way to succeed was to revert to the tactics they have criticized those on the other side of the aisle for engaging in for so many years. I wonder if they realize how many supporters they risk alienating if they continue down the road of trading accusations like “traitor” and “bigot” in future debates.

I was drawn to the Republican Party as a teenager, and have happily remained a Republican, in large measure due to the tendency among its advocates to argue facts and appeal to logic, rather than solely emotion.

In the case of the recent immigration debate, the public desperately needed facts about the bill and its possible ramifications. In addition to facts, emotion does play an important role in political debate. Passion is what moves the public to call and write their congressmen and to venture out on a rainy day to vote. What too often passed as passion and factual debate on this issue, however, were attacks hurled from those on both sides of the issue.Read the entire piece at The Examiner.

Mark Tapscott cites polls saying Congressional approval ratings are down for both parties and wonders whether a new party is needed.

Working wonders
Double dipping for double dips