On every issue, the choice you face won’t be just between two candidates or two parties. It will be a choice between two different paths for America.
A choice between two fundamentally -different visions for the future.
But know this, America. Our problems can be solved. Our challenges can be met. The path we offer may be harder, but it lead us to a better place. I am asking you to choose the future.
But wait, isn’t that “better place” where Ann Romney said Mitt will take us to? So how could “two fundamentally different visions for the future” both lead to the same “better place?” I’m confused, are they arguing about whether to take Storrow or the Pike to get to the airport or something like that? That’s what Scott Brown seems to think:
The problem with Washington is that it’s divided into two sides – good and bad. Everyone believes they are on the good side, and the other side is bad.
People don’t just question your ideas, they challenge your motives. People don’t view each other as good people trying to achieve good things in different ways. They view each other as enemies. No wonder nothing gets done.
Unfortunately, my opponent, Elizabeth Warren, subscribes to this way of doing business. She says she will “throw rocks” at people she disagrees with, and that she would prefer “plenty of blood and teeth left on the floor” than compromise. She makes wild accusations against people who simply don’t see things her way.
I have strongly held views, but I recognize others have different ideas, and I trust they believe what they do for the same reason I believe what I do – because we think our ideas will lead to a better America for ourselves and future generations.
If you start from that basic premise – that everyone is trying to get to the same place, that we are all Americans first – it makes it a lot easier to break through the gridlock and get things done.
Wow, that’s great, but I’d really like to know more about where they think they are taking us, and what they think will make America better. As I said in a comment on my original diary about where the better place is, it is not “over-thinking it” to ask for some details:
There are so many different opinions on what would make America better. I think America would be better if we affirm the principle of all people being created equal, if we preserved natural male and female reproduction, prohibited genetic engineering of children and transgender/same-sex reproduction, and gave same-sex couples Civil Unions defined as “marriage minus conception rights.”
Other people believe the complete opposite about what would make America better, they believe we should apply technology to reproduction and make humans into living Gods on Earth, making Heaven on Earth, and people immortal and in control of the destiny of man, wresting control from evolution, transcending biological limitations like fixed sex and passing on our flawed genetic heritage.
We can’t go to both places, we will either prohibit genetic engineering of children or allow it, and the differences in how that that would affect us and our children and people around the world are dramatic and profound. We can just muddle our way forward and see where we end up, but the benefits of resolving the marriage debate and preserving sex and marriage would be felt immediately, and sticking with the status quo will waste time and energy and money.