http://blogs.e-rockford.com/applesauce/2008/01/11/unity-shmunity/ Pat Cunningham offers an unabashedly liberal perspective on national politics. A note of caution: The language gets a litttle salty on some of the sites to which this blog links. So, don't say you weren't warned. By the way, this blog's name is inspired by the Will Rogers quote, "All politics is applesauce." Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:31:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=wordpress-mu-1.2.4 http://blogs.e-rockford.com/applesauce/2008/01/11/unity-shmunity/#comment-57 Pat Cunningham Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:54:52 +0000 http://blogs.e-rockford.com/applesauce/2008/01/11/unity-shmunity/#comment-57 Look, I'm all for consensus and bridge-building and that stuff. But when somebody calls for "unity," I'm a little leery. Look, I’m all for consensus and bridge-building and that stuff. But when somebody calls for “unity,” I’m a little leery.

]]> http://blogs.e-rockford.com/applesauce/2008/01/11/unity-shmunity/#comment-55 MR. BASEBALL Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:27:57 +0000 http://blogs.e-rockford.com/applesauce/2008/01/11/unity-shmunity/#comment-55 I can't agree with you on this one Pat. I too am all for diverse opinions and viewpoints. I also think it's healthy. The lack of such has been a major fault of the current Bush administration. It's the tenor of the debate that Obama's talking about. You can disagree without being divisive. This all goes back to Watergate. Previous to that the two parties were better able to negotiate and hammer out compromises and that's really the essence of democracy. No one side gets all it wants on every issue. That's why it's so dangerous to have an uncompromising idealogue as our leader. Probably the best President we've had in heaing all viewpoints and building coalitions was a guy named Lincoln. He was a unifying leader and one who changed his mind as circumstances changed. He'd never get elected today because the political opposition who label him a"flip-flopper." I can’t agree with you on this one Pat. I too am all for diverse opinions and viewpoints. I also think it’s healthy. The lack of such has been a major fault of the current Bush administration. It’s the tenor of the debate that Obama’s talking about. You can disagree without being divisive. This all goes back to Watergate. Previous to that the two parties were better able to negotiate and hammer out compromises and that’s really the essence of democracy. No one side gets all it wants on every issue. That’s why it’s so dangerous to have an uncompromising idealogue as our leader. Probably the best President we’ve had in heaing all viewpoints and building coalitions was a guy named Lincoln. He was a unifying leader and one who changed his mind as circumstances changed. He’d never get elected today because the political opposition who label him a”flip-flopper.”

]]>