The true meaning of "bipartisanship"

[Inuca]

A wonderful article by Gary Hart at HuffPo http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/the-national-interest-and_b_78987.html The National Interest and 2008

Given all the primary craziness out there, I do not know if anybody will have the time or the interest to read this, and also hopefully to ponder over what Hart has to say, but IMHO it is well worth it.

A few choice bits (emphasis mine):

There is something called the national interest. It is not an ideology. It is not the possession of a single cabal of self-appointed imperialists. It is not achieved by substituting consensus for principle. It is not "bipartisanship" for its own sake or in pursuit of bad policy. And it is not a euphemism for oil.

Our national interest is the product of more than two centuries of national history which constitutes an amalgam of colossal mistakes, most notably Iraq, and grand sacrifices and noble actions. It required a terrible civil war to establish that slavery was not in our national interest. It required a cold war to establish that alliance and collaboration was in our national interest.

Oil dependence, climate change, nuclear proliferation, concentrated wealth, fear of terrorism, theocracy, empire, corruption in government, an arrogant and ignorant executive, and violation of civil liberties are not in our national interest.

Equal rights for all, respect for our constitutional guarantees, including most notable habeas corpus, economic opportunity, regulation of market excess, our natural heritage and environment, fairness, justice, and checks and balanced government are all in our national interest.

The national interest cannot be achieved by settling old scores, vengeance for past wrongs, and demonization of those with whom we disagree. History operates its own court of justice and vengeance is the enemy of progress.

Together, the two new/old parties must recapture a sense of the national interest, above partisan victory and advantage, willing to achieve consensus for the good of the country as men and women of good will and leadership define it, operating in good faith and mutual respect, and most of all bound by constitutional guarantees and constraints.

A reminder that Hart is one of the participants in the Oklahoma meeting next week, much talked bout in recent days, and which of course includes Bloomberg. I do not know how many of the other participants share Hart's views. Unfortunately, probably not many.....