Pop quiz: If the Democrats are going to stand a chance of beating George W. Bush in 2004, they are going to have to put tremendous effort and creativity into winning over which of the following groups of voters: a) gay men and lesbians or b) people (gay, straight, whatever) who currently think that the post-September 11 United States is just somehow more secure in Republican hands?
-Michael Tomasky, The American Prospect
Now stay with me here a second. The point is not that Democrats need to give up brow-beating shmucks like Santorum when the situation calls for said beating; they should. But Democrats need to attack larger issues as well, i.e. this idea that the "United States is just somehow more secure in Republican hands [.]"
I've long since given up the idea that political debate is some sort of gentleman's activity. Every time someone tries to suggest that it is, or that it should be (and funny it's always some conservative telling me this), my usual gut-reaction is to ratchet up the attack-level. I'm tired of watching my side get consistently sucker punched while looking around for a referee who isn't there. Punch back, or prepare to get decked.
An interesting read if you're into this kind of issue.
Link