Wednesday, October 15, 2008

My political screed

In an email from a loved one the other day I was asked:
“The more angry mobs and outcries I see at McCain (and especially Palin) stump speeches and town halls, the more I have come to believe this is not just your typical presidential race. And I am not talking about the candidates honesty here. I think all distort the truth to their benefit (even the "holy one", Obama). However, I do think the Republican Party is walking a very fine line between appropriate and truly harmful behavior. And with people hurting and scared about their future more than normal, I fear they are quickly achieving an unwanted result--that being a angerously divided country. They are succeeding in making up to one half of the ountry, were Obama to win, believe that their President is something akin to an Arab terrorist. Again, not playing politics, I think the coverage I have seen over multiple networks have accurately captured the sentiments of many. What I wonder is just how much I should worry about my fears becoming reality. Specifically, when we look back to times of integration and the Vietnam War (both of which you were witness to in some capacity), is this one of those times? Should we fear the irrational response of an extremist against our president (yes I am referring to Kennedy, but also to Reagan, who was shot at shortly after a period of discontent) or a statesman (like MLK, though I don't know your opinion of him). I hope you can shed some light on how closely you feel this period in our Country's history resembles the others I have mentioned, and what may or may affect whether we reach one of those times.”

Considering the email over a period of a couple of days, I replied:
“I have to preface this reply with the comment: ‘It is my considered opinion that if Obama wins this election it will be as a result of the Mainstream Media's concerted efforts to cause it to occur. I don't know when I've seen more one sided coverage of an election. It seems to me that Obama and Biden are being held to a far different standard than that of McCain & Palin by the MSM, strictly due to the MSM's liberal agenda.’

Now, on to your question. Politics do seem progressively more volatile than in years past. Eisenhower vs. Stevenson (I believe) was very low key. That was followed by Kennedy vs. Nixon and that race wasn't volatile either. The biggest issue of that election seemed to be Kennedy's Roman Catholic faith. Some believe that LBJ was at least complicit in JFK's Assassination, others see it as the Cubans as a result of his botched Bay of Pigs invasion, still others the "Mob" because of Bobby Kennedy's efforts to renege on a campaign promise to them for their support and yet others as the CIA, who he "crapped" on. I won't ever know, but I will die believing that Lee Harvey Oswald was NOT a "lone gunman" who shot the sitting President. Nor was it by disgruntled American citizens. Kennedy's assassination was about POWER, plain and simple. LBJ then ran against Goldwater (a Republican from Arizona who I supported) and defeated him. He (LBJ) later halfheartedly took most of the steps in Vietnam that Goldwater said needed to occur and that LBJ promised wouldn't, following his (LBJ’s) using of Goldwater's comments to scare the country from electing him. He also created the "Great Society" which I feel is a root cause of the current black impoverishment and decline of black society (and society in general). Exclusive of segration (which HAD to end) black society was much more mainstream in the 50's & 60's than it is now, the hatred of blacks towards whites didn't seem to be what it is today. Supporting and enabling a class of society to be poor has encouraged that class to remain so. Crime rates back then weren't near as high, single parent families weren't as prevalent, discipline was far better, etc., etc., etc.

The mid-sixties were a time of quantum change. The first "boomers" reached 18 in 1964 and their parents, who had endured the great depression, WWII, the Korean conflict and "the specter of the bomb" wanted a better life for them. To a point children weren't very rebellious towards their parents and were looking for a cause. They found it in Vietnam War protest & drugs, i.e. "peace, love, dope". Shortly before this was forced integration which was divisive (to be kind) in the deep South. That coincidentally is what cost Martin Luther King his life. He was a great statesman; however, a recollection of him in that period was his failure, much the same as the liberal Muslims of today, to preach directly against the violent proponents of his/their cause. None the less, there have always been and will always be bitter people, and he was shot by one. For the most part it's my opinion that the young people of the era were who drove most of the unrest of the time, looking for change, BTW. The Sixties were an ugly time with close to anarchy in some cities and campuses. But we did get change, though not for the better to my way of thinking. It is also my belief that most of the news media is now liberal and has come of age since the Sixties; hence, they are "pushing" their agenda of the Sixties yet again.

Following LBJ's decision not to run for a second term Nixon ran against Humphrey (I believe). He (Nixon) was elected, ended the war in Vietnam and withdrew. The Vietnamese War was poorly run and the people of the US (much the same as they did towards the end of WW II) grew tired of it. I feel it was in part caused by the one sided reporting of the news media. It also seems the US people have never been much on inconvenience and with biased reporting, grew tired of the investment, real or presumed. Anyway, Nixon had Watergate his second term, he resigned and Jerry Ford took over as Pres. He was a good man and the country was relatively quiet once again until Carter came along. Ford had an assassination attempt on him while President. The Ford Carter race was not terribly divisive, Carter was elected and became arguably the WORST person ever to serve. He was dumped after one term, beaten by Reagan. Again a relatively quiet race and time in history. Reagan, who I believe to be one of our BEST Presidents, unified the Country, brought back a pride in America and ended the Cold War. Reagan was also shot while in office, by a nut case, not really over politics. He was followed by one term of Bush Sr. who was then defeated by Bill Clinton. Without going into my beliefs about the Clinton White House, I concede that the economy flourished and most people were happy to some extent though more conservative folks quickly became disenchanted with the Clintons liberalism and social agenda. This is where it seems that a more vocal conservative base began being heard. Newt Gingerich's conservative "Contract with America" won the House of Reps. away from the Dems. and the fight was joined. From that point forward it seems to have become a case of one upsmanship between the two parties with the American people being the losers. Definitely, progressively more volatile from that point forward. Following the Clintons was Bush II, who WON Florida by all accounts but the Dems. were "pissed" and the war was on for good. It was time to "get even" for all the conservatives actions towards the Clintons. Bush II has not been a good President but I believe there are some things he's gotten a "bum rap" for. As such, we've become a Nation of "gotchas" and it became the Dems' turn to do the gettin'.

Really there seem to be two battles going on simultaneously, that between the two parties (Dems. and Reps. - each one as bad as the other) for POWER and control as well as that between the liberals and conservatives for the direction that America will pursue in the future. The battles have been "pitched", and each side is absolutely vilified by the other. Common sense, as well as any middle ground, has been lost along the way and I fear that the America I was taught to love and honor has long since been set aside.

So in answer, Yes, America is a dangerously divided country, driven to that division by the powers that be to secure their power. Is it akin to those other times, No, I don't believe so; I fear the issues are far more reaching. It is my considered opinion that the U.S. is already Socialist and the true question becomes to what degree will we be so? You know me well enough that you don't need my opinion on Socialism, in any form. I am a Federalist and a Libertarian.

In closing, I commend you to three books. Animal Farm and 1984, both by George Orwell and Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. In them I fear I see the direction our Nation is taking and believe that soon the question on thinking peoples minds will be: ‘Where is John Galt?’ Before it comes to that you can/will color us gone.”

Love always,


Post a Comment

<< Home