Posted on 03/16/2004 10:42:10 AM PST by SwinneySwitch
Lately, I've been having disturbing thoughts about today's politics and government. I've watched politics most of my life. My earliest recollection is of the Roosevelt vs. Landon race. Alf Landon was governor of Kansas and I remember "Landon & Knox" yellow and brown sunflower lapel buttons (from the Kansas state flower). I learned about what was going on from my Daddy and My Weekly Reader.
Since then I have followed national, state and local politics, usually forming an opinion and picking "my" candidate. Mostly, politics was a spectator sport, but I was active in two campaigns when friends were running for office (neither was successful).
My voting pattern has been eclectic. I never voted a straight ticket and happened to have split my presidential votes even between Democrats and Republicans, but didn't vote in the Nixon vs. McGovern race. I admit to becoming more conservative in my later years, likely because I finally had something to conserve.
Despite this background, the current level of politics worries me, as the political climate has become more vicious, personal and nasty than I can remember. It seems to be more about personality, party and power than about governing. The tirades against Bill Clinton bothered me. I didn't respect him, but I didn't hate him, either. Recent attacks on George Bush are vicious, including deathbed requests that memorial gifts be used for his defeat.
I realize Democrats and Republicans are opposition parties, but I expect them to oppose one another in a fair, honest, decent manner, and to always seek the "art of compromise." I wondered if this impression was just my mind's eye. Was I getting mellow in my old age and expecting every one else to do the same? So I talked to my friend Bob Bezdek, and he agreed. He pointed out that even the consummate Texas politician, Bob Bullock, left public service because politics had become too malicious. Other prominent politicians have recently done the same.
Truman didn't die rich
I have some thoughts as to why this is taking place. I suspect money has something to do with it. Political power can be financially rewarding. Raising money has become one way of keeping score, even without an opponent. Campaign chests are often used for "personal" expenditures related to the office. Plush retirement packages, fringe benefits, and frequent lobbying opportunities following retirement make things look pretty good. Harry Truman may have been one of the last major political figures not to die rich.
The media has something to do with it, emitting a steady, daily drumbeat of personal attacks on radio, TV and editorials.
Most important, perhaps, is that issues include not only "how" to govern, but "what" to govern. Issues once were "how" an existing problem might be resolved. Both parties agreed that the issue existed, but disagreed on the solution for such problems as drugs (both good and bad), medical care, social security and fighting terrorism. These are important issues, but political differences seem not to cause too great a furor, until recently.
Today, however, it seems we often argue over "what" to govern or not govern. Too often the "what" involves important beliefs and values, things we can't or won't compromise on, such as abortion and gay marriages. The courts often bring these questions up, leaving parties and politicians to deal with them. In their dealing, they face dissention and bitterness that generates hate and spreads throughout the political system.
History shows that we've had similar conditions before. The Halls of Congress have seen bitter differences flare up into name-calling, fistfights and beatings. Presidents have been targets of bitterness or hate. Be it a trend or a moment in history, this raises concern about our nation and its future. One thing that helps is to remember Winston Churchill's words: "Democracy is the worst type of government, excepting all others." I think that's true and pray that it continues to be.
John Richards is a retired dean at Texas A&M-Corpus Christi. Feedback columnists, invited to contribute on a regular basis, express their own opinions.
Reminds me of the early 1800's, right before the Civil War!
Its pretty much the same war -- urban vs rural. The socialists own just about every urban area while we own just about every rural area. The population between the two is about even. Perhaps the only real difference is that the issues that divide us are not so much taxes and ability to earn a living. Its philisophical / moral. In that regard is more like the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.
What a hypocrite...another "conservative" by convenience.
When we no longer have a national party that thinks that 45 million murdered babies is NOT ENOUGH, and that confiscating and squandering 50% of everybody's paycheck is NOT ENOUGH, we will start having some civility in politics.
Such moaners, ultimately, simply do not realize how evil most politicians really are, and how much harm they are doing.
I recommend a book called "The Fourth Turning". It examines the cycles of history and how the generational "personality" of the generations participating in it affect what happens. The vicious tone of the political arena today is completely understandable and expected when viewed through the lens of the books premise.
LQ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.