Posted on 01/08/2006 5:13:35 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
Even though the war on terror dominates the headlines, the culture war in America is almost as intense. On one side you have traditionalists, people who believe the country was well-founded, does mostly good things, and has become the most powerful nation on earth by adhering to Judeo-Christian principles like generosity, justice, and self-sacrifice.
On the other side of the culture war are the secular-progressives (S-P's) who believe that the USA is fundamentally a flawed country, which has caused considerable misery both within and outside our borders. The S-P's want drastic change and a new direction for America.
The two most intense issues in the culture war right now are how to deal with terrorism and what role spirituality should play in the public arena.
The S-P's want little or no public displays of God or religion. That's what drove the attacks on Christmas images and traditions; knock down the big Christian holiday, and the secularists achieve a big victory.
On the terror front, traditionalists largely want aggressive action to wipe out the "evildoers," and if lraq is the battlefield, then so be it.
Secular-progressives are appalled by the Iraq war and generally believe the USA has no right to act unilaterally to hunt down terrorists or their enablers.
So the stage was set for my recent appearance on the David Letterman show. I am a traditionalist; Mr. Letterman tends to mock traditionalists. And he often does it very well.
Our discussion began with the Christmas controversy. Dave did not see it as a big deal. When I pointed out the absurdity of a library in Memphis, Tennessee OK'ing a manger scene but then telling the woman donating it that she had to remove Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the three Wise Men, Dave said he did not believe the story. And, generally, that was the opinion of the liberal media: There was no Christmas controversy -- the whole thing was fabricated by religious zealots bent on establishing a theocracy.
Dave's skepticism must have come as a surprise to Memphis resident Brandi Chambless, the woman ordered to remove statues of the Holy Family and their visitors from the East. But, hey, the shepherds could stay, staring into an empty stable.
The subject quickly shifted to Iraq, a conflict both Letterman and I believe has been poorly managed. We also found common ground on the terrific performance of the U.S. military.
But then Cindy Sheehan came up. Uh-oh.
Dave, as well as many in the entertainment community, feels that Ms. Sheehan should not be criticized. He believes she is above reproach because her son, Casey, was killed in Iraq.
I do not see it that way, so sparks flew. My contention is that Ms. Sheehan is entitled to grieve and dissent in any way she wants, but her grief is being exploited by far-left elements.
And when Ms. Sheehan told Mark Knoller, a correspondent for CBS radio, that the terrorists in Iraq were "freedom fighters," she insulted thousands of other Americans who lost loved ones in Iraq.
Simply put, terrorists who blow up civilians, women and children are not freedom fighters in any sense. They are murderers, and I called Mr. Letterman on Sheehan's support of them.
I hope you saw the program. It was a rare display of the culture war on television. I told Dave I respected his views and he should respect mine. I enjoyed the joust.
By far more important, is the wake-up call many late-night viewers got. We in America are becoming a deeply divided country along cultural lines. The more we all understand what the issues are, the better. The culture war is real, and now, everybody watched Letterman that evening knows it.
I didn't even know he had a kid. I guess I'll wait for him to show up on cable "Celeb Kids Gone Wrong" in 20 years.
One major difference between the two sides in the Culture War is that the Left seeks absolute impositions of its values via the Courts, whereas the Right (though usually in these cases the Right's view encompasses the mainstream view) merely seeks a fair battle in the proper, legitimate democratic channels. It is the Left, knowing that most people reject their radical cultural views, who have turned to the Courts to impose these things that can't be won at the ballot box. They try to justify this with the 'Living Constitution' nonsense; telling us that the Constitution somehow now requires things never envisioned or contemplated by the Framers or the people who gave their consent to it.
The idea that the Constitution mandates, abortion rights, recognition of same-sex unions, or the barring of religious displays on public grounds (to name a few hot-button examples)is absurd.
I would agree with you in the sense that such issues (barring an Amendment setting policy one way or another) should always have the ability to remain in flux. If the people want permissive abortion laws (as the Left insists is the case), then so be it. If the people suddenly decide a radical redefining of marriage is in order, then so be it. If the people don't want a nativity scene outside city hall, then so be it. But since the people want none of these things as of now, then that is as it should be (allowing for regional differences of course).
In fact, the only reason we have a national Culture War is because of the Left's abuse of the judiciary and Consitution. Without such tactics, then all of the contentious social issues would be resolved in a manner that most could live with. Having a fair hearing and chance in the democratic process, and knowing that you can come back to try again some other day lends a certain amount of satisfaction to all parties involved, even the losers.
As to Letterman and O'Reilly; Letterman is clearly a leftist, who can barely hide his hatred of Bush and Republicans. And while I am no fan of O'Reilly, he did bust Letterman on a few points. One was how he correctly pointed out that yes, of course Cindy Sheehan deserves compassion and sympathy for her loss suffered on behalf of all Americans, but once she makes herself a part of the political scene then her comments are fair game for criticism.
The biggest point in O'Reilly's favor is how he got Letterman to admit that he was judging his show w/o having watched it. Such a revelation -- that one is criticizing a subject based not on firsthand obervation but instead on what others say -- is usually taken in a debate as a devastating blow. All of the media types and liberals who claim Letterman cleaned O'Reilly's clock are conveniently ignoring this, and they would no doubt pounce on a conservative admitting to the same.
I wish I'd seen that particular show, but Letterman is otherwise not worth my time.
I have to agree that it is a fundamentally flawed nation, as evidenced by the fact that we have these fools in our country, and we even pay good money to make them rich.
So if I understand you correctly, your main point of contention with the left is not as much its viewpoints as it is its tactics?
And if they are wrong, that doesn't bother you?
I guess this is off-topic but political beliefs aside, Letterman is infinitely more funny than Leno. I can't wait until Conan takes over for Leno. Watching Leno is like being trapped in a bad joke factory.
He was funny when I was 15 but time has left him behind. Its not 1968 anymore and liberal refuges from the Age of Aquarius need to figure that out: Put the bong down, the party is over.
It won't belong before he is hawking "final expense" insurance and Depends during reruns of Barnaby Jones, Matlock, or Murder she Wrote.
It is liberals who will to govern because they are the elite, so much more intelligent than the rest of us.
If liberals were in charge there would never be another election.
The will of the people be damned.
They can have their own opinion. They cannot have their own facts.
We have 200 plus years of experience that a fundamentally Christian nation did not persecute, Jews, Catholics, Buddhists or atheists.
There are some, such as myself, that do not take a moral relative perspective as anything but a flawed perspective. Toleration is one thing -toleration of evil or that which is morally wrong is another. There are absolute truths and as such a viewpoint that contravenes what is true and should be so is a viewpoint not to be respected -it is a viewpoint to be opposed and defeated.
I don't presume to speak for Aetius, but the word isn't tactics, as dispicable as they are. It's the intolerance of the left that is the problem.
Post #40 focuses on the problem most conservatives have with liberals.
I gotta admit Leno has never done much for me.
I USED to love Letterman.
Bill
Spot on the money!
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.