Main Street Quietly Revolts

ASPEN, Colo. – At a bustling farmers’ market, Trevor Washko worked on a square of leather in his booth of finely stitched journals.

To his right was a stand packed with fresh-picked fruits and vegetables; to his left, a cooking demonstration.

“We are not at all anything like the way we are portrayed by the media,” Washko said of the extraordinary mix of super-rich and resort workers who live in Aspen.

Washko spent life in Springfield, Ill., until he graduated from college and moved to Colorado. He has worked as a naturalist, as a field guide, in several service jobs at local resorts, and even served as unofficial mayor of the nearby Ashcroft Ghost Town.

The national media would not know how to begin to understand what makes this community tick, he said.

“Here is what they do not get – most of our country is right in the middle, perhaps slightly to the right,” he said. “We are not a member of this group or that group, even though they place all of us in boxes.”

Ten years ago today, Americans united in a way few had ever seen. Since then, a wedge has been driven between us.

Politicians, cable-television commentators and the national media have created a Blue (Democrat) America and a Red (Republican) America.

A funny thing happened as I traveled the country in recent weeks: Things were not as they have been portrayed; Republicans, Democrats and independents do not think of themselves as ruby-red or bright-blue partisans.

Instead, they think of themselves as Americans who don't fit neatly into boxes and who still believe America can meet any challenge, solve any problem, if politicians will just get out of the way.

Tom Link lives in Lower Burrell, in the farthest corner of western Pennsylvania’s portion of the Appalachian mountain range. A commercial-truck salesman, Link says he feels absolutely disconnected by the politicians’ and the media’s understandings of America.

“They don’t care what we think. They care about what they want us to think,” he said.

Over 20 days, this column visited 10 states and one district – Colorado, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North and South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia and Washington, D.C. – mostly on back roads, often in town squares, listening to how people feel about themselves and their country.

Liberals, conservatives, Green Party members and political agnostics all voiced the same belief: Washington doesn't work, and the reporters who cover Washington don’t understand America.

That belief has led an unprecedented number of Americans to conclude that if they can simply throw out all the bums (including their own members of congress and the president) and replace them with someone new, things will improve.

Steve McMahon, a Democrat who runs the Purple Strategies consulting firm with Republican Alex Castellanos, has a warning for incumbents of both parties:

"Americans are completely fed up with the gridlock. They can't believe no one is willing to compromise, or that both sides would take America to the edge of default – while the whole world watched in disbelief – just to score political points.

“Now they are perfectly willing to toss everyone out, including politicians they have voted for over and over again. This isn't a partisan problem. It's an incumbent's nightmare."

Mark Rozell, a public-policy professor at George Mason University, believes “the public is not as polarized as commonly assumed.” Instead, it is “more in the middle than anything.”

Yes, some citizens beyond Washington get caught up in the sort of discourse coming from the national media and many political figures. Yet most care more about how a policy affects their daily lives, not about whether it helps Democrats or Republicans.

“There is a big disconnect, in that sense, between the insider discourse and what most citizens actually care about,” Rozell said.

Sitting in an airport recently, waiting for a much-delayed flight, I watched a military unit pass through one of the concourses. Spontaneous applause erupted, offering those soldiers an honest expression of gratitude from average citizens.

That is the America that Tom Link says he knows, not the America that he says he sees in the national news.

Dems come to power they tend to react to a crisis with more regs to help the children, etc, etc, etc. Problem is big corporations make sure the new regs kill Main Street and burden any upcoming medium size corporations that can compete against them.
GOP come to power they forget that not all regs are socialist conspiracy to redistribute wealth. Big business can corrupt officials and cheat the people. Gov needs to keep an eye on them and make sure existing regs are enforced.
Example of GOP defect, Wall Street meltdown could have been avoided if SEC, banking and etc enforced existing regs. Contrary to popular belief, CRA identifies subprime borrowers when loan note is bundled into mortgage backed securities, but the CRA never condoned liar loans, which the bankers took advantage of the loophole and sold it to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae as prime mortgage notes. Treasury was informed by the FBI when they uncovered liar loans in banks involved with money laundering and were concern enough with its widespread use to inform the banking reg in 2004. There was enough info to go after WaMu and several mortgage companies specializing in making loans and immediately selling it to FMFM. Worst analysts in Moody, S&P, Fitch were scuttle butting amongst themselves how they were forced by their bosses to rate mortgage backed securities AAA when the banks refused to provide individual borrower mortgage data in the portfolio to analysis using common commercial practice. Fortunately many of these MBS have a give back clause which allows the investor to force the banks to buy back their MBS if they do not meet the claims of the prospectus narrative.
All this would come out if the banks did not decide to settle the lawsuits and the Obama is trying to force the banks to carry out liberal social agenda in exchange for lenient settlement then force the bank CEO’s face criminal trial, possible conviction, prison and fines and most important public airing of the crime. That is what Main Street wants from the feds, not bailouts, plea bargains and minor fines so future bankers will pull the same scheme all over again. Remember, young bank execs and upcoming managers are also watching this crisis unfold where the culprits make billions and give back a fraction in fines and settlements. If these future young execs decide the scheme is worth the rewards, what do you think will happen when they become CEO’s fifteen years from now?

Strategists like McMahon are all over the place these days, urging "compromise" by conservatives, as they see the failed policies of the "redistributionists" being rejected by citizens and the candidates they elected in 2010.

The efforts seem to be part of a larger strategy to silence those who disagree with the so-called "progressives'" agenda, as they try to make "compromise" a virtue. Is this part of a Soros-funded effort to neutralize opposition for the 2012 election? Watch AP "reports," columists, and even letters to the editor in local newspapers which suddenly tout the great need for "compromise."

Had the men and women of 1776 "compromised," we would have no Declaration of Independence and no freedom from British rule.

Citizens might remember that, unaccompanied by a strong determination to adhere to the Founders' ideas of liberty, then we risk damaging, rather than helping, the Republic. On questions essential to liberty, we may "compromise" away the liberty of our posterity and help to snuff out the light of liberty in the world.

In other words, if we keep doing the same things we've done already in the Congress and Senate, then we can expect the same results we've been getting--compromises that throw away the liberty of future generations.

On the other hand, if our nominees and representatives can articulate and explain the Founders' ideas as protections for liberty for all citizens, they will have planted the seeds of liberty in the hearts and minds of potential voters. Those seeds will bear fruit for the future, because once the ideas of liberty are understood, individuals may no longer voluntarily submit themselves to slavery to government. If, like the Founders, candidates and elected officials understood the ideas essential to liberty, they would sacrifice their "lives, liberty and sacred honor" rather than "compromise" on issues of limiting government, spending, taxation, etc.

Short-term gain, numbers wise, may lead to long-time loss.

Zacharias Montgomery: "If I have learned anything from the reading of history, it is that the man who, in violation of great principles, toils for temporary fame, purchases for himself either total oblivion or eternal infamy, while he who temporarily goes down battling for right principles always deserves, and generally secures, the gratitude of succeeding ages, and will carry with him the sustaining solace of a clean conscience, more precious than all the offices and honors in the gift of man."

Thomas Jefferson:

"[With the decline of society] begins, indeed, the bellum omnium in omnia [war of all against all], which some philosophers observing to be so general in this world, have mistaken it for the natural, instead of the abusive state of man. And the fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:40

In his First Inaugural, Jefferson clearly outlined the "principles" that would guide his Administration, and added:

"These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and the blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."

For too long, our public discourse has been based on "issues" and short-term political goals, with not enough emphasis placed on how this or that question on an issue relates to a principle essential to our very liberty as a nation. We must return to the "road" described by Jefferson as he took office if liberty is to survive the compromises and assaults by both major Parties over the past 100 years.

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.