Pettiness and Mud (Thomas Sowell)

Creators Syndicate ^ | February 28, 2012 | Thomas Sowell

[jazusamo]

The only good news for the Republicans coming out of the seemingly endless presidential candidate "debates" is that some Republican leaders are now belatedly thinking about how they can avoid a repetition of this debacle in future elections. What could they possibly have been thinking about, in the first place, when they agreed to a format based on short sound bites for dealing with major complex issues, and with media journalists — 90 percent of them Democrats — picking the topics? The conduct of the candidates made things worse. In a world with a record-breaking national debt and Iran moving toward creating nuclear weapons, they bickered over earmarks and condoms. I am against earmarks, but earmarks don't rank among the first hundred most serious problems facing this country. Mud-slinging has replaced rational discussions of differences on serious issues — not only during the debates themselves, where the moderators sic the candidates on each other, but even more so in the massive television character assassination ads in which Romney supporters seem to specialize. Groups supporting Mitt Romney have turned character assassination almost into a science. You take something that most people, outside of politics, do not understand and twist it to sound terrible to those who are unaware of the facts. Blanketing Florida with misleading ads attacking Newt Gingrich won that state for Romney, after Gingrich scored an upset victory in South Carolina. The ads made a big deal out of charges that the former Speaker broke tax laws — charges that the Internal Revenue Service exonerated him of, after a long investigation. When Rick Santorum suddenly surged after his upset victories in Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado, the Romney character assassination machine attacked him for having voted in the Senate for various things that conservatives don't like. But, when it comes to voting in Congress, seldom do you get a pure bill that you can agree with in all its parts. If you never voted for bills containing anything you didn't like, you might get very little voting done. But, if it is a bill to provide American soldiers with the equipment they need to fight a war, and somebody has put into it an earmark for a federal boondoggle in his district, are you going to vote against that bill and let American soldiers go into battle without all the equipment and supplies they need? Taking advantage of the public's lack of knowledge is something that Barack Obama already does very effectively in his political propaganda. But is that something the Republicans want to imitate? It has worked during the primary season, when the media are perfectly happy to see Republicans destroying each other. But it will not work in the general election campaign, when even truthful criticisms of the president will have a hard time getting out through the media, which hear no evil, see no evil and speak no evil when it comes to Obama. The pettiness and mud-slinging during the Republican primary campaigns is especially irresponsible during a time when there are very serious problems, at home and abroad, that need to be addressed in a serious way. Discussions of particular issues, one by one, often miss the larger point that goes beyond the issue at hand — namely, this administration's steady movement toward arbitrary government that circumvents the restrictions of the Constitution. Nothing demonstrates this more starkly than the president's arbitrary power to waive the requirement that employers have to provide ObamaCare coverage for their workers. That can be the difference between paying, or not paying, millions of dollars. What does that mean for anybody's other rights? What does freedom of speech mean if criticizing the administration can mean you get no exemption, while your competitor who keeps quiet, or who praises the administration, gets a waiver? The Constitution requires "equal protection of the laws" for a reason. And what about nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran, the world's leading sponsor of international terrorism? Is that not worth discussing in something other than sound bites?

[jazusamo]

*PING*
Thomas Sowell

Recent columns
The ‘Fairness’ Fraud
Academic Hypocrisy
The Progressive Legacy: Part III

Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to or removed from the Thomas Sowell ping list…

[onyx]

I remain thrilled that this brilliant man endorsed and supports Newt Gingrich.

If only every thinking American and voting American would do likewise.

PRAYERS AND GOD SPEED NEWT GINGRICH.

[rockinqsranch]

Thanks for the ping jaz.

[jazusamo]

Amen to that!

[rockinqsranch]

I’ll run this past you, and jump offline until about 6:00 PM PST.

Intellect, and commonsense are the basis of the true conservative. Drop the commonsense, and you have what a Liberal thinks of him or herself. They often boast they are intellectuals. Deluded souls.

Dr. Sowell is blessed with Intellect, commonsense, and the ability to communicate both. I appreciate reading his commentaries, and like you am extremely pleased his intellect, commonsense, and ability to communicate are in support of Newt Gingrich.

Newt is the commonsense choice of all the candidates out there today.

[jazusamo]

Well said, good post!

[rawhide]

Romney is one of the dirtiest Republican candidates ever. He ought to be since he is more Democrat than Republican in his actions.

[onyx]

Perfectly put!

I concur!

GO NEWT!!!!

[rocketmag]

You know I am actually happy this primary has gone on so long, Conservative commentary and thought is usually blacked out by the media, Gingrich and Santorum have really articulated positions that the average Joe listening to ABC, NBC, CBS rarely hear

[b9]

I’ve been thinking a lot about the so-called smart guys on our side, the smartest ones in the room, and how they see each other.

Unlike Rush, Dr. Sowell sees Newt as an ally, not a rival. The true talents “on loan from God” performing brilliantly with half their brains tied behind their backs rightfully belong to Newt and Sowell, IMHO.

Rush is all about entertainment, and Newt is his competition. Newt is funnier, sharper, more poignant, and a better historian & educator.

Newt needs no explanation and he doesn’t need Rush. Maybe that’s why Rush likes Rick (and why Sowell likes Newt.)

[jonrick46]

When I read Thomas Sowell’s thoughful commentary, I thought of Newt. For a candidate who has suffered the most unfair criticism during a political campaign, Newt rises above the juvenile food fight and talks about the issues in a way that no other candidate can match. Newt Gingrich is the expert and the rest are the children.

[onyx]

Those newtworks have sponsored several of the debates, so I don’t get your point. Plus Romney has done nothing but smear his rivals.

[onyx]

Spot on, b9!

To use an old phrase, I didn’t leave Rush, he left me.

I got sick of him trying to push Santorum down my throat.

Newt Gingrich is too smart for him, just like you opined.

[okie01]

To use an old phrase, I didn’t leave Rush, he left me.

I got sick of him trying to push Santorum down my throat.

Yet, in the past 24 hours, at least 40 FReepers have complained that Rush is trying to push Romney down their throats.

And 15 or 20 have complained that he has been unduly favorable toward Gingrich.

It's remarkable, really, what people can read into his statements.

In the interest of full disclosure, my reading of his pronoucements is a.) he'll support whatever candidate survives the Republican nominating process, b.) he'd rather that candidate be somebody other than Romney, meaning that c.) Santorum and Gingrich would both be acceptable.

But, what the hell, everybody's got an opinion.

[b9]

To use an old phrase, I didn’t leave Rush, he left me.

I got sick of him trying to push Santorum down my throat.

Perfect old phrase! If the shoe fits, polish it.

It's like sibling rivalry, isn't it (at least on Rush's part.)

Newt is ever gracious, so is Sowell.

Newt is both gracious AND tenacious. What a combo!

[onyx]

I can’t say because I quit listening to him a couple of weeks ago and I’m much happier.

I no longer care what he has to say.

[onyx]

You always express “my thoughts” perfectly! LOL.

God bless you, sweetest GF!!!

[TheOldLady]

Thanks for the ping.

[okie01]

Remarkable, how we sometimes hear...is it what we want to hear?

It certainly isn't what is said.