What is left when the show is over, when it’s time to pack up and leave the arena, after the fat lady has sung? Will half of our population go off and sulk for the next four years if it is their candidate that loses the presidential election tomorrow? In a very few minutes last evening, I had the snippets of a great conversation with a good friend whose thinking about presidential politics is different from mine. He is going to vote for Romney and I have voted for Obama. In just a moment, I will tell you about this conversation, but first, a little background is in order. For more than four years I have written frequent blogs about what I think and believe with regard to the two candidates. In doing so, I have shared my efforts with a wide variety of people; those who share my beliefs and those who don’t. It has never been my intention in doing so to simply “sing to the choir,” but to engage in meaningful discourse with those who disagree with me, not to sway their choices or opinions, but to push myself to examine my own beliefs and conclusions. It is my fervent belief that America is truly unique, among all nations, in the zealous provision for, and protection of, freedom of speech and expression via the guarantees of the First Amendment of our Constitution. The use of the word “zealous” is appropriate here because since 1776 brave men and women have died to create and protect this right, first among others. My blogs have received a wide array of responses ranging from vitriolic to nonsensical to well-reasoned viewpoints very different from my own. The good friend mentioned above is in the latter category. On several occasions he has replied in writing with detailed, common-sensical, expressions of his views.
My friend’s adult daughter visited with him and his wife this past week. Their conversation turned to the difference in the views and opinions he and I have on issues such as who should be the president of the United States. His daughter expressed a degree of amazement for and wondered, in effect, how in the world the two of us could get along and enjoy our friendship, frequent golf, etc., when our views are so far apart. In telling me about his daughter’s reaction, he started to say how it was possible because we confined the expression of our opinions to the written word. The conversation ended abruptly at that point because my garage door opener failed and I had to tend to it. I think the point he was making is true. Putting ideas in writing generally causes one to be careful about what and how ideas are expressed. In saying this I do not include the ‘monkey, n- word, Muslim/socialist e-mails that circulate continuously on the e-mail circuit. But there is genuine value in, and respect for, sharing different viewpoints among those who can agree to disagree without bitterness or rancor. Why is it necessary to hate the opposition? Last night’s snippet of conversation summarizes where we all need to be; win or lose, we are all Americans and should stand as one in support of whatever candidate wins in returning this country from the brink of disaster. We can agree to disagree and live in perfect harmony . . . as long as the other guy gives me three strokes.
Just saying . . .
2 comments:
I'm not sure who that jerk is but he probably deserves a good slap!
I think at the end of the day most of us feel we live in a great country but those on the right wonder about the direction the nation is headed in. We see government as this voracious beast that continues to grow and crush the private sector with more taxes and regulations over every aspect of our lives. Do we want to continue to choose our direction in life or have it decided for us. The current administration seems to have a proactive view of government believing that adding more public sector jobs will lead us to more growth. From my standpoint I see public sector positions as part of a zero sum equation. We need teachers, police and government administrators but they do not add anything to growth. As the public sector grows ever larger the amount of private capital shrinks reducing the stimulus for innovation. The Left might say, "why can't innovation take place within govt?". It does in some circumstances but often severely limited by competing interest within the same organization. In order for the country to prosper we need growth that can only be accomplished in the private sector.
Politicians like to take credit for all sorts of things that they have no hand in, creating jobs is a good example. The President can fill positions within govt but never actually creates a job. They can influence the hiring environment through tax policy but need the Congress to agree to really make a difference. On the negative side they can spend beyond all proportion using their financial influence to effectively buy votes at election time. Both sides do this but they also like to pretend that only the other guy is squandering taxpayer dollars.
Obama came into office promising to make Washington work for the people, I suggest he was dangerously under qualified for the position with no previous administrative experience. He did have the benefit of serving in the Senate and working with others to advance legislation but seems to have found a distaste for compromise since he moved into the White House. The country has been in search of a leader for the last 4 years, that should be enough time to get things figured out. He could have gotten together with the Speaker at any point and insisted on addressing the fiscal situation but the real problems facing the country seemed to be put on hold last winter. I suggest that if he had shown leadership back then the race might have been over a long time ago.
My friends on the Right all feel the same way about the Left, we just don't get it? What is the game plan and how do we move forward in a responsible manner? After 4 years I'm still waiting for an answer.
Post a Comment