Okay, no argument....! John Edwards turned out to be a smarmy disappointment to all. However -- as with the old stopped clock -- maybe he was right at least twice. I'm not sure about the first time, but the second has to be his claim we're "Two America's."
There's something historically valid about that image. Test it for yourself. Begin any discussion you want -- business, arts, athletics; crime, violence, drugs -- and before you know it we're all talking past each other. Why? Because we're all talking about very different examples.
If the subject is American free enterprise, are we talking Bill Gates or Bernie Madoff? Is the subject crime? Are we talking ghetto crime or Wall Street crime? You see where Edwards was going with this. With any subject, there are good guys and bad. Inspiring examples and tragic examples. There's simply no one way of discussing any one of these issues. Each issue is clearly rent right smack down the bloody middle. In effect, there really are Two Americas. In fact, two England's, two Russia's, two anywhere's.
Why is this important? It means today's simplified, one-size-fits-all sloganeering is not only futile, it's counter-productive. It's the way to win an argument, but lose a cause. The way to catch a headline or make the Late-Night monologue, but mis-lead not just others but worse -- yourself!
Even with all their efficacy, cablecasting, blogging, facebooking and twittering are sometimes the culmination of generations of yellowed, squeezed, condensed and re-constituted reporting. From senators to anchors, from pundits to experts, everyone has a phrase-maker or a spinmaster on staff. I oughta know having been paid for years to be one. However, the danger in this kind of instant packaging is that while it gets its message across in a few hot sound-bytes, so did promoters from Barnum to Hitler!
With 24-hour news cycles, instant Internet communication and tweets by the bazillion, time has collapsed and space has disappeared. Everyone and everything is so Now, we have little time or inclination to reflect on what we report. If I think it, it must be right! If we package it, it must be dispatched!
This often leaves small opportunity to fathom our way through such complexities as Two Americas. Hey, that means twice the work and twice the time. Don't bother me with details. I've got another thought and another deadline to deliver...!
THE REPUBLICANS DO IT AGAIN
Well, they just did it again. The Republicans once more voted an angry "No!"
Now this, remember, is the great party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan. And yet, most of them simply can't find it in their heads (and especially their hearts) to approve of any bold social legislation. They said no to Social Security. They said no to Medicare. They're saying no to government sponsored health care. And just yesterday they voted no to a Democratic bill making anti-gay attacks a "hate crime" under the law.
Never mind the tens of thousands of gays and lesbians being denied equal rights under the law in workplaces, courtrooms and hospitals. Never mind the spew of vicious gay tauntings and killings throughout the land. The GOP spokesman Representative John Boehner called the proposed legislation "radical social planning."
There's a long, valid history in this country over when and how much government can legislate for the protection of the marginalized. Fair enough. But when I listen to Boehner and his cablecasting cohorts say, "Social planning is inappropriate in a land where we are already free and equal," what I hear is,"We've got ours. As for you -- suck it up!"
I may be wrong, but I'd hate to be living on the margins of John Boehner's America....
There's something historically valid about that image. Test it for yourself. Begin any discussion you want -- business, arts, athletics; crime, violence, drugs -- and before you know it we're all talking past each other. Why? Because we're all talking about very different examples.
If the subject is American free enterprise, are we talking Bill Gates or Bernie Madoff? Is the subject crime? Are we talking ghetto crime or Wall Street crime? You see where Edwards was going with this. With any subject, there are good guys and bad. Inspiring examples and tragic examples. There's simply no one way of discussing any one of these issues. Each issue is clearly rent right smack down the bloody middle. In effect, there really are Two Americas. In fact, two England's, two Russia's, two anywhere's.
Why is this important? It means today's simplified, one-size-fits-all sloganeering is not only futile, it's counter-productive. It's the way to win an argument, but lose a cause. The way to catch a headline or make the Late-Night monologue, but mis-lead not just others but worse -- yourself!
Even with all their efficacy, cablecasting, blogging, facebooking and twittering are sometimes the culmination of generations of yellowed, squeezed, condensed and re-constituted reporting. From senators to anchors, from pundits to experts, everyone has a phrase-maker or a spinmaster on staff. I oughta know having been paid for years to be one. However, the danger in this kind of instant packaging is that while it gets its message across in a few hot sound-bytes, so did promoters from Barnum to Hitler!
With 24-hour news cycles, instant Internet communication and tweets by the bazillion, time has collapsed and space has disappeared. Everyone and everything is so Now, we have little time or inclination to reflect on what we report. If I think it, it must be right! If we package it, it must be dispatched!
This often leaves small opportunity to fathom our way through such complexities as Two Americas. Hey, that means twice the work and twice the time. Don't bother me with details. I've got another thought and another deadline to deliver...!
THE REPUBLICANS DO IT AGAIN
Well, they just did it again. The Republicans once more voted an angry "No!"
Now this, remember, is the great party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan. And yet, most of them simply can't find it in their heads (and especially their hearts) to approve of any bold social legislation. They said no to Social Security. They said no to Medicare. They're saying no to government sponsored health care. And just yesterday they voted no to a Democratic bill making anti-gay attacks a "hate crime" under the law.
Never mind the tens of thousands of gays and lesbians being denied equal rights under the law in workplaces, courtrooms and hospitals. Never mind the spew of vicious gay tauntings and killings throughout the land. The GOP spokesman Representative John Boehner called the proposed legislation "radical social planning."
There's a long, valid history in this country over when and how much government can legislate for the protection of the marginalized. Fair enough. But when I listen to Boehner and his cablecasting cohorts say, "Social planning is inappropriate in a land where we are already free and equal," what I hear is,"We've got ours. As for you -- suck it up!"
I may be wrong, but I'd hate to be living on the margins of John Boehner's America....
Boehner might see his world differently had he been born poor and black...but then no Republican ever is!
ReplyDelete