Print
E-mail
Let's Get Serious
By Matt Benchener, For The Bulletin
Something serious is going on in this country. For the first time in recent memory, Americans are debating the fundamental role of government, the importance of Constitutional precedent, and the nature of foundational American principles. There is a clear dividing line being drawn between liberal and conservative ideology: One believes in large, redistributive government that places moral imperative on equality of outcomes; the other believes in small, limited government, that emphasizes personal liberty and self-reliance. The result of this struggle will define the future and direction of the world’s most powerful nation.
Despite the gravity of our times, however, discourse on both sides has devolved into partisan rhetoric. Consider the following line-up of stories from the past six months, all of which received significant media attention: 1. President Obama is not a U.S. Citizen; 2. Conservatives opposed to President Obama are racists; 3. President Obama is a “secret Muslim” trying to ruin the country; 4. Healthcare town hall attendees are either uneducated, irrational hicks, or rich, white, hired political operatives (a strange dichotomy); 5. Tea party attendees are radical, right-wing extremists that will soon attempt to overthrow the government. I could go on.
The American political landscape has been marred by hyperbolic and irrational rhetoric for far too long, and it comes at the expense of prudent policy discussions. Now, perhaps more than ever, it threatens the legitimacy of fundamental and critical differences between liberals and conservatives.
July was rife with coverage questioning the legitimacy of President Obama’s citizenship. So called "birthers" claimed that President Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii, and was therefore ineligible to serve as President. They called for his immediate impeachment, buying into a watered-down conspiracy theory.
A few weeks ago, President Obama announced he would address the nation’s schoolchildren with a message of hard work and perseverance, stressing the importance of education. Parents, talk show hosts, and writers across the country rallied against the airing of the message, claiming they didn’t want their children to be “indoctrinated.” Multiple presidents have addressed the nation’s schoolchildren. Did those opposed also rally against Ronald Reagan’s speech to schoolchildren in 1988? Not to mention all of this occurred during a complex, impactful, and critical debate surrounding the future of America’s health care system.
Now, Democrats like Jimmy Carter and political pundits like Chris Matthews are claiming that opposition to President Obama is a product of racism. It’s a failed and disturbing attempt to delegitimize the swell of philosophical opposition to the President’s radical agenda. It is not only embarrassing, but transparently defensive. Michael Steele, the African-American chair of the RNC put it best: ““Voicing opposition to the president’s policy proposals is not being a racist. It is being an American…Injecting race into the debate over critical issues facing American families does not create jobs, reform our health care system or reduce the growing deficit. It only divides Americans rather than uniting us to find solutions to challenges facing our nation.”
The problem with such partisan, hyperbolic rhetoric from either side is that it shifts attention away from the vital issues facing the nation. President Bush was constantly attacked as “an evil tyrant,” “right-wing extremist,” and “religious fundamentalist.” It came at the expense of important, lasting discussions of international sovereignty, fiscal responsibility, and state security.
Many simply wrote off conservatism as tried and failed under President Bush, and embraced his successor, a man of sharp liberal policy. But President Bush’s own policies belied true conservative values of small government and fiscal prudence—his administration expanded government programs, deeply widened agency bureaucracy, and spent more than any administration since WWII. Yet these issues were patently ignored.
The same is happening in many circles with regard to President Obama. Saying he is not a United States citizen or comparing his health program to Hitler’s Germany diverts attention away from what is most important. Right now, in a defining time for the direction of our country, we cannot afford sideways energy.
Moreover, when we embrace partisan irrationality, we lose sight of what is best for the country. The irony of President Obama’s “indoctrination speech” to our public schools is that it was a powerfully conservative message of self-reliance, perseverance, and individual responsibility. I would want my children to have seen it. Those at the 9/12 march on Washington, the nationwide tea parties, and healthcare town halls expressed a deep, passionate patriotism firmly rooted in Constitutional values. I would want my national leaders to have been there.
It’s time we recognize that liberalism is a philosophy predicated on moral duty, communal provision, and societal responsibility. Conservatism offers a wholly different view of government—small, limited, and based on individual liberty through personal responsibility. We must learn to debate on the truth of each philosophy, or else we ignore the fundamental thought that shapes our nation. There is an important and stark difference between liberalism and conservatism, a divide which must be addressed if we hope to guide the country to lasting prosperity.
Matt Benchener is the founder of TruPolitics.net and is the Republican candidate for Newtown Township Supervisor. Learn more at Benchener09.com
Despite the gravity of our times, however, discourse on both sides has devolved into partisan rhetoric. Consider the following line-up of stories from the past six months, all of which received significant media attention: 1. President Obama is not a U.S. Citizen; 2. Conservatives opposed to President Obama are racists; 3. President Obama is a “secret Muslim” trying to ruin the country; 4. Healthcare town hall attendees are either uneducated, irrational hicks, or rich, white, hired political operatives (a strange dichotomy); 5. Tea party attendees are radical, right-wing extremists that will soon attempt to overthrow the government. I could go on.
The American political landscape has been marred by hyperbolic and irrational rhetoric for far too long, and it comes at the expense of prudent policy discussions. Now, perhaps more than ever, it threatens the legitimacy of fundamental and critical differences between liberals and conservatives.
July was rife with coverage questioning the legitimacy of President Obama’s citizenship. So called "birthers" claimed that President Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii, and was therefore ineligible to serve as President. They called for his immediate impeachment, buying into a watered-down conspiracy theory.
A few weeks ago, President Obama announced he would address the nation’s schoolchildren with a message of hard work and perseverance, stressing the importance of education. Parents, talk show hosts, and writers across the country rallied against the airing of the message, claiming they didn’t want their children to be “indoctrinated.” Multiple presidents have addressed the nation’s schoolchildren. Did those opposed also rally against Ronald Reagan’s speech to schoolchildren in 1988? Not to mention all of this occurred during a complex, impactful, and critical debate surrounding the future of America’s health care system.
Now, Democrats like Jimmy Carter and political pundits like Chris Matthews are claiming that opposition to President Obama is a product of racism. It’s a failed and disturbing attempt to delegitimize the swell of philosophical opposition to the President’s radical agenda. It is not only embarrassing, but transparently defensive. Michael Steele, the African-American chair of the RNC put it best: ““Voicing opposition to the president’s policy proposals is not being a racist. It is being an American…Injecting race into the debate over critical issues facing American families does not create jobs, reform our health care system or reduce the growing deficit. It only divides Americans rather than uniting us to find solutions to challenges facing our nation.”
The problem with such partisan, hyperbolic rhetoric from either side is that it shifts attention away from the vital issues facing the nation. President Bush was constantly attacked as “an evil tyrant,” “right-wing extremist,” and “religious fundamentalist.” It came at the expense of important, lasting discussions of international sovereignty, fiscal responsibility, and state security.
Many simply wrote off conservatism as tried and failed under President Bush, and embraced his successor, a man of sharp liberal policy. But President Bush’s own policies belied true conservative values of small government and fiscal prudence—his administration expanded government programs, deeply widened agency bureaucracy, and spent more than any administration since WWII. Yet these issues were patently ignored.
The same is happening in many circles with regard to President Obama. Saying he is not a United States citizen or comparing his health program to Hitler’s Germany diverts attention away from what is most important. Right now, in a defining time for the direction of our country, we cannot afford sideways energy.
Moreover, when we embrace partisan irrationality, we lose sight of what is best for the country. The irony of President Obama’s “indoctrination speech” to our public schools is that it was a powerfully conservative message of self-reliance, perseverance, and individual responsibility. I would want my children to have seen it. Those at the 9/12 march on Washington, the nationwide tea parties, and healthcare town halls expressed a deep, passionate patriotism firmly rooted in Constitutional values. I would want my national leaders to have been there.
It’s time we recognize that liberalism is a philosophy predicated on moral duty, communal provision, and societal responsibility. Conservatism offers a wholly different view of government—small, limited, and based on individual liberty through personal responsibility. We must learn to debate on the truth of each philosophy, or else we ignore the fundamental thought that shapes our nation. There is an important and stark difference between liberalism and conservatism, a divide which must be addressed if we hope to guide the country to lasting prosperity.
Matt Benchener is the founder of TruPolitics.net and is the Republican candidate for Newtown Township Supervisor. Learn more at Benchener09.com
 |
 |
|
| On Football And Forgiveness | AARP: The Hype, The Lies, The Facts |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thebulletin.us.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
