A local cornered me at the Floyd County Store recently and, in an angry voice, wanted to know “why you support that black bastard Obama.”
It’s not the first time I’ve run into racism here or elsewhere in this country. I’m sure it won’t be the last. His next comment was, sadly, also something I’ve heard too often..
“John McCain is a real American,” he said. “He loves America. Obama hates America. He and his liberal buddies aren’t patriots.”
Listen to the partisan propaganda from both sides of the political spectrum and you find that each think they have a monopoly on patriotism and love of country.
But partisans, be they Republicans or Democrats, aren’t patriots. They don’t love their country. They love their party, their narrow piece of life through a slanted political bias, their hatred and disregard for anything and anyone that doesn’t agree with their myopic view of the world.
This is not a new phenomenon. Author Horatio King warned that partisanship overshadowed patriotism in his book, Patriotism vs. Partisanship, published in 1900 — 108 years ago.
In 1796, George Washington, in his Presidential farewell address, warned the country about the danger of political parties:
I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
Like too many lessons of history, Americans ignored Washington’s wise advice. Now we have a party-dominated electoral system where the interests of the powerful special interest groups that control each party’s agenda are placed ahead of the interests of the nation. Political partisans base their beliefs on the fantasy that their views are superior to others and the only views worth considering. In such an atmosphere, unity and elected officials with a true love of country are impossible dreams.
I have a sticker on one of my motorcycle helmets. It reads:
I’m not a Democrat.
I’m not a Republican.
I’m an American.
There is a difference.
Damn right there is a difference. And, by the way, I’ve not decided who, if anyone, I support in the 2008 Presidential circus.
I agree that the choices this year are abysmal at best. Neither candidate is what our country really and truly needs at this particular point in our history. I’d like to think that whoever gets elected will “man up” and do whatever it takes to get us back to being a respected world leader, not the hated nation many now perceive us as being. What we really need is someone like Ross Perot.
I so agree with you. It really is hard to decide. It seems that each election is more difficult to decide than the last one. sigh. Where are our leaders?!
What are you trying to say, Jodie? That god will destroy the world because neither McCain or Obama are good men?
No that is not what I am saying… I am simply saying that many Americans are struggling with who to vote in as our next president. We are looking for a leader who will stand in the gap for us as Americans…and I stress Americans…those of us who believe that America is STILL the best country in the world. A wise, experienced, patriotic, allegiant, bold (I could go on and on) leader who may keep us from destroying ourselves and who will not contribute to that destruction. As so many leaders already have. That biblical verse is not in reference to God destroying the world. It is about a man praying for a leader in his land so that he will not destroy it himself. Who is going to “stand in the gap” for you and me? Those that have enabled the abuse of our financial system and profit from it? Who is going to protect the interests of “We the People”?
Without conceding that today’s choices are abysmal, I do recall the 1972 election between Richard Nixon and George McGovern. The outcome of that event was referred to as the election of the evil of two lessers. That interesting turn of phrase has always stuck with me.
On one hand we have a former “self-proclaimed maverick” who has rolled over (or bent over, you choose) and embraced the neocon movement, a movement that he once condemned. Do we need reminding of just how far this country has slipped (here and abroad) since that pack of jackals took power??
On the other hand, we have a human being with a pulse. For me, it’s really just a bonus that he can articulate his understanding of the obstacles we face and has mapped out plans to get through them. Another bonus is that his plans don’t require the continued subjugation of the middle class to succeed.
Over 2,000 years ago the prophet Ezekiel said: I searched for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand in the gap before Me for the land, so that I would not destroy it; but I found no one. So it is in America today.
Jack,
It is an interesting turn of phrase. How about this one:
“When you vote for the lesser of two evils, you are still voting for evil.”
I don’t know know who coined that phrase, but I heard it from Libertarians.
My opinion is, if you follow the money (check how each senator and representative voted, and who got the taxpayers’ money as a result), you will find not a dime’s worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats. Each party latches onto emotionally charged and divisive issues in order to show how they are “different” from the other party, but in the end both sides always vote to bring home the pork to their constituents.
I thought it was interesting a few weeks ago when an NPR correspondent was grilling the Iranian president about whether his country had free elections, and when the Pres questioned the reporter whether the USA had free elections, the reporter of course asserted that we did.
How then is it that in the last election, when the Libertarians, who by the way qualify to put their candidate on the ballot in all 50 states year after year after year, were not allowed to participate in the Presidential debates, to the extent that when the Libertarian candidate obtained a court order from a judge declaring that the Libertarians must be allowed to participate, and the candidate showed up at the debates with the court order in hand, he was arrested and hauled off to jail and still not allowed to participate.
I swore to uphold and defend the constitution of this country. Every member of the legislature has too, but I can’t tell that they actually pay any attention to that fact.
My 2 cents worth ….