As a Conservative I do not believe the
Liberals are "wrong." They are doing what they believe is
necessary and correct to create the society they wish to create. I,
and other Conservatives, just believe that what Liberals wish to
create (a fundamental transformation) is wrong for the country and in
direct opposition to the society (envisioned by the Founding Fathers)
which the Conservatives wish to preserve. So, it would only make
sense that the two sides would fight like two cats in a sack.
Let's take a look at, in general,
Liberals and Conservatives views:
Liberals are generally described as
being open to new experiences, celebrating diversity and questioning
authority. They speak for the weak and oppressed and want change and
justice even at the risk of chaos. Liberals tend to view life more
illogically, more “gray’ and more spontaneous. They challenge
existing norms and values and local customs and generally look for
ways to change the current state of society. Liberals tend to
believe in an expansive government and with commensurate tax rates
needed to fund government welfare programs and believe in a large
“commons.”
Conservatives tend to view life more
rationally, more black and white, more this is the way thing are and
should be. They are more comfortable with safety and dependability.
Conservatives speak for institutions and traditions. They defend
existing norms, values and local customs, and generally wish to
preserve the current state of society. They believe other societies
would benefit from our values. Conservatives believe a limited
government must "live within its means," believe in a
balanced budget and that government welfare programs should be
narrowly tailored, therefore oppose excessive government debt.
Pretty divergent views! So how do we
then come to a common ground so we can move forward? Both sides think
the other side doesn't compromise. I think what they mean to say is
that the other side won't do things "my" way, therefore
they are not willing to compromise. "I agree to do what you
want if you will have your 5-year-old son run across the Interstate
10 times at rush hour." You say, "No, of course, I won't
have him do that!" "OK, I'll compromise; have him run
across only 5 times." The stakes are just too big and the
differences too fundamental for any substantial political
compromises. Both parities are, pardon the cliche but I happen to
believe it, are fighting for the soul of the country.
Why does it seem the left/right divide
is deeper and wider now than any other point in our life time? I
believe it starts at the top. At the top we have a very unusual
situation. We have as a leader, someone who, to the best of my
knowledge, has not, in his formative years, lead the life of a
typical "American" child. (Attending state fairs, sitting
on the side lines of the Memorial Day parade waving a little flag,
saying the morning Pledge of Allegiance before school, singing the
Star Spangled Banner before a football game, watching Andy
Griffith, Leave it to Beaver, Ozzie and Harriet on TV) Those are
the years where a child becomes "imprinted" by the American
experiences that would lead the typical American child to share the
values and morals of other previous Presidents, and most of the
inhabitants of the USA.
If I had spent my childhood in places
like Kenya and Indonesia, came from a broken home, with Communists
as parents and adult role models, experienced Islam as a prominent
religion, spent my time as a young man in a schooling and social
setting where the US was seen as just a part of the global scene, no
better or worse than any other plot of land in the world of global
sameness, and my young manhood was spent with anti-American
extremists, I guess my world view would be more like the President's.
I know there are those who agree with
the President that we should not see the US as exceptional, and I
understand that, but what kind of a motivational speech would a
football coach give if he told his team they were no better, and in
some ways worse, than the team they were playing? Shouldn't our
head honcho be our head cheerleader? I do not believe President
Obama could ever give an inspirational speech to jack up the country
like Ronald Reagan could. Not that President Obama isn't a fine
orator, he is, he just doesn't feel it. Not his fault, he just
doesn't have it to feel.
Considering that a person is a sum
total of his or her experiences and Barack Obama didn't share the
experiences of (wild guess) 90% of the population, it is no wonder he
governs the way he does. Again as I said in the beginning, he is not
"wrong" in the attempt to impose his beliefs. What he does
is designed to drive America to a whole different place--from Leave
it to Beaver to Two and a Half Men.
As a Conservative viewing the actions
(not the rhetoric) of the President and taking him at his word that
he wants to fundamentally transform the county, which would mean to
make it different at its core than it is. I would assume he would
want to make it like he and his life's influencers want it to be. I
don't believe they are shooting for a stronger more influential USA.
Possibility just the opposite.
I say that because of their actions.
Is accumulating, and adding to, an almost unsustainable debt making
the country stronger or weaker? Is changing the core construct of a
strong society, the traditional family, making the country stronger
or weaker? Is forcing our businesses to pay workers what the workers
want rather than what they are worth, making the country stronger or
weaker? Is passing laws that make it harder for the good guys to
have guns while doing nothing to prevent the bad guys from
"carrying", making the country stronger or weaker? Is
curtailing the hometown production of the world's main energy source
thus freeing us from dependence, making the country stronger or
weaker? Does allowing almost unfettered access to our country by
unskilled workers, thus adding "takers" not "givers"
to our population , making the country stronger or weaker?
Our President's view of what part
America should play in the world, how Americans should relate to each
other and what should be our relationship with our government are, in
most cases, diametrically opposed to the Conservative philosophy.
This is why Rush Limbaugh said, (and was much misunderstood and
maligned), "I hope he fails." Rush did not want the US to
fail, but it was said with the sincere belief that if the philosophy
of a person with Barack Obama's background and subsequent political
beliefs succeeded and ever got to be the law of the land, the US, as
we have known it for 238 years, is lost. If you reread the
conservative philosophy above you will see why, for a Conservative,
defeating President Obama's particular brand of Liberalism is worth
the fight.
-
No comments:
Post a Comment