But, we all know he's not going anywhere. He will never go away. Whatever happens, it's quite certain the effects of his influence will take generations to purge.Sure, division, enmity, polarization...these things have always been part of the human social condition. But Karl Rove took us to new lows. No single individual in the twenty-first century has worked so hard to consciously generate ideological division than this man. Who had ever heard of blue states and red states until this administration? When did evangelical Christianity become known almost exclusively for its opposition to homosexuality and gay marriage? For that matter, when has there ever been such a sharp distinction among Christians about which party they should support? All of this coming from a guy who doesn't even claim to be religious. He played us. Well, at least he played several million otherwise decent people into believing in a chimera, and buying into a artificially generated cultural and spiritual war that never existed, except in his evil brilliance.
No question the guy is a genius. How else will history account for one of the most incompetent presidents ever to hold the office winning an election he lost, then getting reelected? It takes an architect of ungodly skill to pull it off.
Rove, along with like-minded demagogues, has spread a brand of anger, distrust, and cynicism that may never go away. We can't change that; but we can change us. And we can decide today that we will not allow it to happen to us again.
There is only one candidate in the field today who eschews talk of blue and red, them and us, liberal and conservative, etc. Only one who thusfar has not played the game of polarization, divide and conquer. He may not turn out to be some messiah, but he is better prepared to take us a new direction than anyone else.
"Karl Rove was an architect of a political strategy that has left the country more divided, the special interests more powerful, and the American people more shut out from their government than any time in memory. But to build a new kind of politics, it will take more than the departure of a man or even an Administration that constructed the old -it will take a movement of everyday Americans committed to changing Washington and reclaiming their government."
16 comments:
I think you give his brilliance too much credit. There is no way one man, even if he were the president himself, could be single-handedly responsible for all that.
Obviously I exaggerate a bit; but people like McCain underestimated him too. Check out what happened in South Carolina in 2000. I don't have the time or the interest, but there are plenty of examples of specific Rovean tactics turning an entire state a different way. His targeting of evangelicals is often pointed to as an illustration. Sure, he couldn't have accomplished what he did without a great deal of complicity from various publics, but he is a master at stimulating public sentiment and setting public agendas, while making us think it came from grassroots.
You funny guy, make me raugh. Prease to re-read Eccresiastes. There is nothing new under the sun. Including poritical dirt bags of both parties.
You are absolutely right, Pokey.
I can't wait for the other party to get in power so I can prove my equal opportunity criticism. It's been so long, I'm rusty.
By the way, this is why I currently do not support Hillary. She represents the old way, or politics as usual (polarization, divide and conquer, etc.). I don't think we have to accept that and assume that all governing is going to follow the same model.
Here's what I would like to hear from conservative Christians: a prophetic voice. Be willing to speak truth to power, whatever the stripe.
What usually happens is a vigorous defense or tacit approval of conservative politics, then when those politicians are revealed as evil the response is to say, well, all politicians are evil. Or, better yet, "Your side is as bad or worse." Maybe so, but why do we use that as a diversion technique to avoid telling the truth about wrongdoing?
President Obama may appoint an Attorney General who supports dehumanization and torture, and engages in the dirtiest of politics like Alberto Gonzales; but until I have that person to critique I'm going to point to Gonzales' resignation and say, "Goodbye, and good riddance."
You want the truth? Aside from the fact that you can't handle it, the truth is almost all politicians I've observed are primarily interested in their own agendas, chief among those being the need to be reelected.
Conservative Christians tend to side w/Republicans because Republicans at least give lip service to the ideals we hold dear, such as the inhumanity of abortion or the innate wrongness of child pornography. They may not actually accomplish much, but they say things that make us feel better. The Democrats don't even pretend to care.
Your stance on politics is admirable. And, I'm afraid, pollyannish. It ain't never gonna happen. We the people are not taking back the government. Too much money, too many powerful interests embedded for us to make a difference. And yup, that sucks.
Polly Anna--my new handle.
I think it's interesting that "Republicans give lip service to the ideals we hold dear...Democrats don't even pretend to care." So, the ideals of addressing poverty, racism, peace, the environment (the least of these)...are not ideals Christians think are important? Maybe it's the Christians who are wrong, not entirely the politicians.
You're right, the Republicans talk a moral game and don't deliver. The Democrats possibly will too. However, do we embrace a separatist pietism that calls for us to retreat from public life altogether?
I'm not ready to say public officials are a lost cause and incapable of making change. I think history is full of examples of meaningful leadership that made a difference.
My point is that this administrations leadership has promoted a worldview and cultural norms that are particularly destructive. Will a Democrat do the same? Maybe. But, it is possible (likely in my opinion) they would be a lesser evil. Even a marginal good.
I am sympathetic to you last statement. I agree. But cynicism feeds the beast, it doesn't address it.
I like your last comment, Reacher. You are right -- cynicism doesn't address anything.
If you hold certain ideals, why should lip service be enough? Why does it have to be pollyanna-ish to be a part of the change?
The political system is broken. But we don't have to allow it to stay there.
Dear Polly-
Good to dialogue with you electronically. If it were in person, I might have to kick you in the groin. Not because I'm upset; just for fun.
By the way, Polly, I think a valid argument can be made that liberals engage in more racism than conservatives, whether you're talking about political parties or not. Racism cast in a different cloth, but racism all the same.
Do you think Republicans (or Christians) do not want peace? Or is it that their methods for achieving peace are different from what you perceive to be effective?
With regard to the environment, Al Gore is an idiot and his "claims", by and large, cannot be substantiated scientifically. Are we having an adverse affect on the environment? I'd say yes. Is the earth heating up and we're all gonna die? Not likely.
You desire to do good. I admire that. How much good do you do?
Wanna cracker?
I want to hear your racism argument. Surely, as a follower of Jesus (you know, the "least of these" fella) you're not going to trot out the old "white males are the most discriminated against group in our country" chestnut, are you? You wouldn't seriously hold up as examples the anecdotal accounts of white males missing opportunities that are instead given to people of color who have historically been denied basic human rights, are you? When white people claim to be victims of racism, in most cases, it is a pathetic attempt to grab even more cultural power away from those who have been denied a place at the table for generations. WWJD? (hint: Samaritans, women, sinners, etc.)
Sure, attempts to right racial wrongs are often poorly designed and ineffective, but failures of policy hardly erase the reality of racism. There's really not room or time to do this here, but in short the issue is this: race is invisible to whites. They don't have to think about race in their daily lives. How many times a week do you think of your race? Probably none. That's cultural privilege. You don't have to think about race because your race occupies the position of power and privilege. I assure you people of color are conscious of race every day. White conservatives will scream racism that there is a BET network, but "if we had a White Entertainment Television network, everybody would scream bloody murder." We do have a WET (heh, heh) network, in fact we have plenty of them; they are called ABC, CBS, NBC, etc. Have you watched primetime television and broadcast news lately?
As for the peace issue, I do believe there are conservative Christian Republicans who sincerely believe in peace through strength. Can't say as I find that in my Bible. And, for the sake of honesty, I don't know too many of those folks who are not a little intoxicated with the idea of power and occasionally consumed with vengeance, not justice...and certainly not peace. Who Would Jesus Bomb?
As for Al Gore, you are a better man than I. It is a bold claim to call Gore an idiot. Particularly ironic, if you are a supporter of GW Bush's. Gore is one of the most well-educated and articulate policy analysts ever to inhabit Washington. Is he always right? No. Is he 100% right about global warming? I don't know, I'm not a scientist. But I do tend to believe the overwhelming number of academic scientists (who are not funded by oil companies or free market think tanks) who generally support his theses.
For Christians to argue against global warming (like Falwell and the SBC) is to offer transparent support for an economic and ecological machine designed to chew up God's earth and spit it out as unrecyclable trash. It is motivated by a selfishness that is rooted more in capitalist models than the leading of scripture.
There are some complicated concerns about how environmental efforts could potentially hurt the poor in some areas, but nearly all of those are answerable with innovative market-driven solutions that require us to discipline ourselves and rein in our appetites. Again, a model that says we should think more of others, consume less, and be more responsible with the things we use seems to be obviously closer to the heart of God than a model that says do what you want with your stuff and don't let anyone tell you what to do. Use as much as you can, they'll make more.
Your final point is a good one. I do some, but it will never be enough. Again, you're using an age-old straw man argument that suggests no one can critique the system unless they themselves have reached perfection.
Sheesh. A kick in the groin would have been a lot quicker and painless than all that.
From one really pasty white guy to another, how dare you question the depth of my people's suffering. From what I have observed in 44 years, everyone is racist to some degree. I just see it being used as a political ploy most often by the liberal side of the aisle.
Your adulation of Albert G. made me laugh out loud. Thanks. It is not outlandish to argue against global warming, whether you're a Christian, Muslim or Arkansan. I am not contending that our world economy is good for the environment because it is not. But Big Al's case is pretty unconvincing, in my opinion. Besides, it annoys me that he lives in a house that in all likelihood consumes more energy than yours, mine, my grandma's and my mom's combined. It would also bother me if GW lived in said house and was running around like chicken little, squawking loudly about global warming.
Hey, I wasn't using a straw man argument. I know you isn't perfect. Neither is me. But we both try. Do we try as hard as we can? Some days, maybe. Other days...
With regard to the groin punt, let me know when you'll be home and I'll stop by. We'll just make this thing quick and painless. I'm all about painless.
B-
Your political hack manner continues to stun me. You boast of being saved from the Reagan camp, now you're nothing more than a trollip for the Dems. For God's sake, study up on the Electoral College and then come back and tell me how Bush, "won the election he lost". You are living in delusion. You are a highly educated idiot. My God, I used to respect you, so did alot of people.
Gee... I always thought it was "trollop". Or as my Dad once said, "trolalop".
Alot isn't even a word.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080117171119.g3u627l1&show_article=1
UhOh reacher, watcha gonna do with this one? You've asked for it before....here it is. Spin this one my friend.
Post a Comment