Civil Discourse

I was talking to a colleague the other day about politics.  Usually not the best plan, especially when I knew that she always votes opposite me, but I never claimed to be the smartest guy in the room, so I just rattled off something that Obama did that I didn't much like.

Her response wasn't ugly, but she certainly put the best spin on it.  Well, I countered, Bush certainly didn't do that.  She agreed with that, but then proceeded to put the worst possible spin on Bush's actions.

It got me to thinking about how we view politics and politicians.  I concluded that we are pretty schizophrenic about it all.

Here's the deal: We will tend to agree with every action of a politician or with none of his actions.  We will excuse egregious behavior of a favorite politician and we will nitpick the ones we don't like to death.  We seem incapable of allowing them to be human, and, at the same time, have policies with which we agree or disagree.

When did perfection become requisite for holding office?  Find me a perfect human.  I dare you.  See? You can't do it.  Why, then, should our politicians be expected to be perfect?  More importantly, however, why should we insist on vilifying the opposition while forgiving the same behavior in our favored officials?  That's really the question.

One of my favorite examples of this is Bill Clinton.  I recall seeing a leading feminist being interviewed about the sexual accusations against him.  The interviewer simply asked her why she supported Clinton in the midst of these anti-feminist charges.  The response was easy for her, "We like his politics."  I was dumbfounded because it seems that I never hear stark truth spoken bluntly.

It's just one of hundreds of examples of how we handle ourselves when it comes to politicians and politics.

The presidential election of 2016 provides us with one of the best looks ever at this phenomenon.  Both candidates had significant problems with their actions and their speech.  Hilary with her e-mails and the Clinton Foundation scandals and Trump with his abrasive and course, even lewd, style.

Yet, Hilary supporters seem blind to her shortcomings.  Any other politician with even a fraction of her baggage would have been discarded early in the process.

Trump supporters, likewise, seem deaf to his rants and petty, unpresidential arguments.  Normally, he'd have been sent packing before the first play from scrimmage.

This puts us, as regular Americans, into something of a quandary.  How do we handle what seems like a mess?

Interestingly, it's been handled by many by jumping into the deep end with one candidate or the other.  Once one jumps, any criticism of their candidate is forfeit.

Others, put off by the choices, seem a bit fuzzy about it all.



John F. Kennedy

It seems to me that we're getting a very different view of our candidates nowadays.  The social media culture brings candidates into our lives through a different window.  To me, they seem less out of reach.  More accessible.  It allows us to see them in a bad mood or having an off day.  Remember when politicians were packaged so slickly that we only saw what we were allowed to see?

FDR and Kennedy were a bit before my time, admittedly, but they were certainly well packaged.  FDR kept his severe handicap hidden from America with great success and JFK kept his amorousness out of the press for his entire presidency.



Franklin D. Roosevelt

As I look over my life, I can see that there was a time when I looked at my candidates through rose filters.  They simply could do no wrong, and I was deeply offended when someone said otherwise.  It all seemed very personal then.  It was as if they were attacking me.

Now, I see the world a bit differently.  I see all our politicians as humans, which, therefore, means that they are all flawed.  I'm more interested in their message and in the integrity that they possess all the while realizing that it's unlikely that they will perfectly represent my own message with perfect integrity.

So, now, if someone criticizes my candidate, I don't take it personally.  Neither do I make excuses for them or try to spin it the 'right' way.  I will, however, point out any hypocrisy that I find.  I will also talk about the underlying issues and ideas.

In order for us, as Americans, to make progress with one another, we simply must cast off our schizophrenic partisanship and talk to each other in real ways about real topics.  We mustn't hold politicians to unrealistic perfection, nor can we afford to forgive real breaches of honor and morality.

And we can't take it so personally.  If I criticize your candidate, I'm not criticizing you.  I'll take it as an article of faith that you're not criticizing me either.  That way we can actually disagree without being disagreeable.


James Madison
Father of the American Constitution

I do love America.  It's experiment in democracy is unprecedented in human history.  American-style democracy may seem an obvious way to do business in 2016, but it was far from obvious in 1776.  The legacy of fairness, optimism, and hope left to us by our forefathers should be honored.  It's remarkable that flawed men left something of such immense value to posterity.
Pledge with me to honor that legacy by engaging with each other in honest ways, with pure intent, and through the lens of reality, not emotion or fantasy.

Democratically yours,

TheCurmudgeon