I can remember when being a politician was considered an honorable profession. It described a man or woman who was engaged in conducting the business of government. If the politician was a Democrat, that indicated a belief in a government that participated more actively in the lives of its citizens, particularly when it came to the protection of “the little guy.” If the politician was a Republican the implication was a belief that government should keep ‘hands off’ particularly when it came to regulating the free market and interfering with the conduct of business. In either event, the disagreement between the two parties was ideological and there was a tacit agreement that compromise from both sides of the aisle was the goal and in the public interest.
Today, however, a spirit of acrimony prevails. Proponents of bills originating from one side of the political spectrum are belittled and abased by opponents on the other side. Obstruction rather than compromise is the goal. It has come to the point where the vitriol has drowned out debate, reducing it to shameless attack and counter-account with virtually no regard for corroborating facts and reasoned argument. To Americans who revere the political process the current climate is reprehensible and unconscionable. It’s tempting to point the finger of blame at one side or the other. But that just adds to the bitterness.
What to do? Perhaps reading “The Plot Against America” by Philip Roth or re-reading “It Can’t Happen Here” by Sinclair Lewis would be a start. Is Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh or Keith Olbermann that much different than Father Coughlin, the father of hate radio? Many of today’s politicians and talk radio agitators apparently lack a shred of conscience. We don’t have to listen to them. The votes we cast in November and in 2012 should reflect a very real concern with the dangers of demagoguery.
