On Rick Wilson, CNN, And Civility

I've seen the CNN segment with Rick Wilson going around the interwebs this morning and you've no doubt seen it too. I condemn it. It does nothing to resolve our political differences and instead deepens the divide.

On the other hand, much of the weeping and gnashing of teeth is disingenuous since verbal abuse has become a staple of Republican politics for years. It’s a feature, not a bug. Republican outlets have posted many offensive attacks on those who disagree with them. I've personally been called just about every name under the sun because I have had the temerity to disagree with Republicans on a variety of issues such as immigration, impeachment, and reflexively believing the worst about the other side.

The president himself has called the other side "human scum" and "enemies of the people" among many other things. Many of the people rending their garments over Wilson and CNN will be the same ones who were chortling over the video of Trump’s greatest insults that made the rounds several weeks ago, people who tuned in to the 2016 debates to watch Trump and his opponents trading barbs and then said that’s the sort of fighting spirit that the GOP needs.

That isn't an excuse for Wilson and CNN, but it is a fact. And I’ll also acknowledge that Trump didn’t start the war of words between the two parties. However, the president and his supporters have raised the politics of insults to an art form.

The point is not that either side is right. As the old saying goes, two wrongs don’t make a right.

From my experience as an admin on a political Facebook page that I have administered throughout both the Obama and Trump Administrations, I can tell you that partisans of both tribes are indistinguishable in their reactions to criticism of their man. I’ve had to ban legions of both because they could not seem to obey the simple rule that debates should be kept civil and without name-calling.

The point is that both sides have abandoned the Golden Rule that you should treat others the way that you want to be treated (not, as Barack Obama famously misquoted it, the way they actually treat you). For Christians, that is going to involve turning the other cheek when the other side doesn’t immediately mimic your high-road behavior, but we are called to be different from those who don’t claim to know Christ, not to sink to their level. And that applies to Christians on both sides of the political divide as well.

On the other hand, if you insist on engaging in playground insults of the other tribe then you should be able to take it as well as dish it out. It’s hypocritical to unload on the other side and then cry foul when they fire back. To put it another way, you reap what you sow.

The better course (and one that I think a majority of voters would appreciate) is for both sides to act like adults and focus on the issues rather than personal attacks. Another old adage comes to mind that says you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Aside from wondering why anyone would want to catch a fly, the maxim points out the obvious truth that you probably aren’t going to badger an opponent into seeing things your way by calling him names. You’re more likely to push him to vote for the other team.

Insulting the opposition is the easy way out and is often the last resort of those who don’t have facts on their side. The next time you feel the urge to call someone an idiot, take Samuel Johnson’s advice and, rather than raising your voice, reinforce your argument.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Heidi Heitkamp On Civility

As the Democratic Party appears to be devolving into a pitchfork-wielding mob, at least one Democrat official is willing to stand against the rising tide of incivility and violent rhetoric. North Dakota Senator Heidi Heitkamp yesterday rebuked Hillary Clinton’s statement that Democrats could not be civil with Republicans as “ridiculous.”

Earlier this week, failed presidential nominee Hillary Clinton said on CNN, “You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about. That's why I believe if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that's when civility can start again.”

The embattled North Dakota senator responded to Clinton’s comments on Anderson Cooper’s show, also on CNN, saying, “That's ridiculous.  I mean I can't imagine how you get anything done if you don't bring civility back into politics, and that goes for both sides.”

Heitkamp’s newfound ability to speak out against heated Democrat rhetoric may be related to a bevy of bad polls in her reelection campaign. Heitkamp was trailing her Republican challenger even before she announced her opposition to Brett Kavanaugh. Since September, she has trailed by double-digits. Heitkamp’s seat represents one of the best chances for Republicans to flip a Senate seat this November.

To be fair, however, Heitkamp, a red state Democrat, is not a typical liberal. In 2016, Donald Trump reportedly considered her for a cabinet position as Secretary of Agriculture. Since then, she has voted with Trump about half the time and her support for a bill reforming Dodd-Frank earned her a public thank you from the Koch brothers. A GovTrack ranking of senators puts her almost squarely in the middle of the Senate and more conservative than Susan Collins (R-Maine).

Sen. Heitkamp’s call for civility may not be enough to save her seat, but it is nonetheless refreshing to hear. If the North Dakota voters choose to bring her home, the real loser will be the Democratic Party, where moderate voices are becoming increasingly difficult to find.

Originally published on The Resurgent

MAGA: Bring Back Civility And Respect

If you’re like me, your mother passed down a lot of wisdom and instruction on how to behave, especially in public. Don’t talk with your mouth full and don’t interrupt are two bits of motherly advice that many moms have passed down to their children over the years. Another important instruction is, “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.” It is this third bit of advice that Americans seem to have forgotten.

Maybe it all started with the left. Leftists have been yelling profanities at the American public since the 1960s. In recent years, it hasn’t gotten any better. Leftist vulgarity has extended from mere words to wearing hats shaped like female genitalia and placing statues of a naked Donald Trump in public spaces. Wouldn’t mom be proud?

If vulgarity, profanity and incivility in modern politics originated with the left, the right is trying hard to catch up. While I opposed Barack Obama for his entire career, many of the right-wing attacks on the president went over the line and probably backfired against Republicans by making them seem like racist wearers of tinfoil hats. In particular, personal attacks on Michelle Obama, who was always more popular than the president himself, made conservatives look small. Likewise, right-wing comments and memes about immigration, race riots and Islamic terrorism often take an ugly, stereotypical tone.

Over the past week, right-wing vulgarity seems to have reached a new low. In the wake of Sen. Orrin Hatch’s (R-Utah) revelation that the McCain family intended to not invite President Trump to Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) funeral. Hatch called the family’s plan “ridiculous,” sparking an intraparty battle over whether Mr. Trump should go the funeral of a man with whom his relationship can best be described as “strained.”

Trump supporters took the plans to bypass the president for Vice President Pence personally. Popular memes on social media showed President Trump digging McCain’s grave and summoning a hearse after being dissed.

If the reaction of Trump’s grass roots supporters was bad, the reaction from the White House was even more troubling. On Thursday, White House aide Kelly Sadler reacted to McCain’s opposition to President Trump’s nominee for CIA director by saying, “He's dying anyway.”

The remark at an internal meeting was neither officially confirmed nor denied by the White House, which also did not apologize to Sen. McCain and his family, but unofficially a White House staffer called it a “joke that fell flat.” CNN reported that Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who recently was the target of a leftist comedian’s attacks, dressed down the press staff for both the leak about the comment as well as for the disrespectful nature of the remark itself.

Keep in mind that both Donald Trump and John McCain are members of the same party. McCain had even endorsed Trump in 2016. After the controversial “Access Hollywood” tape, McCain, along with many other Republicans, withdrew his endorsement, but usually seemed to try to be objective in his dealings with the president.

I have never considered myself a McCain supporter. I’ve disagreed with him on many issues from climate change to campaign finance reform and especially for his regrettable vote to kill the Republican health care reform bill in 2017. The current issue is not one of politics, however. It is one of human decency.

If President Trump and his supporters truly want to “make America great again,” a good place to start would be to extend an olive branch to the McCain family. Frankly, there is probably no reason that Donald Trump would want to go to John McCain’s funeral except to use the occasion as a political photo op. Making peace with the terminally ill McCain would not necessarily secure a spot at the funeral for the president, but it would make Trump seem to be a bigger and more mature person. This is an image that he desperately needs to cultivate.

Reaching out to a dying and defeated rival would also set a precedent that might possibly lead to more civility and respect in the national political debate as well. The president sets the tone for the national dialogue and making peace with Sen. McCain would be a radical change from the past few years. It would be a good thing for the entire country if we could move beyond tit-for-tat insults and focus on the larger issues that face us as a nation.

Many of the problems that confront Americans require some semblance of national unity to resolve, not just executive actions or party-line congressional votes. Unity is not going to be found by tweeting snappy comebacks at detractors. Unity requires a statesman who can rise above the furor and chaos of the political landscape and draw Americans together.

Maybe Republicans didn’t start the uncivil political war, but they should put an end to it rather than adopting the left’s own tactics. This is particularly true of the Christian right who was charged by Jesus to “turn the other cheek” and counseled that “a soft answer turns away wrath.”

Do your part to make America great again by making politics a more civil endeavor. Treat your political enemies with Christlike kindness rather than returning their hate and anger in kind. Maybe then your mother won’t have to wash your mouth out with soap.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Tea Party terror

Last week, in the aftermath of the debt limit compromise, it became fashionable in liberal circles to label conservatives, Republicans, and Tea Party members as terrorists. A common theme among progressives refers to conservatives who are holding the country hostage in order to prevent Democrats from spending their way to an economic recovery.

Representative of many of the progressive musings was a blog on RealClearPolitics.com by Froma Harop. Harop wrote:

“Make no mistake: The tea party Republicans have engaged in economic terrorism against the United States -- threatening to blow up the economy if they don't get what they want. And like the al-Qaida bombers, what they want is delusional: the dream of restoring some fantasy caliphate in which no one pays taxes, while the country is magically protected from foreign attack and the elderly get government-paid hip replacements. Americans are not supposed to negotiate with terrorists, but that's what Obama has been doing.”

Even USA Today, a mainstream newspaper, ran an editorial cartoon in its Friday, August 5 edition which portrays the Tea Party as a Mad Hatter holding President Obama hostage. In the cartoon, President Obama laments that “We now negotiate with terrorists.” The cartoon, which first ran in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, can be viewed here.

The terrorist analogies were not limited to columnists and newspaper editorials. According to Politico.com, Vice President Joe Biden allegedly agreed with Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA) when Doyle said in a closed door meeting “this small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money.” According to the report, Biden responded, “They have acted like terrorists.”

Even President Obama, in his Twitter town hall on July 6, referred to the Republican tactic of linking spending cuts to an increase in the debt limit as “a gun against the heads of the American people.” A video of Obama’s comment is available on Youtube.

The violent imagery, condemned by many of these same progressives as little as six months ago, belies the frustrations of the left in the wake of the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives in 2010 and nearly three years of failed Democratic economic policies. Not only has President Obama and his economic team failed to lead the nation to an economic recovery, they have done so at the cost of increasing the national debt by a third in less than three years. Their failure is capped off by the recent downgrade of U.S. treasury bonds by Standard and Poors.

The terror comparisons also reveal that many progressives do not accept the fact that there are alternate viewpoints that can be held in good faith. In their world, an attempt to cut spending isn’t about reducing the deficit for the good of the country; it is an attempt to “blow up the economy.” On economic issues, much like climate change, once the consensus of liberal elites is reached, any departure from the progressive orthodoxy is to be scorned, ridiculed, and otherwise not taken seriously.

A recent Atlanta Conservative Examiner column that solicited answers from Democrats to a series of questions about Obama Administration policies did not receive a single serious response. Democratic policies are not working. The Democrats realize that they are not working, but they have no other ideas. This makes them angry and causes them to lash out.

In reality, of course, the Tea Party is not a group of terrorists. The Tea Party is made up of average Americans, like the thousands who gathered at the Georgia state capitol in Atlanta on April 15, 2009 to protest the $800 billion stimulus package and corporate bailouts (see a slideshow of this Tea Party here). Various attempts to paint the Tea Party as violent and racist in the past have failed for lack of evidence while tolerant progressives referred to the group’s members by a sexual slur.

The Tea Party is similar to a number of progressive activist groups, except that it is a true grass roots movement of real people who are concerned about the direction of the United States. It spontaneously arose to protest the bipartisan bailouts and out-of-control federal spending. The Republican Party listened to the people. The Democrats did not and they paid the price in the 2010 elections.

True terrorists, whom the progressives seem somewhat less concerned about than the Tea Party, don’t use filibusters and congressional votes to get their way. Their weapons of choice are IEDs, suicide vests, and hijacked airliners. A loss to the terrorists wouldn’t mean a budget compromise; it would mean thousands of dead and maimed victims. The Tea Party is a totally open and decentralized network of groups that even has multiple pages, like this one for the Atlanta Tea Party Patriots, on social networking sites like Facebook. Needless to say, there are no Facebook pages for the Taliban or al Qaeda.

To attempt to label the Tea Party as terrorists demeans the progressives who make the charge, much the same way as it demeans conservatives to call President Obama a socialist. It also detracts from the seriousness of the threat of the actual terrorists, people whose goal is to kill as many Americans as possible and to bring our country to its knees. True terrorism is a life and death matter, not a tempest in a tea pot.

Read this article on Examiner.com

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-atlanta/tea-party-terror

<a href=" http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-atlanta/tea-party-terror"><img src="http://www.examiner.com/assets/images/Examiner-Badge.jpg" border="none"></a>

 

Photo credits:  David W. Thornton, All rights reserved

Obama is right: Conservatives should be civil

Sarah Palin (Therealbs2002)

My friends and readers in Georgia and around the country will probably be shocked to hear me say, but I agree with President Obama.  A phrase that many native Georgians heard while they were growing up was “if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.”  This advice applies in politics as well.

Many Georgians have probably closely followed developments in the Tucson shooting, including the accusations that Jared Lee Loughner was inspired by conservative rhetoric.  These accusations were quickly discredited, but the controversy over heated political talk remains.

President Obama recently addressed these concerns in his recent memorial speech for the victims in Tucson.   He said, “But what we can't do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another.  As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility.  Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let us use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and remind ourselves of all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together.”

He continued, “If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate, as it should, let's make sure it's worthy of those we have lost.  Let's make sure it's not on the usual plane of politics and point scoring and pettiness that drifts away with the next news cycle.”

I think that he is right.  Even if political talk from the right (or left, after all, at least one victim, Judge John Roll, was a Republican) wasn’t the cause of the incident, we can still use it as an opportunity to slow down, take a deep breath, and think about alternatives to the way we are currently doing things.

Most conservatives are civil people.  There are exceptions.  There has been no shortage of conspiracy theorists on the right since the election of Barack Obama.  Most conservatives aren’t racists, but many have forwarded racist emails about the president.  Most Tea Partiers are nice people who love their country.  A few are nuts with insulting or bigoted signs.  Most conservatives speak in terms of facts.  A few want to label their opponents as “socialists” or “communists.” Most talk show hosts are reasonable and responsible.  Some, in the words of Neal Boortz, “make the kids run and hide under the bed.*” (Michael Savage, I’m looking in your direction.)  It is the exceptions that hurt conservatives everywhere.

Conservatives have nothing to fear from a civil discourse.  Facts and history are on our side.  Conservative policies work when tried.  Low tax rates lead to prosperity.  Second amendment freedoms lead to lower crime rates.  Economic freedom leads to a rising tide that lifts all boats.

On the other hand, liberal policies usually fail.  The Obama stimulus was a massive and expensive failure that did not lower unemployment or end the recession.  The same was true of FDR’s New Deal.  Gun control disarms honest people and leaves them at the mercy of criminals.  As President Reagan said, “… some years ago the federal government declared war on poverty – and poverty won.”  Liberal engagement of despotic regimes has led to nowhere except the empowerment of dictators.

The path to conservative victory is through showing the rest of America the differences in liberal and conservative policies.  In particular, we should point out how, despite their good intentions, liberal policies are prone to failure and unintended consequences.  Good intentions don’t matter if the result is a bigger mess and more problems. 

Some conservatives point out that liberals are the ones doing the majority of the name-calling.  From my perspective this is probably true.  That doesn’t mean that conservatives should respond in kind.  First, we should expect the left to be angry precisely because of the failure of their policies.  They cannot argue the effectiveness of their policies, because their policies are ineffective. 

Second, it has been my experience that liberals are usually emotional, rather than logical, people.  Their emotions dictate a call to action to resolve a crisis.  The rallying cry of Maude Flanders on the Simpsons is typical of modern leftists:  “Won’t somebody please think of the children?” All too often, they take rapid action, and then fail to notice, as they are congratulating themselves on their compassion, that they made the problem worse.

Health care reform is good illustration.  For years we were told that the US had to enact universal health care since many Americans were dying because they could not afford health insurance.  Then last year, against strong public opposition, Democrats enacted their version of health care reform.  This included many provisions such as free preventive care, a ban on excluding pre-existing conditions, and the claim that a new entitlement would help reduce the federal deficit and lower everyone’s health insurance costs.

Less than a year later, while Democrats are still congratulating themselves on their historic legislation, the truth is still coming out.  By not letting insurers screen out pre-existing conditions in children (this provision is not in effect for adults yet), the law has caused the market for children’s health insurance policies to collapse.  Many companies are no longer writing child-only health policies and others have been forced to raise rates, making the coverage unaffordable.

Far from making health insurance more affordable, the health care reform law has caused health insurance premiums to rise.  A report by Medicare’s Office of the Actuary projected that the law would increase health care costs.  The report was released not released until after Congress had passed the law.  Millions of Americans, me included, are finding that under Obamacare their health insurance costs are going up.  The much vaunted high-risk pools to cover those with pre-existing conditions have signed up only about 2.6% of the number predicted.  By all measures, the law is a spectacular failure.

The American people understand all this.  They consistently opposed passage of the law and now they consistently favor repeal.  In spite of Democratic and media support for the law, most Americans understand that it will add to the federal deficit, cause a decline in the quality of US health care, while hurting the economy and job growth.  If conservatives start engaging in a heated war of words with liberals, these facts may be obscured.  In fact, that is what the liberals are counting on!

Brooks vs. Sumner (John Magee)

As other conservatives have pointed out, today’s political arguments are not as heated as they have been at times in the past.  Sarah Palin was criticized for pointing out, correctly, that the Founding Fathers sometimes settled disagreements with dueling pistols.  Even duels paled in comparison to May 22, 1856 when Rep. Preston Brooks (D-SC) severely beat Senator Charles Sumner (D-MA) unconscious with a cane on the floor of the US Senate.  Brooks was re-elected.  Sumner later became a Republican.  Things got worse only five years later with the outbreak of the War Between the States.  Nobody today wants a war or violence.

In contrast, the Republicans should take a lesson from the liberals and the Bible.  Proverbs 15:1 says that “A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.”  This can be seen in the eight years of the Bush presidency.  Liberals were daily excoriating President Bush with accusations that he lied to start to wars, was complicit in the 9/11 attacks, caused global warming, allowed New Orleans to flood because he did not care about black people, and much more.  Where did it get them?  President Bush served two terms and was a largely successful president.  Voters rallied to support the president from unfounded attacks.

If conservatives mount baseless attacks on President Obama, we may suffer the fate of a second Obama Administration.  A new poll shows that 48% of Americans disapprove of President Obama’s policies, but only 21% disapprove of him personally.  Will conservatives win votes by insulting a man liked by 73% of the country?  It would be a far better strategy to attack Democratic policies rather than the president.

Finally, it has been pointed out that liberals are unlikely to maintain their air of civility very long.  This is true.  When you can’t defend your record of accomplishments, the only thing to do is either change your mind or lash out with charges of racism, sexism, or the accusation du jour.  Already one House Democrat has again started comparing Republicans to Nazis.  More will probably soon follow suit as the Obamacare repeal effort gains steam and the debate over debt financing heats up.

To this I say that Republicans and conservatives are not responsible for the behavior of Democrats.  We are responsible for our own behavior.  If the other side wants to (or has to) resort to childish name-calling to distract from the lack of positive results of the policies, then let them.  The conservative response should be to politely rebut their falsehoods and maintain civil criticisms of their policies.  This worked in the last election.  It will work in the next.

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-atlanta/obama-is-right-conservatives-should-be-civil#ixzz1BbvhBjU3"> 

*Boortz is quoted as recalled by the author during an on-air live promo for the Michael Savage Show on WSB-AM 750.