Monday, April 28, 2014

THE LYING POLITICIAN – HOMEGROWN – AMERICAN AS APPLE PIE!

By Edwin Cooney

Of course, you are properly shocked to read that any red-blooded American patriot, which I assure you I indeed am, would even suggest that lying politicians are as homegrown and as American as apple pie, but think about it!

While you think, I’ll share with you what prompted this particular topic.  I was considering writing about religion and typed the word into my browser to get a couple of standard dictionary definitions of the word in order to expound on various ways of interpreting and examining different aspects of religious practices and understandings.  Suddenly, I came across one of political satirist Andy Borowitz’s “reports” that nicely linked politics with religion.  This is what Mr. B. wrote:

            In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of the United States declared on
            Tuesday that lying by politicians is protected by the First Amendment because
            it is an expression of their religion.  By a 5–4 majority, the Court struck down
            an Ohio law that would make it harder to lie in political ads, arguing instead
            that “any attempt to restrict or punish lying by politicians is an unconstitutional      
            infringement on a religion they have practiced for decades.”
            The Court’s decision won praise from politicians of both parties, with many
            saying that the Justices’ recognition of lying as a religion was “long overdue.”
            Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts argued, “For politicians, lying            
            is a religious observance akin to attending a church or a synagogue, except that           
            they do it seven days a week.”

Politicians, when you think about it, are very special liars because political lies are different from “run of the mill” lies. Twenty-first century politicians and their ideological backers mostly lie within an ideological context.  After all, liberals and conservatives find little if any truth outside of their political faiths.  Of course, no political ideology really has a monopoly on truth telling or lying, but their capacity for truth telling is limited by their inevitable agenda.  In fact, the more ideological you or your favorite politician is, the more likely you are to be a bigger and more committed 21st century political liar.

Recently, the health care exchanges more than met the minimum number of applicants necessary to make the affordable health care system work.  Republicans can’t politically afford to recognize that fact, so they won’t.  Hence, John and Suzie Q Citizen can’t depend on a political leader to provide an honest, non-ideological assessment of the national affordable care act.  As for the lie, liberals say publically funded health care will work.  Conservatives insist that such a suggestion isn’t true and thus the liberals are the ones who lie.  Just ask South Carolina Congressman Joe Wilson: he’ll shout it out to you once again if you like.

Everyone knows that Franklin Roosevelt and Bill Clinton were probably the fastest and loosest abusers of absolute truth ever to reside in the White House.  FDR often admitted that he seldom let his left hand know what his right hand was doing.  Bill Clinton, who’s blessed with one of the quickest minds ever to reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, insisted at one time that there were multiple meanings of the word “is.” Depending on how you perceive things, even our greatest presidents lie.

President Ronald Reagan insisted that he never traded arms for hostages and was backed by conservatives who, had Jimmy Carter done the same thing, would still be sermonizing about it today all over Fox News and Limbaugh/Hanity radio.  Papa Bush (Number 41) insisted during the 1988 presidential campaign that Congress ought to read his lips as there would be no new taxes under his administration.  In 1990, however, he made a presidential decision to increase taxes by signing the 1990 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. Thus, despite his remarkable foreign policy successes, Bush was defeated for re-election by a much more skillful political liar -- an Arkansas gentleman Republicans came to refer to as “Slick Willie.” 

In the wake of 9/11, George W. Bush insisted that he had knowledge of existing weapons of mass destruction in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq when he only hoped he possessed such knowledge. After all, those weapons had to be there in order to justify GWB’s agenda. 

Question: Were FDR, Reagan, Bush No. 41, Clinton, and Bush No. 43 liars?  Is President Obama’s insistence that health care should be publically financed a question of integrity?  If politicians’ assessments of public matters are merely efforts to deceive, where does that assessment come from?

One of the reasons George Washington bemoaned the establishment of political parties in his 1796 farewell address was the damage he thought they would do to our capacity to accurately and wisely evaluate the wisdom or usefulness of national policies.  Washington clearly realized that the competition for political supremacy between, or perhaps even among, political parties would invariably poison the well of legitimate ideas and strategies.  Political parties would invariably make national issues reflect the motives of men rather than the wisdom or usefulness of ideas.

Finally, where do these lying politicians come from?  Who were their parents, their friends, their schoolmates, their teachers, their professors and, if you insist, their clergy?  Who provides them with ongoing financial, intellectual and emotional/spiritual support?

If Andy Borowitz is right that lying constitutes a “religious act” for today’s politicians, it is due to an even greater truth as I see it. Twenty-first century Americans have substituted their traditional spiritual faiths for doctrinaire politics.  If lying is the religion of the politician, the demanding, parochial, self-righteous, and too often ideologically-oriented American voter is that religion’s “patron saint!”   

Thus, the primary reason we enjoy Andy Borowitz so much is because he tells such outrageously amusing lies -- or does he?

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY


No comments: