Monday, April 27, 2015

HEY, THERE, CANDIDATES -- TALK ABOUT YOUR PLANS, NOT YOUR MORALITY, PLEASE!

By Edwin Cooney

I don’t know what you’ve been told, but I’ve been told that there could be as many as 20 politicians trying to convince us that they ought to be elected President of the United States of America in 2016.

Each of them, according to what I’ve been told, is backed by at least one billionaire.  Most of them will be Republicans.  There may be as many as three Democrats in the race, but no one really expects anyone other than Hillary Clinton to be the Democratic nominee.

It’s expected that the Republican campaign will be all about which candidate is the true “red” conservative.  (I just love the idea that red Republicans exist.  Only a few years ago, Republicans, especially conservative Republicans, used to insist that they’d rather be dead than red.  Wow, the world really is changing!)

Ever since I began writing these weekly musings ten years ago, I’ve been bemoaning the existence of the culture war in this country.  Since the late 1970s, partisanship has become less about the practical application of principles or strategies for solving great national and international issues and more about the moral forces behind the proposed solutions for problem-solving.

Most Republicans will insist that it’s immoral to force people to purchase health insurance.  Next, they will insist that gay and lesbian marriage is a question of morality.  After that, they will insist that by seeking accommodation with Iran and not more aggressively opposing Assad in Syria, the Obama administration is guilty of the immorality of selling out to the enemies of western democracy and Christianity.

Mrs. Clinton will also suggest that her principles are primarily matters of morality.  After all, isn’t the increasing disparity between the upper and middle classes in America a question of morality?  If a gay or lesbian couple can provide children abandoned by straight couples with a solid and safe life style, doesn’t that in itself justify gay and lesbian relationships?

As much as I may favor what President Obama has accomplished in the field of healthcare, I’m willing to hear how Republicans might improve the healthcare system, but I’m not the least interested in hearing about their moral outrage over “Obamacare”.

Back in the 1950s, we faced an atomic threat by what we considered a “godless and materialistic Soviet society.”   Many high-powered and well-placed citizens such as Douglas MacArthur, J. Edgar Hoover, Richard Nixon and Barry Goldwater insisted that world communism was a single-minded monster that would rule the world if not militarily vanquished.  Communism, they insisted, was a monolith and a moral outrage.  The truth of the matter is that it was neither.  Communism, true communism or Marxism was never practiced even by the Soviets.  However, like Islam today, communism was a wonderful presidential campaign issue because it was easily labeled a moral outrage.

Here’s another truth which my friend Steve in Northern California recently taught me.  Seldom do societies go to war because they understand each other!  After all, the victorious North demonstrated that it didn’t understand the South in the wake of our Civil War. Otherwise, he points out, we would have avoided the era of Reconstruction.

Meanwhile, there are legitimate issues on which Republicans and Democrats can seek votes.  Each ought to sell us a healthcare plan.  Each party ought to assess the environment, the need to rebuild America’s infrastructure, and the strategies of job creation.  Each ought to examine the world situation as realistically as possible with the idea of forever “…staying the hand of mankind’s final war,” as President Kennedy put it in his 1961 inaugural address.

It would be nice if presidential candidates would keep their moral outrage to themselves.
Politics ought to be about the people’s agenda and not about the moral incredulity of self-important presidential candidates!

Any office seeker who considers him or herself your moral superior is unworthy of you, let alone your vote!

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY

No comments: