I tell my students there are four words they can't say in my class unless they want their mouths washed out with soap: Democrat, Republican, conservative, and liberal.
The danger with these labels is that not only are shortcuts to thinking; they are short CIRCUITS to thinking. When one proudly identifies one's self as Republican (or vice versa) and the enemy is labeled as a D_*#crat (or vice versa), one no longer has to think in terms beyond black hat and white hat. Everything the Enemy says is a lie. Everything one's own side says is the truth told by a good guy. Every idea on the other side is evil. There is no discourse. When we subscribe to this name calling, we are suckers.
One blatant example involved presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Maybe Romney was not the most beloved Republican candidate, but when push came to shove, Republicans fell in line to support the "lesser of two evils." My dad supported Romney, in part, because he felt Romney more strongly had Israel's back. The reality was that both candidates said the exact same words on the issue. Still, to Republicans, it is pretty clear that we can't trust that the Democrat and liar President Obama really meant it. Certainly, there is plenty of evidence to discourage trust from guy who told us he "would be the most transparent president ever" and whose lies we have highlighted.
Yet, certainly on the other side of the aisle, people can rest assured they can trust their own guy.
Except, maybe we shouldn't trust that one is telling the truth who has an extensively documented history of saying one thing in one interview and the opposite thing in another interview. http://mittromneysflipflops.com/
One outrageous contradiction is so blatant that it illustrates the disdain our officials hold for our intelligence. The fact that we fall for it shows maybe they are right?? Starting at minute 1:42, Romney tells us that one of his first acts would be to repeal that evil, liberal monstrosity ObamaCare. Don't worry, though, our politician has a solution as well, "real reform for health care."
Here's what he says it will consist of. 1) "Make sure that people who want to keep their current insurance." 2) "Number two gotta make sure that those people who have pre-existing conditions know that they will be able to be insured and they will not lose their insurance." 3) "Do our very best to help each state and their effort to assure that every American has access to affordable health care, " and he continues on outlining what sounds spectacularly like the program he is repealing. It is a crazy bit of theater to hear such blatant contradictions.
"Ah," the Republican apologist say, "He is just saying what he needs to say to get elected, and then he can show his true colors." Well, to me (and I know I am not alone in my idealism), integrity and guts are the true colors I need to see.
A Republican could rebut at this point that Romney is not a true representative of the heart of the party, but my response would be show me a Republican candidate that both demonstrated integrity and represented the Constitution as the guiding principal. "Conservative" Perry? The one consistent candidate in basing decisions on the Constitution was aggressively blackballed by his party and made others uncomfortable with his isolationism and his staying out of social issues.
Again, the point is that the labels switch off the thinking. We believe the conservatives are conservative because they say they are in their ad campaigns. Then we fall for whatever they tell us and sell us; we had found our White Hat Hero (Cain, Gingrich, Palin), no matter how shallow, dishonest, and non-liberty-loving they may be documented to be. The problem with the white hat disguise is that it is the most effective and insidious of all. It is the wolf that doesn't even need to bother putting on the sheep's clothing. He just has to announce, "Hello, everyone, I am a sheep," and we don't even see.
In the same way, labeling the enemies of the other party also blinds our sight. Talk show hosts and so many others fail to see what the other side is. So often, as shown in the Romney example above, what they are is exactly the same as themselves, the same side of the same coin. Rather than intelligent dialogue, all we get is arguments ended with the hissed slander of "that Liberal" or "those backward, naive conservatives," which is just an adult version of "Oh yeah, well you're stupid." Pretty smart.
The hour is grave because of what we have forgotten.
And now there are two (er, three?). Did it matter which? After watching the debates, it seems being AGAINST Liberty is now a campaign technique. And the winners are . . . (not the Bill of Rights).
Target date is 2030
Take a failed issue. Give it a righteous new name. Get people begging for government salvation. Ram the details through in secrecy. Paranoid indeed.
A must read: on the surface it is about the people who work behind the scenes for Trump. More deeply, it is an expose on the way the world really works. How are we brought to believe what we believe?
FIA acquired emails document favorable treatment for favorable treatment
How do banks keep fees high and rates they pay low despite "Competition"? They're all owned by the same people.