Pogo May Have Been Right: We Have Met The Enemy and He Is Us

Eight years ago, I quoted Pogo that we have met the enemy and he is us.  Little did I imagine that our political arena would devolve to a point that even George Orwell would not have been able to imagine what exists today. 

Who would have thought that we would have a President/ Former President  that:  

• Thinks nothing of telling lies on an almost daily basis;
• Asserts that the press is the enemy of the people;
• Claims that any news which points out the falsity of his statements is simply fake news;
• Asserts that Courts can't be trusted and that any ruling contrary to his view is because of a crazy or biased judge;
• Threatened North Korea with annihilation and then calls its leader Kim Jon-Un a very good fellow;
• Says that a white supremacists march chanting racists slogans has some fine people;
• Claims that Mexicans who want to immigrate are murderers and drug dealers;
• Says he wouldn't mind serving five terms;
• Actually tried to engineer a coup of our democracy and still is viewed as the ostensible voice of the Republican Party.

We as a Nation are better than this but are now in a battle for the Soul of America. 

• Are we a society built on welcoming immigrants and people of all backgrounds or are we a society that fears any people that may look or act different?
• Are we a society that believes in protecting the weak, the sick and the elderly or are we a society that treats any kind of government protection as irresponsible socialism?
• Are we a society that believes in the importance of a free press to assure our freedom or are we a society that considers reporters and the press as the enemy of the people?
• Are we a society that believes in the integrity of science or are we a society that believes that science is simply someone’s opinion that can be ignored?
• Are we a society that believes in freedom of religion for all faiths or are we a society that believes in religious freedom only so long as it involves our religion?
• Are we a society that can distinguish fact from fiction and truth from falsehoods or are we a society that accepts only what is consistent with our preconceptions?
• Are we a society that believes in the rule of law and access to justice for all or are we a society that believes justice is available only if one has money and power?
• Are we a society that believes that education for all is a foundation for our future which needs improved funding or are we a society that believes that education is a commodity that should be available to those who can pay the price?
• Are we a society that believes that being a citizen of the world makes us better citizens of America or are we a society that believes that we must focus on America first to the exclusion of the rest of the world?

As citizens of this great Nation we need to be the the best that we can be.

ELECTION SEASONS BECOMES MORE DEPRESSING EVERY YEAR

Every generation has its emotional political litmus tests. The current political hostilities between parties and candidates, however, exceed any reasonable justification. Civil discourse does not exist. More discouraging is that the electorate does not reject such behavior and seems to accept sound bites as substance. Perhaps as the result of such conditions few truly capable candidates appear to be running.

In Florida the race for the Republican nomination for governor is Rick Scott a former CEO of a health care company who is using his personal fortune to sell the message that government needs to be run like a business and it should eliminate government regulation of business. While CEO, his former company committed massive fraud on the government for which the company was fined almost 2 billion dollars. This is the largest fine ever levied against an entity. I guess the message is: a vote for me is a vote for more privatization so more corporate fraud can be perpetrated on the residents of this state. His opponent is a career politician whose most recent signature activity as attorney general was in spending hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to fund expert testimony regarding the dangers of homosexual behavior in lawsuits opposing gays from adopting children or serving as foster parents. The male expert, however, takes European trips with male escorts.

In the Democrat Senate race one candidate is a recent playboy billionaire transplant from California who is best known for paling around the Balkans with Michael Tyson and prostitutes when his yachts are not destroying reefs off of Belize. His opponent is a congressman who claims that he spoke with his mother about a company who paid her hundreds of thousands of dollars while he lobbied on behalf of the company in Congress.

Candidates do not debate. Candidates do not let allow interviews with neutral editorial boards. Candidates simply spend millions of dollars on television ads that demonize their opponents or portray simplistic appealing messages that are wholly inaccurate. We are reaching an era where the term politician and statesman will be considered antonyms.

We are facing economic challenges for countries throughout the world. Our deficit spending is growing exponentially to the “horror” of all candidates who wish to solve the deficit by reducing government revenue ie taxes. We blame the government for failing to prevent the gulf disaster, to provide adequate education, or to reduce traffic congestion. Our solution is to reduce government.

Somehow in spite of these conditions our system still seems to work better than any other alternative. Even so, It is still really depressing to incur another political season. We could offer so much more.

Every generation has its emotional political litmus tests. The current political hostilities between parties and candidates, however, exceed any reasonable justification. Civil discourse does not exist. More discouraging is that the electorate does not reject such behavior and seems to accept sound bites as substance. Perhaps as the result of such conditions few truly capable candidates appear to be running.

In Florida the race for the Republican nomination for governor is Rick Scott a former CEO of a health care company who is using his personal fortune to sell the message that government needs to be run like a business and it should eliminate government regulation of business. While CEO, his former company committed massive fraud on the government for which the company was fined almost 2 billion dollars. This is the largest fine ever levied against an entity. I guess the message is: a vote for me is a vote for more privatization so more corporate fraud can be perpetrated on the residents of this state. His opponent is a career politician whose most recent signature activity as attorney general was in spending hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to fund expert testimony regarding the dangers of homosexual behavior in lawsuits opposing gays from adopting children or serving as foster parents. The male expert, however, takes European trips with male escorts.

In the Democrat Senate race one candidate is a recent playboy billionaire transplant from California who is best known for paling around the Balkans with Michael Tyson and prostitutes when his yachts are not destroying reefs off of Belize. His opponent is a congressman who claims that he spoke with his mother about a company who paid her hundreds of thousands of dollars while he lobbied on behalf of the company in Congress.

Candidates do not debate. Candidates do not let allow interviews with neutral editorial boards. Candidates simply spend millions of dollars on television ads that demonize their opponents or portray simplistic appealing messages that are wholly inaccurate. We are reaching an era where the term politician and statesman will be considered antonyms.

We are facing economic challenges for countries throughout the world. Our deficit spending is growing exponentially to the “horror” of all candidates who wish to solve the deficit by reducing government revenue ie taxes. We blame the government for failing to prevent the gulf disaster, to provide adequate education, or to reduce traffic congestion. Our solution is to reduce government.

Somehow in spite of these conditions are system still seems to work better than any other alternative. It is still really depressing to incur another political season.

WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US

Pogo,almost 40 years ago, uttered the admonishment "We have met the enemy and he is us". These words were expressed at time of spectacular economic growth and consumption. It also was a time of deep political and emotional divisions in the American populace which ranged over issues from the Vietnam war to the imagery of youth lifestyles as portrayed by Woodstock .

The imagery of these times seems to have reappeared with the election of Barack Obama. His proposal to assure that all Americans have access to health care have created a level of animosity not seen for many years. Feed by the demagoguery of self styled media pundits, many people express vocal outrage in any attempt at civil discussion. Ironically, many of the most vocal in opposition to the proposed health care programs are the elderly who are served by Medicare. Many of these elderly assert a vigorous rejection of any control of the government over their health care because they believe it may mean a limitation on their medical care. This perspective obviously reflects a voting population that doesn't even know that Medicare is a government administered health care program for the elderly. Recent attempts at town hall discussions of the subject by various members of congress dissipated into chaotic screaming sessions by these opponents. Given the intense emotional outbursts by these opponents one must wonder whether the opposition is based on a true question of the merits of the proposed program or simply an emotional distaste to the election of a black President that demagogues stir by characterizing his beliefs as Marxist and un-American.

Perhaps, civil discourse can be found. Until it can be found, Pogo's wisdom remains true to this day.

WHO AM I

-->

In today’s political commentary the country is divided between red and blue states, between Republicans and Democrats, between conservative and liberals and between secular atheists and evangelicals. The reality is much more complicated. Most thinking people do not meet a political litmus test or fit any simple political box. I use myself as an example. On some issues I would be viewed as conservative and religious. On other issues I would be considered to be liberal and secular.

• I strongly believe in a free market.
• I believe that business can generally outperform government at most services.
• I believe that the future of this country must be based on the creation of jobs in the private sector.
• I believe that excessive taxes can destroy economic incentive in the free market.
• I believe in the right to bear arms.
• I don’t believe that the government can, does or should watch out for my best interest.
• I believe in personal responsibility.
• I would never personally participate in the abortion of a life after conception.
• I believe in fiscal responsibility.
• I fear that the federal deficit will undermine economic growth for decades to come.
• I believe in family values.
• I believe in the rule of law and that no civilization can exist without a clear rule of law.
• I believe that judges are to apply the law based upon constitutional, legislative and common law principles rather than simply applying their personal philosophical beliefs.
• I believe that the term “judicial activists” simply means any judge that has ruled in a manner contrary to the speaker’s belief.
• I believe that the success of a society is best measured by the success of its least fortunate members of that society.
• I believe in First Amendment.
• I have been appalled at our Country’s wiliness to ignore constitutional principals in the name of security.
• I believe that we still have a long way to go in achieving true civil rights.
• I believe in a women’s right to chose what to do with her body until a fetus is viable.
• I believe that no one is entitled to wealth or status merely by virtue of their birthright.
• I believe in protecting the environment.
• I believe that society must provide a safety net to its weakest members especially children and the elderly.
• I believe that government must regulate some aspects of business that the profit motive does not consider. This includes activities such as control of adverse environmental practices or fraudulent conduct.
• I believe that we need to reduce our dependence on carbon fuels.
• I believe that global warming is a real event.
• I believe that a strong military is one of the best protections to a free society.
• I believe that government secrecy is generally bad and that the more someone wants to hide something the more likely it is that what has been hidden should never have been done.
• I believe in education.
• I believe that is government’s role to give everyone the opportunity to the best education they can achieve and that in the long run, such an educated society will outperform other societies.

Many of my friends in various “movements” consider me a conservative Republican. Other friends in the business community consider many of my views to be the ravings of a left wing liberal. In reality, like most Americans, my views do not fit a neat litmus test for political affiliation. On some issues, I am a traditionalist and conservative. If it isn’t broke we don’t need to try and fix it. On other the other hand, where our current policies do not enhance economic growth, civil liberty or environmental protection we can do better and my views would be considered liberal. 

On the whole, I pride myself in trying to listen to the facts which are often hard to decipher and the corresponding arguments. Unfortunately, much of the media is fact-less. What passes for news is simply spin. Commentators on television and talk radio tend to pander to demonization and stir political hatred in order to achieve ratings. This is not an appropriate use of the media but it is protected speech. Fortunately, these ravings can be easily disarmed if one takes the time to listen and evaluate. I have faith that most Americans take that time and recognize that litmus test politics serves no one except the persons promulgating the tests.