Out of Arizona...
A berserk act with state, national and global implications.
The violent shooting eruption that occurred on Saturday, January 8, 2011, when US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was critically wounded, six people died and over a dozen others injured by one gunman, has reverberated around Arizona, the United States and both Hemispheres. To state that most Arizonans initial reaction was shock and fear, would be an understatement. Everyone has their own mechanisms for dealing with such news but it is fair to say that many Arizonans will go through various stages of a grieving process. We have only just begun to absorb the impact of what happened that day.
Why Arizona?
It is fair to say that many of us decades long (three or more) residents and second and third generation Arizonans are asking "What has happened to our state?" The question is in the larger context and not solely related to the brutal shooting fracas in Tucson. Arizona has been considered a conservative state since the Sixties in the era of Goldwater, when conservative here meant a more libertarian "live and let live" attitude. In the Eighties we tilted more to the right as social conservatives began to become a stronger force in state and local politics as the evangelical fundamentalist movement grew nationally as well as here. It was then a lack of tolerance began creeping into our culture. It was clear by 2000 that intolerance had become a more prominent feature of our social landscape and that "live and let live" had finally died after lingering attempts at survival. Many of us began to feel uncomfortable with the prevailing social attitudes among the voting population and felt they had swept in like unwanted tumbleweeds during a wicked dust storm.
The irony is that most of us ourselves are of a conservative bent, fiscally conservative and social libertarians but not social conservatives, raised by parents in the tradition of Barry Goldwater and Sandra Day O'Connors Arizona. An Arizona that was wide open spaces with plenty of room for other people's opinions. We had become outsiders in our own state.
This is attributed by many of us to the decision of the "movers and shakers" to build an economy on unlimited growth, engineered primarily by real estate developers and mortgage companies, on the foundation of construction. The price of which we are paying for now in two ways. The first is the obvious housing bust we have experienced that lags only slightly behind California and Nevada and is among the top in the nation. It was unsustainable from the beginning. The second is a less obvious byproduct and almost never openly discussed and that is immigration from within the US...not illegal immigration from Mexico. Illegal immigration in large part is a result of the legal migration of people from other states in the US who wanted the cheap labor of the illegal migrants from south of the border.
We had an influx of Americans who did not come here to invest in the State of Arizona's way of life and to contribute and become involved in it socially, culturally, economically or politically but rather to escape to a "lifestyle" of fun and sun beyond their financial means. A perpetual California of the Mind. We had inexpensive housing with a low cost of living and the basis for that is another unspoken reason, we also have low wages. That also meant we attracted people who commonly, certainly not all of them but a large segment, didn't have higher education and with lower skill and economic denominators. People involved mainly in construction or the byproducts of the industry, joined by plenty of retirees on fixed incomes, with almost no spread of other types of employment and income. In general these were people not very interested in investing time and money into developing a high-level economy, strong cultural institutions, solid educational systems and long term sustenance. This negatively impacted our strong points and drove out our solid manufacturing, computing, defense and aerospace industries.
This phenomenon became clear to a lot of us after the 1993 recession when population, housing and other construction began growing nonsensically gangbusters; in a state with limited water and energy resources. Those of us who pointed this out were rewarded with being called elitist spoil sports who just didn't understand The American Way...never mind it was an ephemeral desert mirage of the real American Way.
Can you hear us now?
The bottom line result is we have a population largely ignorant of their own local area much less the history, culture and politics of the state. When and if they do get involved, it is at the level with the least knowledge, resulting in local and state officials elected without the electorate really knowing what they really stand or rather, don't stand for. The trend got worse in the 2004 election and progressed from there and we now have a State Legislature who operates at the basest of political animal instincts. Propositions, Referendums and Initiatives were passed by voters with short sighted concern for the damage to the long term interests of the state's economy.
We don't stand apart, only at the forefront.
My belief though is we are but a microcosm of the country, that things tend to come to the forefront here earlier than most states, due to our population being more forthright. At the very least we are honest, for better or worse, about our antipathy and mindset. Dung flinging didn't originate here but was developed as a fine art, by both of the two major political sides, outside of this state. We simply have a population that absorbs and mirrors it, our best hope is that we learn from last Saturday's events but I'm not counting on it.
What happened here could have happened anywhere in the country. Already the Limbaughs, Olbermanns, Becks, Maddows, et al have sharpened their arrows and tightened their bows and are projecting more venom into the atmosphere. This in spite of it being long past the time we lower the rhetoric, vitriol and character assassination from both sides of the spectrum to focus on legitimate differences in opinion in a more civilized manner. Although the gunman might be mentally unsound, it has to be considered that the toxic political atmosphere that has escalated these past 15 years or so, infiltrated his thinking and influenced him into action.
It occurs to me that as all of America absorbs what happened, it's possible that many of us who have become tired of the extreme bombastic rants from the television, radio and internet, will speak out against it while still supporting free speech. A key element people should remember is that the people blasting us with these negative invectives, are making huge amounts of money from it, go home at night to a comfortable home and do not suffer the consequences of what they have said. This includes not just the Mainstream Media but the Political Class whose arrogant, petty bickering and backbiting is effrontery to civility, the US Constitution and the people of America. We do ourselves a disservice if we listen, tolerate or repeat it and we should be asking not only "What has happened to our country?" but also "What can I do to stop the caustic atmosphere and help improve the climate of our discussions and debate in this country? While still preserving people's right to speak their minds, no matter how much we disagree?"
Showing posts with label social conservatives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social conservatives. Show all posts
9/21/10
IMHO: Social Conservatives and Liberals
Social Conservatives are like Liberals...
Nunya business. Keep the government out of my life.
It occurs to me that Social Conservatives place as much demand on the government as Liberals do. They both want to use government intervention and money to forward their social behavior agenda and dictate to everyone their view of how people should behave.
Americans are basically centrist and lean to the right on fiscal issues, and most don't want the government interfering with peoples daily lives, even if they personally hold conservative views on individual behavior. It goes against the grain of their sense of fairness. There is something equally offensive about both Affirmative Action quotas and restriction of women's access to medical abortion by government edict.
Social Conservatives and Liberals need to repeat to themselves over and over again, that the economic crisis and the Great Disruption, overrides everything now. Americans can't afford and won't be distracted by social agendas until their economic concerns are resolved. It explains the Tea Party movement, which is based on one central theme: confronting politicians about taxes, spending, debt and government intervention and not about a myriad of pet grievances such as minority rights or abortion.
Nunya business. Keep the government out of my life.
It occurs to me that Social Conservatives place as much demand on the government as Liberals do. They both want to use government intervention and money to forward their social behavior agenda and dictate to everyone their view of how people should behave.
Americans are basically centrist and lean to the right on fiscal issues, and most don't want the government interfering with peoples daily lives, even if they personally hold conservative views on individual behavior. It goes against the grain of their sense of fairness. There is something equally offensive about both Affirmative Action quotas and restriction of women's access to medical abortion by government edict.
Social Conservatives and Liberals need to repeat to themselves over and over again, that the economic crisis and the Great Disruption, overrides everything now. Americans can't afford and won't be distracted by social agendas until their economic concerns are resolved. It explains the Tea Party movement, which is based on one central theme: confronting politicians about taxes, spending, debt and government intervention and not about a myriad of pet grievances such as minority rights or abortion.
8/8/10
Be Prepared For Political Bashing
What is troublesome about the Boy Scouts booing Obama video...
Several things bother me about this video of the Boy Scouts booing President Obama's prerecorded speech to the National Jamboree in Virginia. It's occurred to me for awhile now that it serves no useful purpose to bash a President, whether it's Bush or Obama, rather it's simply being a poor sport and a sore loser. Legitimate criticism is one thing but the endless Bush and Obama bashing are just bad form and old news.
The Boy Scouts are not the organization I grew up with but I've known that a long time. I do expect certain things out of the leaders of a group of young people that are supposedly being trained in moral qualities of better character. If the President chose to go on The View instead of attending the 100th anniversary of the Boy Scouts, that is a reflection on him. That he chose to appear at their National Jamboree in a prerecorded videotaped session falls in the same category. Regardless if the Boy Scouts in attendance were booing Obama for not appearing in person or whether they "like" him or not is being a bad sport, lacks character and is disrespectful. That reflects on their leaders more than it does on them. It indicates they are not being trained in higher moral standards and good character. If they were they would know, whether you like any President or not, you respect the Office of the Presidency and booing a video monitor doesn't qualify as having good character, it is just unsupervised juvenile behavior.
On the other hand, it also reflects poorly on President Obama. Common political horse sense should have told him to not appear at all, in person or videotaped, at the National Jamboree. Let the criticism fly that he didn't, that would have been the better option of two bad options. It is another indication that our current President is not very good at knowing his audience, the limits of who his constituents are and having savvy political advisors. He made his choice to appear on The View and in the nuances of politics, negated anything he could have said at an appearance in front of the Boy Scouts. Sadly, his poll ratings indicate how poorly he is perceived by a lot of Americans and he should consider his every move knowing that. Remarking that he doesn't seem to be very politically astute, is not bashing him, merely an observation of his political skills.
I'm left wondering if anyone really believes in striving for Duty to Self, Boy Scout or not, the Promise of the Boy Scout Oath. "Keeping yourself physically strong means taking care of your body. Eat the right foods and keep your strength. Staying mentally awake means learn all you can, be curious, and ask questions. Being morally straight means to live your life with honesty, to be clean in your speech and actions, and to be a person of strong character."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAWsy7VV8oE
Several things bother me about this video of the Boy Scouts booing President Obama's prerecorded speech to the National Jamboree in Virginia. It's occurred to me for awhile now that it serves no useful purpose to bash a President, whether it's Bush or Obama, rather it's simply being a poor sport and a sore loser. Legitimate criticism is one thing but the endless Bush and Obama bashing are just bad form and old news.
The Boy Scouts are not the organization I grew up with but I've known that a long time. I do expect certain things out of the leaders of a group of young people that are supposedly being trained in moral qualities of better character. If the President chose to go on The View instead of attending the 100th anniversary of the Boy Scouts, that is a reflection on him. That he chose to appear at their National Jamboree in a prerecorded videotaped session falls in the same category. Regardless if the Boy Scouts in attendance were booing Obama for not appearing in person or whether they "like" him or not is being a bad sport, lacks character and is disrespectful. That reflects on their leaders more than it does on them. It indicates they are not being trained in higher moral standards and good character. If they were they would know, whether you like any President or not, you respect the Office of the Presidency and booing a video monitor doesn't qualify as having good character, it is just unsupervised juvenile behavior.
On the other hand, it also reflects poorly on President Obama. Common political horse sense should have told him to not appear at all, in person or videotaped, at the National Jamboree. Let the criticism fly that he didn't, that would have been the better option of two bad options. It is another indication that our current President is not very good at knowing his audience, the limits of who his constituents are and having savvy political advisors. He made his choice to appear on The View and in the nuances of politics, negated anything he could have said at an appearance in front of the Boy Scouts. Sadly, his poll ratings indicate how poorly he is perceived by a lot of Americans and he should consider his every move knowing that. Remarking that he doesn't seem to be very politically astute, is not bashing him, merely an observation of his political skills.
I'm left wondering if anyone really believes in striving for Duty to Self, Boy Scout or not, the Promise of the Boy Scout Oath. "Keeping yourself physically strong means taking care of your body. Eat the right foods and keep your strength. Staying mentally awake means learn all you can, be curious, and ask questions. Being morally straight means to live your life with honesty, to be clean in your speech and actions, and to be a person of strong character."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAWsy7VV8oE
8/6/10
Ben Quayle's Rented Kids
The Family Man...
Just as disturbing is the way one of his opponents, Vernon Parker, is getting mileage from this and tying it in with a social conservative anti-gay marriage message in the mix. Arizona's Congressional District Three has a very crowded field and the candidates are stooping to new lows to garner attention and pull ahead.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBJC8bIUaDc
Just as disturbing is the way one of his opponents, Vernon Parker, is getting mileage from this and tying it in with a social conservative anti-gay marriage message in the mix. Arizona's Congressional District Three has a very crowded field and the candidates are stooping to new lows to garner attention and pull ahead.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBJC8bIUaDc
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)