A Rally by Any Other Name

A friend writes from his rally experience in Santa Fe: " Contrary to media reports, it was not an anti-Obama rally. It was overwhelmingly attended by average folks concerned about the runaway deficits and the growth of government."

I readily appreciate the probability that the majority of the attendees at these rallies are voicing their own legitimate concerns about national policy regarding deficit spending, growth of government, and medical insurance primarily. What troubles me is the stimulus (no pun intended) to this movement. It has appeared to me that the initiating cause for these gatherings was the rhetoric of Republican/conservative fear mongering premised on baseless hyperbole and lies. Now there is room in my philosophy for "the end justifying the means." And the Great American Public should have been and should remain concerned on all issues of importance to the country, including those now being considered (I started to say "being debated" but there is relatively no public or parlimentary debate). First, many if not most of the citizens attending, I'll concede for argument, are honestly concerned. Yet, having watched parts of the DC rally on C-Span (I'll defer wholly to my friend on his Santa Fe experience) two observations concerned me. I did see signs that were not issue statements but personal attacks on the President. And there were quite a few. Interestingly, these poster boards did not at all appear professional or preprinted but rather home made. I do not see this fact as a positive. Secondly, the leadership as evident from the identity of sponsors and the speakers were anti-Obama. So, I can accept a media report so stating as to the DC event.

I see the Republican Party using the "best" Machiavellian tactics to rebuild a base. The fact that the Party is being hypocritical is not noticed by this popular awakening because most of them slept through earlier years of skillfully managed obscene spending (both parties)and tax cuts blindly ignoring, among other facts, the reality of two ongoing wars and the associated costs. The reality of the depth of the world-wide economic crises and the necessity of limited government intervention as recognized in every developed country seems to have escaped the popular education. They, the majority of those rallying now yell out of fear and ignorance. The posted objectives I saw to "save the Constitution," stop socialism," stop communism," stop fascism," and Obama "the liar," the Hitler,"the enemy" are frankly ridiculous on the basis of any reasoned view of this administration's eight months in office. It is the strategy of the Republican conservative movement to negate the results of the national presidential election and prevent the developement of the policies and objectives desired by majority of voting citizens.

The DC rally was instigated by well established conservatives and encouraged and guided by Republican Party and elected representatives both of which have a specific, unified agenda not consistent with nor in the interests of these assembled masses. In the not to distant memory, there were rallies of workers protesting often legitimate and important issues and policies. There was then a distinction when such rallies were manipulated by the Communist Party toward ends not consistent with nor in the best interests of the workers. In November 2008 the country voted and rejected the policies of the Republican administration. Their objective to return to those policies is hidden by them with tarantinoesq fears and the flag.

An Aside

I must admit that I have been anxious to put pen to paper or, rather, finger to key, given the events and propaganda pervading the media during these closing days of the presidential campaign. For example, I wanted to write about how McCain is being disserved by those running his campaign from my perspective as a target independent swing voter. And, I expect I soon will do that. But, I am somewhat embarrassed to admit that I have wasted a moment of my time to write to the on-screen personages of a television program that I never watch. After seeing a clip from "The View" and reading associated commentary, I sent the following into the bowels of their website:

"Elizabeth Hasselbeck is correct in her view of the importance of the personal associations chosen by candidates. Of course, there are general issues presented in this presidential election that are important for the electorate to consider. However, the character of the person who would be president is above all other matters the most crucial of these. It is not a "smear" to seriously discuss the associations a candidate choses to maintain in his or her personal and professional life. Recall the discusssions in the past of a candidate's membership in an "all-white" country club or an "all-male" business club. It is one thing to question the weight to be given any relevant issue and a far different matter to deny its relevance entirely. "You are known by the company you keep." Can the others on the show reasonably deny that?"

A letter to a classmate.

With all due respect, now, more than ever, is the time for such discussions. Your comment suggests that there had been an earlier conversation [about the Iraq War] among the class. I regret that I missed that opportunity. I believe that the conversation should have never ended. Our country is in an approach to a general election. Notwithstanding the cherry-picked issues of the candidates and the media during the primaries, the fundamental concern must be the character, competence and qualification of those who would be our elected leaders. The decisions of this present administration over the course of the past seven years now form the framework of what we as a nation have become and, to a great measure, define the position we maintain in each “crisis” situation around the world. Now is precisely the time, for example, to educate ourselves and discuss the events and actors that pulled us out of Afghanistan and put us into Iraq. Now is the time to discuss the competence, character and policies of the current administration and to apply those negative or positive lessons and value-judgments in our evaluation of which direction our country should now move.

I suggest that is it our duty, a duty greater than most other Americans, to the men and women now serving and who will serve over the next generation, to continue to educate ourselves and others about the leadership lessons of the Iraq war. One of my concerns has been that we as a nation will now blindly accept the status quo and not call to account the decisions and “deciders” that brought us to this point in Iraq. It is far too easy just to say “We are in Iraq so we need to support the troops.” I fully support the magnificent effort of the men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. We cannot pullout precipitously. However, the fact that this effort is finally being applied in a tactically sound, counter-insurgent manner with increasing success, should not, must not, cause us to ignore the nature and conduct of the leaders who brought us to this moment. These lessons should control the present, presidential political debate. Who knows, there may even be time to discuss the use of torture, Middle-East policy, the Fourth Amendment to the Bill of Rights, Habeas Corpus or even why the Army forgot the lessons our men died teaching us in Vietnam. Having graduated in the bottom five percent of our class I have always admired the intelligence of my classmates [including those few whose names are found after my own]. With the experience and education gained since June 1965 I think we might just have something to contribute.