Analysis for Critical Thinkers

Americans seem to be all talking about the recent upset in Massachusetts where Scott Brown won a decisive victory over the Democratic favorite for the Senate race. Martha Coakley and the Democrats ran a yawn of a campaign with the presumption that any Democrat will automatically be elected in such a liberal state. Imagine their surprise as they were shocked into reality. All is not well in Camelot!

The problem that so many politicians are having today is a lack of respect of the views of their constituents. Take New York Senator Chuck Shcumer. He recently called Mr. Brown a “far right tea-bagger”. ” “Tea-bagger” is, I am told, a reference to some sort of sexual act of which I – and perhaps even Senator Schumer – am unfamiliar with. It is also a reference to someone who, like our founding fathers of this country, fought against oppression by Big Government. I find it troubling and also quite ironic that the term has become popular among Democrats who use it derisively against what they call the “right wing.”

What has happened is that Democrats have lowered themselves to simple name calling. “Tea Baggers,” “Nazis,” “Stupid,” “Evil,” are just some examples of the terms used by the likes of no other than Speaker of the House Nancy Peolosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senator Chuck Schumer, and President Obama himself – as well as through his press secretary. Name calling is what is done by people who have no argument to offer, no principle to defend, and no position to promote. Someone calls you a name in order to avoid an intelligent discussion on an issue. It is done at Town Hall meetings when someone asks a question to a politician who does not know the answer. It is done when someone with a different point of view asks a question to someone who has no clear idea of what it is he is trying to accomplish.

What it all comes down to is simple ignorance. The President, the Speaker, and the Majority Leader may actually mean well for the country. But they are ignorant of things such as the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, American history, history in general, economics, and they are ignorant of what the American people are telling them. Their ignorance is actually forgivable though. One cannot fault somebody simply because they do not know something. After all, there is no test to become eligible for election to their offices. What is not forgivable though is their arrogance.

It is arrogant to hurl insults at the very people who you represent. It is arrogant to refuse to answer questions like Joe Biden did when, rather than answer if he was a socialist, he shot back with, “Are you serious?”. It is arrogant for Nancy Pelosi to cry the same “Are you Serious?” when asked, quite seriously, what part of the Constitution authorizes her to order people to buy health insurance. It is of little use in a discussion for people to proclaim that they won and “get over it” without even discussing any issues at all.

It is natural that one may counter that it is I who is actually the ignorant one here – and not the above named elected officials. This may very well be true. So now what do we do?

The job of our elected officials is to have principles that they believe in. They must have a moral compass – a direction – a clear cut goal. They must have the integrity to pursue that goal. One can surely see that the Democrats have certainly set their sights on having Big Government take over health care. But where it all falls apart is when you fail to make the case.

The main reason for the failure of the Democratic agenda is that no on was able to present a cogent argument as to why this would be good for this country. I believe that it is not good for the country. I have welcomed the opportunity for someone to explain their side. Maybe you’d convince me! Other than the generalities about how this will “fix” the “broken” system, there is no information. The proceedings are being held in secret, anyone who questions the plan is insulted and ridiculed, questions are unanswered, the 2000 page bill is rushed to a vote before even the people who have to vote on it have read it, and tensions run high. This is exactly the type of behavior that leads people into organizing “tea parties.”

You still hear so many left-wing bumper sticker slogans being hurled around and I expect even more as election day approaches. In the wake of the “Underpants Bomber”, it is interesting how even more shocking some of these sound to me when put into some sort of real-world context. I had an idea for a political cartoon that admittedly would be too shocking to actually make. The most disturbing thing about the cartoon though, would be the statements that we hear every day being said by the people in the cartoon. How offensive these statements are to the families of people who have died in terrorist incidents on airplanes. And how absurd and offensive they are to all of us who are innocent Americans who just want to be safe.

The cartoon shows an airplane that has just been exploded by a terrorist. Yes “terrorist”. This is “terrorism”, not as President Obama has ordered,  a “man-made disaster”, but yes it is that too – man made by certain men. The cartoon shows the people on the plane and what they are saying right after the explosives detonated.

“At least I know the screening was fair,” says the 80 year old lady who had been flagged for a random search.
“I worry about the Arab world and what they think of Americans and our screening process,” says a father of 3.
“Bush lied!” a mother yells.
“Close Gitmo!” cries an ivy league college professor.
“Wiretapping of terrorists should be banned!” exclaims a 20 Second Scholar.
“Prosecute the U.S. Intelligence community!” sighs a man who was reading the New York Times.
“This guy had nothing to do with 9/11!” screams a conspiracy theorist.
“I just hope that if this bomber survives somehow, they read him his Miranda Rights,” opines an up and coming public defender.
“Let’s not jump to any conclusions,” insists a Obama campaign volunteer.
“As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse,” says a big fan of Meet the Press who strangely looks a lot like General Casey.
“Profiling of terrorists is a very dangerous policy,” reports a TV watcher who is also ironically a big fan of those shows where they talk about those FBI profilers who help solve all those big cases.

If a group of people tells you that they want to kill you, I want to be on the lookout for these people in particular. I want wiretaps, surveillance, satellite imagery, undercover operatives, interrogations, information sharing among different agencies – I want membership lists including their names and addresses, who they called, where they travel and what they buy. I want to know who they have tried to recruit and what their plans are. This can all be done fairly, although more than fairness, I am interested in my family not getting blown up.

“Have you considered the fact that these people might recruit others who may not fit your profile?” Yes. We need the technology to screen everybody at airports – as well as the will to do it. But have you considered that they may not recruit others? Will we be ready for that?

“But can’t anybody, even from other groups, be a potential airplane bomber?” Perhaps, although this has not happened yet. Please do not make policy based soley on the possible exceptions. Please do not try to rationalize why we are not doing what we know must be done.

The lives of Americans must be the sole aim of our airline security. There is no room for the political correctness that has become all the rage lately. When one talks of “fairness”, one must ask,

 “Fair to who?”