Heads vs Hearts

The times they are a-changin, goes the old Bob Dylan song. Indeed.

As we roll into a new decade, Americans are basically divided into two groups. The first group sees the world changing for the better. We call these people Progressives. They tend to be naive and hopeful. They view the ever-changing cultural norms with equanimity. They see possibilities, they regard 'having fun' as a worthwhile goal. Fundamentally, they believe that things will work out if we just try to get-along and treat each other decently. They feel superior to the other group because they are driven by compassion to share the wealth (especially the wealth of the rich fat cats) with less-fortunate souls. They regard human laziness and stupidity as an unfortunate result of a bad dice roll. By contrast, if one is lucky enough to be born good looking , healthy and smart enough to take advantage of opportunity, you must always keep in mind that you were not entitled to it; you were given a break and you must pay it forward.


The second group - the ones we call Conservatives - are a grumpy bunch of stick-in-the-muds. They spend their workdays trying to get ahead. Then they stay awake at night afraid of slippery slopes and camels' noses in tents. Cons clearly see the negative aspect of anything that smacks of change. They love traditions and old authoritative books and parchments. They think everything worth knowing was already known by the Founding Fathers; new fads and ideas are regarded with suspicion and skepticism. They don't see the point in having fun, because people hate us and we need to stay on guard. They think they are superior to the other group because they are driven by their heads instead of their hearts. They see most taxation as stealing money from hard working people and giving it to ignorant slackers. They feel they are entitled to what they have, and hard cheese if you were born into the servant class, but that's the way it goes.


Normally, I think of myself as a fence-sitter between the two groups, usually falling on the side of the progressives due to a tendency to feel empathy and to acknowledge the relativity of moral truths. Conservatives are driven by their heads, thus they see human existence as a zero-sum equation where someone has to lose for you to win. For them everything is black or white, right or wrong. They regard fence-sitting-seers-of-grey with contempt.

Throughout the 8 years of the Bush-Cheney administration* we were treated to the monotone nattering drumbeat from ultra progressive partisans, ranting negatively about everything that "W" said or did. It was tiring but often laughable for the extremes that the Libs would go to find fault with the President.

Now the cons, apparently feeling that turnabout is fair play, are filling the blogosphere and airwaves with silly criticisms of everything Barack Obama has done since his inauguration. Examples abound:
He is blamed for the ineffectiveness of the economic stimulus package (which was started during Bush's term), he is blamed for not bringing the troops home, for supporting a surge in Afghanistan, and the record unemployment is clearly his fault - all accomplished in just 9 months in office!
Lately, the criticisms are even nastier. You would never know that the Christmas day Northwest underwear bomber failed to complete his mission if you listen to some Conservative commentators. They are falling all over themselves accusing Obama of crimes and misdemeanors, sins of omission, commission and admission.
It's laughable. They used to say of Bush "He kept us safe" because there were no successful repeats of the 911 terrorist attacks in the USA. But Obama has been criticised as weak because of recent reports of foiled plots. (Hello, Cheney himself testified that there were several foiled plots after 911.)

Cheney, Limbaugh, and others talk about the Christmas day incident as if the bomb had exploded. They say Obama doesn't care about the safety of Americans - Which is about as block headed as it gets.

Most Americans are not as worried about crazed terrorists as they are about getting ripped off by some identity thief or taxed to death by out-of-touch elite legislators.

The main thing for which Obama should be criticized is this abomination of legislation called health care reform. As a candidate, Obama promised transparency, but has been silent while his pals in congress concocted this monstrosity of a reform bill behind closed doors. Candidate Obama pledged not to sign any legislation with earmarks, ("...we can no longer accept an earmarks process in which many of the projects being funded fail to address the real needs of our country.") Yet, nothing has changed. Deals were made in exchange for votes. Obama has has failed in his promise to us on these most important issues.

Already, two prominent Dems in the senate, seeing the tide of public opinion swelling against them, have already said that they will not run (and probably lose) in the next term.

Times they are a-changin'






------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*I admit that I voted for George W. Bush both times. I'm still convinced that he was better than the opposition: 2000 Al Gore then 2004 Kerry for chrissakes. I've never liked Cheney; he always impressed me as the type of guy who would shoot you in the face after a couple of schnapps.