“A prayer group is getting special access to the Statehouse for the opening day of the 2012 session.
People attending Capitol Commission Indiana’s prayer day at the Statehouse can show a copy of an email message to skirt an expected large crowd of union members protesting the so-called “right to work” legislation on opening day Wednesday. News of the waivers emerged after state safety officials set a 3,000-person limit on the number of people in the Statehouse at one time.
Capitol Commission State Director Matt Barnes said Monday that his group isn’t getting special treatment, noting that anyone attending a scheduled Statehouse event can use a special entrance.”
So–let me see if I understand this. The reason the limit was imposed was concern for the safety of citizens who were coming to the Statehouse (formerly known as the “people’s house”). But as we learned a couple of days ago, the safety of lobbyists with special passes isn’t a concern. Okay–I can understand why the administration might not care about the well-being of lobbyists (although, if the lobbyists are injured, who will pay the tab at St. Elmos??) But religious folks who are coming to pray? Their safety isn’t important?
I’ve frequently used this blog to advocate for greater government transparency, but someone should tell Bosma and Daniels–I didn’t mean “transparently dishonest.”
Our daughter called me the other day, horrified. She’d somehow gotten on the mailing list of one of the crazy organizations that seem to thrive in our country–a group called “Freedom Watch,” headed by one “Larry Klayman, Attorney.” The letter was, as she said, vile; among other things in its overheated diatribe, it accused President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton–“the mullah-in-chief” and the “corrupt communist”–of treason.
Most sane citizens, whether they agree with this administration’s policies or not, find such paranoid rantings incomprehensible. But there have always been fringe groups of mentally unhinged folks who project their own frustrations onto the Presidency. FDR was accused of having foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor and allowing it to happen as part of a plot to lead America into war. The notorious hater Father Coughlin accused him of being in league with “the Jews and communists.”
As one historian has noted, this paranoia came from both ends of the political spectrum: “The Communist leader Earl Browder said that FDR was “carrying out more thoroughly and brutally than even Hoover the capitalist attack against the masses,” and the domestic fascist William Dudley Pelley called the President the “lowest form of human worm – according to Gentile standards.” One critic accused him of “blathering platitudes like a parson on vacation.” and another wrote to him savagely, “If you were a good honest man, Jesus Christ would not have crippled you.” It was in a formal address to the Chicago Bar Association, not in a harangue to an extremist rally, that a United States Senator from Minnesota did not hesitate to liken Roosevelt to the beast of the Apocalypse,” “who set his slimy mark on everything.””
Harry Truman was accused of employing a top Nazi from the Hitler regime as a covert advisor–not to mention his purported role in directing the cover-up of the crash of a UFO in Roswell, N.M. The John Birch Society insisted it had proof that Dwight Eisenhower was a member of the communist party. George H.W. Bush was accused of being a member of a “Trilateral Commission” that was widely believed to be intent upon one-world government and an assault on American sovereignty.
In the rant from Freedom Watch, such paranoia is on flamboyant parade–complete with accusations of “death panels,” “planting Marxists throughout government” and “canceling the National Day of Prayer in favor of Ramadan” among others. Klayman says that Obama “manipulated a deep economic depression” in order to fool Americans into voting for him. And he assures readers that he is working with Tea Party members of Congress–Michelle Bachmann, Allen West and Steve King are named–to submit articles of Impeachment against the President he calls a “treasonous tyrant.”
A quick Google check for “Larry Klayman” brought up a legal decision disciplining him for violation of the canons of ethics, and a report that the status of his law license in Pennsylvania was “on suspension,” as well as information about an earlier organization called “Judicial Watch” and assorted charges and countercharges between him and other fringe characters.
What do we make of this strand of unhinged hysteria in our body politic?
On the one hand, as even a superficial stroll down history lane attests, America has always had a generous portion of “the crazy.” On the other hand, it only takes a few of these demented souls to disrupt public meetings, intimidate lawmakers, mislead well-meaning but uniformed folks, or even trigger assassination attempts.
In a free country, even the most delusional citizens have the right to spew their venom. But it might be a good idea to put more resources into mental health services.
I’m not sure what it is in the human psyche that impels us to see the New Year as a new start–and to make resolutions to behave in certain ways, to turn over new leaves, to focus–yet again!–on self-improvement. But whatever the reason, most of us do take this opportunity to do some navel-gazing, followed by some promises to ourselves.
In that time-honored tradition, here are my “good intentions” for the New Year.
1) I resolve to be more environmentally conscious. Maybe one person can’t make much of a dent in the waste that’s choking our landfills, or the energy use that contributes to global warming, but an ethical approach to the planet we share has to start with each of us.
2) I resolve to be a good capitalist–by which I mean navigating the wealth of choices that a market economy produces in order to patronize establishments that deserve my business. In a free country, Chik-fil-a has the right to support anti-gay causes, and I have the right to eat elsewhere. I can choose not to deposit my money in the banks that played fast and loose with our economic system and to take my (admittedly insignificant) funds to a local bank instead. In our wired world, it is relatively simple to assess the ethics of the large corporations competing for our dollars, and to spend our dollars in ways that reward good behavior. Capitalism lets me put my money where my mouth is.
3) I resolve to continue working through the political system to support good candidates for office–defined as people who understand our constitutional system and are prepared to work within it, who support evidence-based policymaking, and who are both intelligent and thoughtful. Granted, such candidates have become rare, so in a pinch, I’ll support the people who are pandering to the people who are least scary. Bottom line–just because our politics have become toxic and our politicians venal and/or ignorant will not be an excuse to turn my back on the process.
Will any of this make the world a better place? Probably not. But I’ll feel better.
Yesterday, there was an attempted robbery at a northwest side Kroger Store; the perpetrator stuck “something” (evidently not a weapon, although reports weren’t clear on the point) in the back of a clerk and made her walk to the office where the money was kept. At that point, another Kroger employee pulled out a gun and killed the would-be robber.
Wuss that I am, I think I’d just have let him have the money.
The media was all over the story. My husband looked at me during one of the TV reports and said “Here we go again. It won’t be two days until the gun lovers start insisting that everyone should be armed.”
He was wrong; it only took a day. One Mike Speedy, a member of the General Assembly, was quoted in this morning’s Star decrying Kroger’s policy against gun-toting employees, saying “This could have turned out a different way if that employee was not carrying. Kroger could have two dead employees. What value is their policy then?”
How do we elect these people?
I can see it now: Shoot-out in canned goods! Gunfire in the cereal aisle (those granola-eating liberals had it coming…they weren’t even packing heat!) So what if Kroger has to pay zillions of dollars to innocent shoppers who might inadvertently step into the line of fire? So what if a trigger-happy employee misconstrues a “situation” and starts shooting? So what if…well, let’s just say there are innumerable scenarios that would not end well.
I don’t know about Mr. (or Mrs.) Speedy, but knowing that the guy restocking the dairy case is carrying would certainly get me to shop–elsewhere.
Eugene Robinson is one of the more thoughtful members of America’s “pundocracy.” This morning’s column is an example; in descriptive paragraphs that suggest our politicians are fiddling while America burns, he says
“The central issue is the prospect of decline. For much of the 20th century, the United States boasted the biggest, most vibrant economy in the world and its citizens enjoyed the best quality of life. The former is still obviously true; the latter, arguably still the case. But there is a sense that we’re fading — that tomorrow might not be as bright as today.
Our systems seem to have become sclerotic. The United States still has the finest colleges and universities in the world, but now ranks no higher than fifth among 36 industrialized countries in the percentage of working-age adults who have at least an associate degree, according to a 2011 report by the College Board. We have the most expensive medical care in the world yet rank 50th in life expectancy, behind such nations as Jordan and Greece, according to the CIA Factbook. Our society now features less economic mobility than is found in Canada and much of Europe, according to the Economic Mobility Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts.
Our manufacturing sector is just a shadow of what it once was, and that’s not China’s fault. Because of automation and the globalization of the labor market, rich countries can only excel at high-endmanufacturing that requires more brains than brawn. Our future lies in knowledge and information. So let’s go there.”
Well and good–it’s difficult to disagree with him. Certainly, this college professor isn’t going to dispute the importance of education. So why can’t we seem to “go there,” as Robinson urges?
I certainly don’t have a dispositive diagnosis for what ails us right now, but I think I can identify one piece of the problem. We have developed a culture that sneers at intellect, that dismisses expertise and knowledge as “elitist,” and that elevates impulse and “gut” over rationality. The popular culture elevates belief over knowledge (the Founders were all “bible-believing” Christians; there’s no such thing as global warming, etc. etc.), and minimizes the Enlightenment virtues–empirical investigation, respect for evidence, belief in human dignity–that animated our origins.
I don’t know how we got here (although I have a couple of theories), and I don’t know how to turn things around, but I know where such a culture will take us if we cannot reverse course. Anyone who has ever raised children understands that they aspire to the goals and live by the values of their environments, primarily but not exclusively the values held by their families. “Do as I say and not as I do” rarely works. Children know what sorts of achievement are genuinely valued, what sorts of behavior will really be admired.
Right now, the message our culture is sending is not conducive to intellectual rigor–or to intellectual honesty, for that matter.
