Posted by Racer on March 6, 2004, at 15:41:30
In reply to Re: please rephrase that » Racer, posted by Dr. Bob on March 6, 2004, at 2:45:14
OK, deep breath, and let's give this a try. First of all, I do apologize for my wording about GWB: I do think he is dishonest, I do think he is greedy to the point of rapaciousness, I do think he is a cruel person, and I do think he insults the American People by his words and deeds. I won't apologize for that, but I will say that it frightens me a great deal, which may be why I react so strongly about politics right now. It seems as if both sides are underestimating both the man and his political machine. And I do think that taking the TV image out of it and looking critically at what he's done is the only thing that can save us from worse damage than has already been caused.
I am sorry that my tone, in writing, seemed sarcastic or like a put down to anyone when I suggested a Critical Reasoning class. Personally, I have found that my old CR text has been very helpful to me when I watch the news, and that was genuinely meant as a constructive suggestion. When I look around at the world these days, I hardly recognize anything. Children in schools are taught to take tests, rather than to learn. There's no innovation in industry or government, because no one is exploring alternatives -- it's the same things, done the same ways, without the individuality to innovate, and that frightens me, too. Every time I see another example of this, I realize again how valuable CR is, whether it's in recognizing the IKEA ad on TV as advocating immorality, or recognizing deceptiveness in a politician's speech. (And yes, I do recognize deceptiveness in both parties.)
Shortly before writing that ill-conceived response above, I heard on the news a little story -- almost buried beneath the Martha Stewart/Kobe Bryant/Scott Peterson/Jayson Williams infotainment -- about a staffer on the Bush campaign who had been found to have hacked into the computers of Democratic Party figures and copied memos to his own computer for use in the campaign. It was probably on CNN, and it was only a small blurb to fill in between celebrity shockers, but it sent such a jolt of fear through me, cold, hard fear. That should have been a lead story, it should have been covered in depth, it should not have been lost in the flood of "gee, how much jail time will Martha Stewart get?" (Answer: she's going to get prison time, and it's a personal tragedy for anyone to give up his or her freedom for any length of time. She has been convicted, she has no excuse, she brought it on herself, now can't we let it be her tragedy and not ours?) That little story, that a campaign staffer was spying on the opposition, happened about 30 years ago, too, didn't it? That frightens me, that we're so easily seduced by plausibility and the offer of something for nothing. That frightens me to the depths of my being.
To make this more personal, I'll tell you that I'm very old fashioned about a lot of things. I believe that anyone who enjoys priviledges has a responsibility to accept in return. Since, despite depression and all that comes with it, I do enjoy a great many priviledges, I feel responsible for holding up my end of the bargain. Here in America, we enjoy many priviledges that most of us -- including me -- take for granted. All that is asked in return is that we take part in the electoral process and show up for jury duty. It's icing if you can join a national service unit of some sort, but not everyone can. It's great if you do more than that, but not everyone can. Some people really and truly can't even afford to miss work for jury duty, but it's still a small price to pay for our court system. Not too long ago, when there were voter registrars in the parking lots around here, I overheard a man say he'd never registrer to vote, because he didn't want to be called for jury duty. Now, I can tell when my juror summons has been sent from the Registrar of Voters or the Department Of Motor Vehicles driver's license database, and it's most often the DMV's list. There's a guy who lives near me who refuses to assume his responsibility to his community, because he doesn't want to have to be bored and inconvenienced by jury duty. That frightens me, too. It's a small thing to ask, in the bigger picture, and I'm frightened to see how many people seem to want to shirk their responsibilities to their communities in ways like this. That's certainly part of my touchiness about these subjects.
As for the general tone of my response to Elle, I have to say that it was an emotional reaction. When I read her post to me, I felt that it was an ambush attempt, psychologically, and that, no matter what I wrote, the response would be the same, and that that response would be an attack on me. Of course, because of my {ahem} pre-emptive strike, we'll never know how sincere Elle's questions were, for which I apologize most sincerely. I don't apologize, mind you, for being suspicious. I only apologize for using the bad judgement of responding to a post that I believed could bring only ill will. For that, I am genuinely sorry, and I will attempt, in future, to remember to think before hitting send.
As for the intent of my original post, it was intended to be supportive of the poster who started this thread. "Hey, you! We share some viewpoints! We're not alone! We can all hang together, or we shall certainly hang separately." I believe my first post on the subject was actually about why I no longer support Ralph Nader personally.
Anyway, I'll try to learn from this, but please remember: it's really hard for an old dog to learn new tricks! I'll try hard to learn and go forth to sin no more. I hope that helps.
poster:Racer
thread:320233
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20040305/msgs/321180.html