Red-White-and-Blue Meanies

". . . the land of the free
"and the home of the mean."

In his 1920 essay entitled "The Sahara of the Bozart," H. L. Mencken wrote the following about the state of politics in Virginia in the decades since the Civil War:

Politics in Virginia are cheap, ignorant, parochial, idiotic; there is scarcely a man in office above the rank of a professional job-seeker; the political doctrine that prevails is made up of the bumpkinry of the Middle West--Bryanism, Prohibition, vice crusading, all that sort of filthy claptrap; the administration of the law is turned over to professors of Puritanism and espionage; a Washington or Jefferson, dumped there by some act of God, would be denounced as a scoundrel and jailed overnight.

Little has changed since 1920--in Virginia, in the South, in the United States of America. Politics is mean business. I know that's not news. But while I didn't have to listen to the political mudslinging that tainted the Adams/Jefferson election in 1800, or many that came after, I certainly catch a lot of the crap currently passing under the guise of "campaigning." Today's races for office tap into the meanness that seems to be becoming a bigger and bigger part of our national culture. For example, most of the humorous birthday cards I see these days are mean--especially if the card's "target" is getting older. Television shows are mean, their humor often based on making fun of somebody, their drama based on being excluded or "voted off." Politicians and their political support systems will do and say anything, seemingly, in order to get hold of an office and keep it.

Personally, I think this vile atmosphere has been fostered, if not actively promoted, by our political leaders and commentators. If the "best" of us can only respond to those who challenge them or oppose them with character attacks, they set a bad example. The step from meanness to lawlessness is apparently a short and easy one to take. Witness all the scandals that "rock" Washington and then pass out of memory as soon as the next ugly behavior is brought to light. Witness a talk show host calling an individual with a terrible disease a "faker." Witness all candidates not hoping to serve but going for power. Witness . . .

the Tennessee senatorial race between Bob Corker and Harold Ford, Jr. I know the political affiliation of each, but their beliefs, their takes on real issues, were lost deep in mud long ago. Their parties and ideologies have taken a back seat to their character attacks and counterattacks. I can't remember the last time that either of them "approved" a "message" that focused on his own campaign and his own understanding of the country and the world. For all the good these ads do those of us who are trying to make decisions not dictated by party bias, Corker and Ford might as well step into the ring and beat each other bloody. Like pro wrestling matches, their campaigns compete on the basis of the show and who's really "selling" his moves, who's really "selling" suffering due to the meanness of the other.

What happens to our national stability and security when politics devolves into entertainment? And these ads must be entertaining somebody. I shudder to imagine the person who actually decides her vote based on who best smears the mud on his opponent.

And their parties are getting into this race as well. The Republicans ran an anti-Ford ad that I believe is the worst I've ever seen. This piece of "campaigning" is so ugly and manipulative even Corker has asked that it be pulled from circulation. Given the character of the race, however, who's to say that Corker didn't secretly "approve" the ad in order to look like the good guy when he demanded that it be pulled? (I put nothing past any politician these days.) But if that were the case, it would certainly suggest that the Republican party as a whole doesn't mind being associated with such meanness. (The Democrats have put out ads about Corker as well, but theirs haven't stooped quite so low.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWkrwENN5CQ

What is wrong with our culture--besides meanness and the resulting deterioration of morals--that would suggest to anybody or any party that such an ad was a good idea?

Time was when I believed that nothing could threaten the existence of the United States, that the country could always rise above political squabbles for office. Given the current state of affairs in our politics and culture, I'm no longer so sure of that belief.

One more idea from Mencken's essay: "Free inquiry is blocked by the idiotic certainties of ignorant men."

243.4