Here's your last chance; if you read this, you'll be exposing yourself to some of my political views. I'll also sound really old. Here goes:
Spending the last few days in Atlanta, I had a closer view than most when the courthouse shootings exploded into the news cycle. Having married into a family that works in the federal courthouse, this event caused a little panic in the first few minutes. Thinking about this idiot for the last few days, I'm struck by the recent violence against judges in this country.
It is easy to find the source: there is an anti-intellectual streak currently running through the political discourse in this country. Anyone with a college education seems suspect of being an "ivy-tower liberal" who doesn't care about or share the viewpoint of the common man. Add in a masters degree of any sort and the right wing is sharpening its poisoned pen, ready to tear you apart. Anyone with a doctorate is automatically discounted as out of touch with reality.
When did this start? When did it become so liberal to be educated? Perhaps when people on the right noticed those with higher education seemed to lean further to the left it was decided to elevate the stupid in this country. Suddenly, it isn't desirable to have the smartest person possible in the White House. It was important to give the job to a guy that "stayed the course" and was "consistent" even if that meant consistently wrong. People didn't want to vote for someone who was smarter than they were, they wanted someone who was dumb like they were.
Let me tell you: If I'm sick, I want a someone who's got a doctorate working on me, not "Larry the cable guy." Why are the people of this country holding the White House to a lower standard than themselves?
You can see the pattern from the mid-1990s. Anti-Abortion demogogary of "baby killers" ran at its height. "Wanted" posters could be downloaded off the fledgling internet listing the home address and children's names of OB-GYNs. The result? Idiots on the fringe of the movement started killing doctors. Clinic bombings filtered into the news. It became normal for OB-GYNs to have bodyguards and flack jackets. Does any of this sound familiar? Iraq today writ small perhaps?
It's called terrorism folks, and if Saudi Arabia is wrong for supporting the "terrorist infrastructure" than domestic political movements are as well.
Today, we're seeing judges become targets. Why? Because those "liberal activist judges are planning to take away your guns, make church illegal and brainwash your kids." So words and bile are published. They knock around the blogosphere and talk shows. And the real nuts decide that there is a crusade (jihad) to be taken up with homemade bombs, pistols, late-night phone calls and sniper rifles. And those who have lit the fuse claim no responsibility and wash their bloody fingers and mouths clean. Disgusting.
Ever notice there aren't assassinations carried out on the right side of the spectrum? Don't try the argument that the left is just as bad.
Judges represent the highest ideal of service to this country. Their mission is to protect the common man's rights against the state or against the more powerful. They are considered the greatest minds in the law, usually have decades of experience before the bar and most are lifetime appointments. The writings of these men and women are timeless, because they will be quoted in two hundred years. Our Supreme Court has the ability to turn back the stated will of the people in the form of laws passed by Congress. Yet those who sit on the benches of this country are currently under attack by those who cannot hold an intellectual candle to them.
Are we waiting until the colleges are being audited by the state (or church) or even shut down before people wake up? Once we replace doctors with "healers?"
Education is good, folks. If more education makes you lean farther left than you are now, shouldn't that tell you something? Do I need to draw a map here?
9 comments:
Judges do represent the highest ideals in this country. You are wrong in you asumption that the right wing wackos are to blame for these attacks against those who work in our court houses.Look at the facts sir,both were individuals who did not get what they wanted so they reacted in an insane manner,on their own behalf without regard to the lives of the innocent.
If your going to consider placing blame on the right wing rants of a few - then you have to consider the liberal actions being taken up by the few in courts to subvert democracy by avoiding public debate by taking up their causes within the judicial branch across this country.
Look at the pattern, ma'am. A white supremacist loses a case presided over by a federal judge, who also solicits assassination against that judge, who then suffers a horrible attack from another unhappy plaintiff who subsequently kills himself.
Why did we first look at the supremacist? It wasn't a socialist UN lover looking for someone to take her out, and it isn't the first time a judge has been directly threatened in this country.
As for considering the "liberal actions" to "subvert democracy," I find two points interesting:
1) It wasn't liberals in the mid-1930s that went to court to stop the New Deal, subverting democracy by taking their causes to the judicial branch.
2) Isn't it the purpose of the courts of this country to redress grievances of the citizens who feel their rights have been trampled upon by the government? Aren't the courts insulated from public debate for just that reason?
It's funny: FDR contemplated a "reform" on the Supreme Court when some programs were struck down. The conservative movement today strives to "reform" the court system that protects the rights of a new minority.
There won't be a bit of surprise in me if there is another murder of a judge in the next few years that just happened to rule against a conservative principle, folowed by some website offering a justification.
Hmmm, this particular post seems to be getting a bit heavy. There are a couple of things that I make a point of never debating online-- religion and politics as there are too many folks out there who won't agree with you.
I, of course, agree with you. I can't help it, but then I'm a part of the excessively-educated, liberal academics.
I do have to point out that I feel certain that Byron Nichols who was the individual alledgedly responsible for Thursday's horrific events, was not following any particular political agenda. Based on all accounts, he was suffering from other psychiatric problems that led to a massive personality and behavior change as well as extremely aggressive and dangerous behavior.
I think that it is important to note that both liberals and conservatives engage in questionable judicial and legislative action. However, I think that it would be inaccurate to draw any parallels between these actions and violent extremist behavior of individuals, such as Eric R. Rudolph (the man who was responsible for the bombings at the '96 Olympics, a clinic that performed abortions and a gay club.)
Uhh, Jay, strictly speaking, I think maybe you should keep this blog to rowing. I know it's your decision, but you're going to risk alienating some team members and parents. Politics is not going to unite this team.
Jay, this is my opinon, but could you please not talk about politics on the blog. I know the blog is yours, But I think most of us see it as another tool for communitcation on the team.
We as rowers have a rule of conduct with each other that was established during the election: If you want to argue politics, do it outside of crew. Politics have nothing to do with winning a boat race.
We all can have whatever polical views we want, but we really don't care what they are (unless some one is a bigot, anti-semite, etc.). You are an amazing coach, and I personally don't give a damn what your polical views are.
I hole-heartedly agree. I feel that this is something that needs to be left at the door. I've always seen this as a rowing blog, and I don't expect to read about politics on it. Although I agree with basically all of your views, I know not everyone will and that is something you have to put into consideration. We don't need our own civil war.
Coach - I think that the political angle to rowing should be explored in detail. Here's why. When I think about the history of rowing, it harkens me back to the days of oars manned by the slaves of old - driven to the limits of endurance by a cat-o-nine tails. I then think about the injustice to these early rowers which leads me to the thought that rowers are, in general, discriminated against at every turn. In fact, rowers commonly turn on each other every day. As a rowing coach, you should recognize that there is internal political strife IN THE BOAT ITSELF! Why, the very act of stepping into the boat divides the team into a LEFT and a RIGHT! Thus, politics is at the foundation of a rowing team. Hence, the only logical conclusion is that the political discussion should stay. There, you made me say it.
Anon:
What makes you think that the cat-o-nine-tails is no longer in use? You're giving me some great ideas here.
For the port and starboard, those of us who could do both always felt caught in the middle.
I agree - seems that, at least for rowers, you're either a lefty or a righty - no tweeners 'cept the coach. Perhaps coachs should be libertarians.
Post a Comment