stating the obvious

Every so often I spend the time to pull together a personal 'world view'. Some of these I make public, others I don't. It's about time to lay it on the table again. Like most folks I am comfortable with the gestalt that is being alive and cognizant, but at times the background noise rises to such a level that a step back in order to focus is in required.

The model I use for this construct boils down to reversing the 'can't see the forest for the trees' observation. I want to see the trees, and luckily, in most cases this amounts to little more than stating the obvious aloud. There is a certain intellectual dishonesty in jumping from the specific, to the general, and then back again, but I hope what I'm doing is simply shifting focus.

The November election is currently a toss-up. If the Democrats take the House government will likely grind to a halt while the power games are played to the fullest - investigations galore and pompous posturing will be the order of the day. If they also take the Senate we will see an attempt to impeach Bush. Important issues, like dealing with immigration and Islamic Imperialism will fall even further into the cracks while the politicians fiddle. It would be easier if I could point a finger at one group of politicians, but it can't be done with generally used labels.

Our 'Cold Civil War' goes on. Spiro T. Agnew covered this ground when it was newly turned, with the difference being that we can now see the probable harvest some thirty years later.

From Wikipedia:

Agnew was known for his tough criticisms of political opponents, especially journalists and anti-Vietnam War activists. He was known for attacking his opponents with unusual, often alliterative epithets, some of which were coined by White House speechwriters William Safire and Patrick Buchanan, including:

• "nattering nabobs of negativism," (written by Safire)
• "pusillanimous pussyfoots",
• "hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history",
• "the liberal intellectuals...masochistic compulsion to destroy their country's strength",
• "effete corps of impudent snobs", and
• "radiclib," a portmanteau of "radical liberal".

It's amazing how those words still fit, yet they can't encompass the additional threats.

We are confronted by thousands of Chamberlains.

Peace in Our Time.

The peoples of the British Empire were at one with those of Germany, of France and of Italy, and their anxiety, their intense desire for peace, pervaded the whole atmosphere of the conference, and I believe that that, and not threats, made possible the concessions that were made. [1938]

The liberal/left and Agnew's radiclibs seem willing to do anything to preserve peace, except provide for the tools needed. Sadly, those who would be first targets of the enemy are those with a suicidal bent.

Our country can't even agree on a common language to say nothing of agreeing on what America is or stands for. Our own government seems to confuse capitalism with democracy.

Taken in toto (the forest again) there's little wonder that the overall optimism that I've always attributed to being American seems missing. But there are a few trees that are green and growing.