Join The Debate!

Let's not lose our sense of humor

Maverick:

You've touched on a good point about contemporary liberalism -- pervasive feelings of guilt -- but you may have exaggerated just a teeny-tiny bit. National Democrats, beginning with Franklin Roosevelt, have mainly concerned themselves with "the forgotten man," the poor and oppressed and so on. Some of their passionate spokespersons have developed a reflexive animus towards success in general. America is a successful country, by and large. Once you've built a career out of correcting every little drawback, and engaging in the kind of rhetoric that garners attention, it comes out like lack of patriotism, indifference to continued success and so on. But I doubt that Democrats really want to "destroy America from within."

Even the biggest Democratic support groups, public employee union pension funds, Hollywood snoots and glib Manhattanites, have their money tied up in capitalist enterprises. Some of their posturing comes from force of habit, not from a real desire to see American fail.

The name-calling and hyperbole that we see in the blogosphere tends to go a tad over the top at times. I feel that reflects the frustration of a lot of writers (myself included) who wish they were really esteemed newspaper columnists but never quite made the grade. So if we shout a little louder maybe someone will finally notice.

Conservative voices get a bit strident at times, too; it's safe to admit. Liberals may err on the side of guilt-mongering, but conservatives tend to err on the side on sanctimony, too. Fortunately the people who write professional newspaper columns have editors who red pencil most of the nasty stuff. The politicians who represent us in Congress and Legislatures have rules of debate that enjoin them from calling each other "baby killers" and "fascists." We should be thankful for that. Public debate gets a bit tedious and equivocating at times, but at least those folks can still respect each other in the morning. When you stop to think about it, that's essential if they're expected to show up at work day after day and lead the country somewhere worth going.

I feel that a core issue that might unite some of the cooler heads among us is the need to retain a sense of humor, no matter what. I recently read "Team of Rivals," the book about Lincoln's cabinet. The salient feature of Honest Abe's character that made his leadership so effective, is that he could almost always defuse a tense meeting by beginning with an amusing anecdote. He had an endless repertoire of jokes and stories; even people who didn't like him admired that ability. Lincoln had strong opinions about issues and strong feelings about people, too, but he never let it stand in the way of his greater feelings of love for ordinary people and dedication to the continued progress of our great country. He absolutely refused to hold grudges -- not because he was wishy-washy, but because it would get in the way of reaching his goals. I believe that Lincoln's second inaugural address came from the innermost depths of his soul and that it was essential in reigniting the success of the American experiment.

Franklin Roosevelt was another great leader who defeated a fearsome, ruthless host of enemies, while holding together a country deeply fragmented by economic hardship. Nobody ever suggests he didn't make mistakes. However, one of FDR's great strengths was, like Lincoln's, a cultivated ability to remain upbeat, to crack jokes, to make people feel relaxed in his presence and encourage them to believe that everything they had to say was worthy of the president's ear.

I believe that the threat of militant Islam is real, and that the West has a job and a half on its hands figuring out what to do about it. Not least among the dilemmas is how to keep our people together for the long haul ahead. Somehow, I don't feel that screaming at each other is the way to get there.

One of the weaknesses of fanatical Islam seems to be its inability to laugh at itself. They not only massacre civilians, they assassinate comedians. Unless I've got it all wrong, it's difficult for me to visualize those sourpuss, bearded & robed old men, glowering and wagging their index fingers at the cameras, having any humility or self-deprecating humor even in their private moments. Do those grave Imams seem like good listeners to you? How anyone can stand to listen to their antiquarian gibberish is beyond me.

We should think about that before exchanging remorseless invective amongst ourselves.