Political Football

I want to talk about some of this data posted below and what it means to the way we used to think about policy – or - the way Americans live their lives and think about the future.

The data below was collected over the last twenty years (basically since the end of the Reagan Administration).

Link HERE.

I will reference these data points over the next several posts. I hope it will enforce why I have been saying that this presidential election is the most important in my lifetime.

Although a main theme moving forward in these threads will involve the paradigm shift of sentiment of both parties, the primary difference between Republicans and Democrats remain:

1)  large versus small government – and

2)  personal independence versus what Rudy has been starting to pejoratively call “nanny state” government.

My generation’s frame of reference (I’m a mid-baby boomer born in 1953) was molded by our parents who were identified as “the greatest generation” of Americans to date. I think that ID stuck because of the huge national sacrifice and numbers of men and women who were engaged 24×7 for major parts of 5 years – fighting overseas for the freedom of the world from the tyranny of despots like Hitler, Mussolini and the Japanese Empire.

I have a sister who seriously considered going into the military in the 1970s because she was that patriotic. She recounts now how loudly our father objected, “I fought that war so you wouldn’t have to”. Our father was one of those who was not in the military before the war but served when called (1941 to 1945) and saw the horrors of war in the Pacific Theater as a corpsman.

The enormity of our parent’s sacrifice framed our lives as we moved on to bigger and better lives – greater technology and a smaller world. But America loomed large in that smaller world. In the 1950’s we elected as President one of the heroes of that war, General Eisenhower. In 1961, in his Presidential farewell address, he warned of the “Military Industrial Complex”, but an equally visionary statement is not remembered:

“In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.”

Read the entire address by taking the link above; it’s quite good.

As a man who spent his life in the military; General Eisenhower didn’t know what party his personal philosophy stood for – both parties fought for him to represent them in the presidential elections of 1951. He clearly chose correctly, the party of small government. But with WWII and its industrial aftermath, his warning of the struggle to balance small government with a strong national defense in a shrinking world was presient.

Neither party is perfect and I’m not saying that – please understand that. Neither party has a lock on virtue or vice - never has and never will – and labels don’t make or break politicians – their actions speak for them.

In 1964, LBJ started our “war on poverty”. If you want to talk about a well meaning “war” that has cost trillions of dollars and is in a “quagmire” – look at the war on poverty. Good intentions, not sure it would get a passing grade.

Where LBJ’s approach focused on cash assistance along with other benefits such as food stamps; since the 1996 welfare reform a major focus of government programs today is to get poor people into private-sector jobs.

If you really want to understand big government and why it’s bad for its citizens, you need to carefully read and consider a blog post from Scrappleface. Remember, it’s a news satire site (doesn’t POST the news – it makes fun of it by spinning it in another direction). But, the post I’m directing you to is not funny. It is a heartfelt narrative on the War on Poverty relative to the Katrina crisis. I’ve posted references to that site and that post 3,4 times in the last year – go here now to read the post I’m talking about. (I’ll wait for you to come back)

So you should have read in the Scrappleface post, more than a few sentences that resonate with you (I hope) – a few of those I would like to repeat here:

… Over the decades, we have ceded power, authority and responsibility to the federal government far beyond anything envisioned or desired by our founders. …

… the threat of this system is that it strips a man of what makes him a man, and turns him away from his inner resources, or the inclination to partner with neighbors to solve problems. It humiliates him, blinds him and ultimately cripples him.

Cripples him… alters his soul… it’s not right.

So now over the years, the Republican message got scrambled, polluted, and made ugly by the Democrats – blasting that Republicans don’t care about “the little man” and the Democrats are the “protectors of the poor”. To that I say… what do you think?

Part 5 – Republicans & Democrats – Social Issues

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed