Division amongst the divided

The ongoing battle between Conservatives and Liberals is as American as apple pie, but it seems as though the front lines are blurring. With the recent debt deal that’s been reached, Tea Party Activists and hard-line Liberals are complaining loudly, stating that compromise is tantamount to giving up. Giving up what, I’m not entirely sure, but that’s what they’ve been squawking about over the past 24 hours or so.

Tea Partiers and Liberals are showing us that extremism by any other name would smell as bad (just as Anders Breivik showed the world with his actions in Norway.) Compromise is not only a necessary tool in attempting to represent as many people as possible, but it’s also a requirement of being a grown-up (something which I cannot believe I actually felt the need to write.) Forget about the politicians; I don’t think I’ve ever been as ashamed of the voters as I have been during this debt ceiling debate. The lies and disinformation spread by both sides has been voluminous, despicable, and unending.

What’s funny is, despite all the fighting between Tea Partiers and Liberals, they’re both right! That’s why compromise is so important; both sides have some great ideas that will work wonders for our society, but only following one side’s method or the other is going to get us nowhere. Extremism is never a healthy option, but it seems to be slowly infecting the inner, more domicile portions of right and left-wing  constituents.

Back when this whole mess started to get a lot of media attention, Boehner and Obama had the whole thing buttoned up with a $4 trillion deal. Neither of them were altogether happy about it, but hey: it’s not compromise if everyone gets what they want. So, what happened? Why are we still focusing on this same debate weeks later? The voters. Once again, we the people have stepped up to the plate thinking we’re going to hit a home run, and instead have just knocked ourselves in the head (and then turned around and beat the hell out of the catcher for good measure.)

For me, the most amusing part of this whole debate has been the various media personalities that have railed against those taking the middle ground, at the center of which Paul Krugman stands with his op-ed piece in the NY Times. The only way  you can downplay people advocating a middle ground is if you yourself are a part of the fringe, i.e. the reason we’re still arguing about this. Facts are solid things, and the fact is that no one is blameless in this mess. Republicans and Democrats have continued to put this country deeper into debt for years by consistently tearing down what the other builds in an attempt to force the pendulum back the other way.

The purpose of the centrist approach comes down to this: two heads are better than one. If we can’t even agree on how to save our country, how can we possibly hope to have a country worth saving?

The whole truth and nothing but the truth

Any time a major political debate spills over onto the public (the most recent example being the debt ceiling talks), the ambiguity of the truth comes to the forefront. It seems like, regardless of where someone stands politically, they will always find information that supports their point and exposes the lies being presented by the “other side”. This phenomenon, while not limited to politics, seems to thrive under discussions of policy.

The complete disregard for facts (or the selective belief in them) is something that has always fascinated me. The psychological cause for something like this is a weird one…why would someone ignore the facts in front of them, just because it doesn’t fit into their personal philosophy or belief? This brings up another strange point: why do people feel the need to spread disinformation just to prove their point? Shouldn’t we be striving to keep our contention of facts to a minimum, and instead focus on discussing the ways different paths will affect us as a nation?

The rampant flow of misinformation (which is exacerbated by the Internet and the 24-hour news cycle) has reached an almost inconceivable level, threatening to make any form of constructive political debate a nearly impossible proposition. What purpose does this serve? Why spend so much energy arguing over the truth?

This separation doesn’t only affect our politicians, but also us as voters. There has always been political division in this country, just as their should be; after all, political dissent is a cornerstone of freedom. But what’s the point of exercising that freedom by perverting it? We are given the ability to freely discuss policy…why do we piss all over that ability by spreading misinformation, arguing over what’s true, and insulting each other?

I’m all for political discussion, and I’m all for dissenting opinions. But let’s at least agree to call a spade a spade, rather than a turkey. Remember: twisting the truth to fit into your opinion doesn’t suddenly make it true.

Relaunch

I originally ran this blog as part of the 2008 election, and have decided to ressurect it with a retooled purpose. This site, sometime in the near future, is going to provide a place for political discussion from all sides.

Liberal, Conservative, or Other…it doesn’t matter. I make an effort to see things from all viewpoints, regardless of my own opinion. This site will reflect that by providing analysis with an informational bent, and by conducting interviews with people from all over the political spectrum.

My purpose isn’t to change your mind, but merely to inform you of what the other side thinks. Stay tuned!