Did Anyone Notice that the President’s Press Conference was Better than Expected?

 

Very few.  But The Sensible Conservative did.

Sure, he made some mistakes including being too candid about NATO’s reaction to a “minor” Russian incursion into Ukraine.  As is his wont, some responses did wander a bit.

But his performance – from a style perspective – exceeded expectations.  Since this was only the President’s second press conference after a year in office, many on the Right were cheering the prospect that his well-known history of public incoherence (the evident reason for his absence from the public stage) would be unavoidably on display.  Those on the Left were dreading that this would indeed come to pass.  Disappointment and relief, respectively occurred instead.

Joe Biden was calm, generally in good humor and seemingly knowledgeable on the subjects discussed.  In short, he came off as intellectually alert and confident in his responses.

That was, from a foreign policy perspective, good to see.  Characterizations of our President as incompetent and mentally challenged can discomfort our allies and encourage aggression from our foes.  (Why fear the leader of the free world?)

Such observations, however, were not made by conservatives in general.  Fox’s prime time hosts (7-11pm) had no compliments to utter.  It was as if favorable comments about the devil would bring down the wrath of God (or at least Fox’s viewers) upon them.  Has partisanship so taken hold of people that being fair is forbidden?

Ironically, given the general hostility of the Left toward an American role in the world, CNN and MSNBC took Joe Biden to task for confusing listeners (those in Ukraine in particular) about minor versus major incursions.  (The former would be ok?)  Maybe their general disenchantment with Biden’s failure to fulfill leftist legislative promises is the reason.

NOTE:  My approval is limited to his performance.  The substance of his comments is on the value of policies pursued is delusional.

 

Will Civility Return?

 

Hope is not a satisfactory answer.

The national trend of a decline in politeness and avoidance of insults in public life has been underway for years, well before Donald Trump arrived on the political scene.

Of course, for many, Trump’s coarse manner and general uncouthness brought the subject to the fore.

But the reality is that politics follows the culture, not vice-versa.  So one needs to reach further back.

Was it the internet that fostered mean, harsh comments?  Seemingly, the anonymity of messages encouraged some people to drop the pretense of civility that previously mandated decorum.  Now they could be blunt.  Eventually, as the more aggressive “pushed the envelope”, hiding one’s identity was no longer considered necessary.  Crudeness, nastiness and obscenity online and on TV was not only tolerated but applauded as audacious by the avant garde. 

Political discourse followed suit.

So why should we care?

Language matters.  No one likes to be insulted.  What used to be praised as polite discourse was founded on the principle that disagreements among people should be expressed in polite terms.  In other words, an exchange of contrary views should not aim to offend others.  Don’t make criticizing “personal”.  Of course, such politeness can be merely pretense.  But that’s better received, even if the attitude is not well concealed, than the blatantly hurtful.

Harsh words are not only deeply wounding but the target is likely to reciprocate not only the language used but, more importantly, the disrespect conveyed.

Mutual hatred can’t be far away.

In the political world, we know where that leads.  Look around.  One side views the other as its enemy - not as a foe with whom one respectfully disagrees.  Polarization is a euphemism (another polite term) for the formation of hostile camps.  Members aren’t interested in working together to serve a common purpose; their aim is to destroy the other.

Of course, this sounds like hyperbole.  And, fortunately, most Americans don’t yet think in such dire terms.  But we all know the trends are headed in the wrong direction.

How can the situation be reversed?  The task is not easy, nor is it to be accomplished by a flip of the proverbial switch.  A change in social mores is the only way.  Again, politics follows social views.  Traditional institutions such as religious, education and businesses used to set standards; they seem to do more to undercut than sustain positive examples these days.

In our entertainment-obsessed society, is there an option other than looking to entertainment to make the switch?  A slender hope, indeed.

Where else can we look?

Maybe a Spiritual Awakening like that which spread across America in the 19^th century.

Something must be done.

Is not the return of civility vital to the long-term survival of our democracy?

Animosity Toward Covid-19 Vaccinations Flows from Political Polarization

 How did that simple fact come to be?

Initially, America seemed united in the effort to develop vaccines in 2020.  And Donald Trump was in the forefront pushing for speedy development.  He even appeared almost daily at White House presentations featuring Anthony Fauci and other proponents.

But, late in the year, the President prompted criticism from the (liberal) media when he suggested already available drugs might work (a very controversial claim).  That reaction, along with occasional ambivalence by Donald Trump to mask-wearing, cooled the support on the Right for the anti-infection campaign.

For many Trump supporters, if their man is lukewarm on the need for vaccinations and his political opponents are for it, that’s sufficient reason “to be against it”.

That’s certainly in sharp contrast to the reception the polio vaccine received in the 1950s.  There was little resistance among the general public.  It was a health issue only.  Of course, there were then, as now, conservatives and liberals. But the sides did not view their opponents with the hostility so prevalent today.

The role of deep emotional divisions encompasses the wearing of masks as well.  The Biden Administration’s call for mandates unsurprisingly met with vocal resistance.   Again, the President’s demands for adherence  generate an intense, partisan reaction because what he proposes on essentially anything is opposed by many of his political foes.

Are those refusing to get vaccinated or wear masks doing so out of spite and – considering possible serious complications – biting off one’s nose… (you know the rest)?  Likely.

To respond that that makes no sense is to disregard human nature.  Those of us who consider ourselves reasonable (relying on reason, of course), and therefore rational in decision-making, are ignoring that we are all primarily emotional creatures.  Usually, we decide what we want to do on an emotional plane before seeking palatable justification.

So, foolish as a dangerous choice may seem to others, emotional satisfaction usually wins out.

Appeals to reason are not persuasive when the decision is founded on emotion. 

 

 

Music Lift Despair in Kentucky

 

The news from tornado-ravaged southwest Kentucky was seemingly never-ending horrific.

But there was a reminder of the resilience and optimism of America’s spirit among the storm’s rubble.

Alongside his demolished home, a farmer (judging from his overalls) was seated at his piano which, incredibly, had been pushed out of the house by the wind and was in one piece.  He was playing hymns!

He and his community will survive.

“Merry” had a different meaning for the farmer this Christmas but, for Christians, eternal joy remains on the horizon.