Sunday, July 01, 2012

Republicans are Cruel and Dysfunctional

Did you know that?  I didn't.  I was so surprised to hear it on the radio today (NPR's new agey show New Dimensions, which is religious in content).

How thankful I am for this insight!  Here I thought I was kind, charitable, reasonable, and intelligent.  No, this speaker said:  Republican men are cruel and power-mad, and Republican women are cruel and enabling.  Wow.

Of course, we are cruel because we give a larger percentage of our incomes to charities.  We are cruel because we go on missions trips overseas with churches and nonprofits.  We are cruel because we want the federal government to be smaller and for people to be responsible and pay their bills.  We are cruel because we want to end abortion (or at least some of us do).  We are cruel because we believe civilization should not be reinvented and redefined every couple of years.  We are cruel because we put national security above cheap labor.  We are cruel because we want to protect our borders.

Now, I don't really fall lockstep with the Republicans, because they are a political parties and political parties are concerned with one thing:  being in power.  The Republicans sixty years ago were pro-civil rights; now, sometimes  I wonder.  I am more concerned with environmental issues than some Republicans.  But I am much closer to one side than the other.  Even this mistaken speaker on this offensive program (the interviewer did not have the courage to call him out on this characterization) admitted that the Democrats put out a bumper sticker that said, "We are not Republicans."  What does that say?  Only that demonizing Republicans (a very large minority of the country) is their main strategy.

On the other hand, this shows the Republicans have done a sorry job of defining their good reality and a bang-up job of letting the other side define the bad image (and reality, in some cases).  Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity do not speak for me, yet too many have let them.

I say this because I just finished a class in grad school where we had a touchy-feely session at the end that left a bad taste in my mouth.  One of the students said about another, "He's a great guy, even though he is a Republican."  How offensive--yet it was not "interrogated."  What if I had said, "He's a great guy, even though he's a Democrat?"

When it comes to Democrats, what's good for the goose is not good for the gander.

2 comments:

drgregb said...

Hi Barbara

Good analysis. I have a problem aligning with either party. But the real break with Republicans for me is thier "John McCain-like" hawk position on war, in Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, SYRIA... where does it end?!

I guess I'll just have to become another of those amorphous independents!! (Acutally, I'm sinfully tempted by libertarianims; but don't tell anyone!)

Barbara G. Tucker said...

There is a lot to like about libertarians in terms of fiscal matters, but I'm still a social conservative in most ways. It's hard to call the wars, for me. We cannot realistically get involved everywhere. Iraq was enough. Sheesh!
Thanks for posting!!!

Fresh look at Matthew: Matthew 26, second take

In the story of the woman anointing Jesus, I have to wonder if there is a secondary lesson.   Don’t criticize others’ s...