Saturday, June 14, 2008

Rhetoric and democracy



Jun 13, 2008

Rhetoric is far from democracy's finest hour

Free speech gets downright silly

Chris Sinacola Sina-cism
csinacola@telegram.com

 
 


The overheated rhetoric of the presidential campaign, in combination with the First Amendment, has led to some interesting and dispiriting places of late.

Democrat Barack Obama this week launched a Web site, www.fightthesmears.com, intended to dispel the most widely circulated falsehoods about him and his wife, Michelle. They include the rumors that he is a Muslim, that he once attended a radical Islamic religious school, and that there exists a tape showing Michelle ranting from the pulpit of Trinity United Church about "whitey." All three are false.

Republican John McCain has been quick to fire back at his critics as well. Asked about when U.S. troops will come home from Iraq, McCain told NBC's Matt Lauer: "No, but that's not too important. What's important is the casualties in Iraq."

Any reasonable person understands that McCain meant to suggest our focus should be on stabilizing the Iraqi government before withdrawing our troops, and that McCain feels that goal takes priority over the timing of our withdrawal. But Sen. John Kerry led a chorus of boo-birds in immediately labeling McCain as "unbelievably out of touch."

Only the most naive expect that American politics will ever be a genteel, no-contact sport. Still, it must be said that such nonsense as is being offered up in the attacks upon the two major party candidates — and this more than four months before Election Day — makes the prospect of most any other summer activity more inviting. If you have long thought that counting shorebirds might be a useful contribution to science, savored the thought of learning ancient Greek, or put off a family vacation to Botswana, now might be the time.

The fault for the campaign's gutter politics lies in part with the First Amendment. I am a big fan of the First Amendment, but I do sometimes wish the Founders had seen fit to end it with the line, "But try to be nice, please."

If you are among those who seriously believe that First Amendment rights have been curtailed in recent years, consider this. Every election year a Hollywood celebrity — often one who has made millions by spouting nonsensical left-wing rants or displaying as much of their body as community standards will allow — will grab the spotlight by declaring their intention to move to a foreign country should a particular candidate become president.

Usually these promises to emigrate are contingent upon a Republican victory. Most recently, actress Susan Sarandon — no stranger to R-rated movies herself — suggested a McCain victory would compel her to move to either Italy or Canada. (I cannot recall a Bruce Willis or Ted Nugent threatening to head for flat-tax Estonia, say, should Obama win.)

Rarely, if ever, has a celebrity followed through on such a promise, since doing so would deprive their fans of their talents, and themselves of much cash. They must also realize that the First Amendment is in fine shape. Why else does the government permit them to hold press conferences? And why else do no jack-booted thugs attend?

Since Canada seems to be the default destination for those leaving an allegedly neo-fascist America, I suggest would-be political refugees check out yesterday's New York Times, which carried a front-page story about the suit against McClean's magazine, which published a cover story in 2006 titled "Why the Future Belongs to Islam." An excerpt from a book by conservative author Mark Steyn, the piece suggested that the rise of Islam threatens traditional Western values.

While Muslims anywhere might have been offended by the article, in Canada they were able to sue under a British Columbia law that bans hate speech. In Europe, the late Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci was routinely sued, and convicted, under similar laws for writing far more incendiary stuff about Muslims. I cannot predict how the trial will end, but I much prefer the U.S., with blemishes, to the Orwellian world of Canada or Europe, to say nothing of an Iran or Saudi Arabia.

As for Obama and McCain, the same First Amendment that permits moronic pundits to waste airtime and print baseless and silly accusations permits me to declare that Obama's agenda is the closest thing to full-blown socialism that American voters have been offered since Eugene V. Debs in 1912, while McCain is to Republicanism what enriched white bread is to a good loaf of Russian rye — a pale and unsatisfying imitation of the real thing.

I think I'll head to the shore to hunt grebes.

Contact Chris Sinacola by e-mail at csinacola@telegram.com.


 

No comments: