Race-ing to the Middle

With the two-party system ambling toward obsolescence, it's becoming clear that race - and racism - is not just a good way to redefine political affiliation, it's just about the only sensible way to do so.

It's not about us and them anymore - at least not an "us" and "them" defined as relatively equal segments of society. Rather, it's about a large "us" and several smaller groups of "them". The clearest way to see this  - and the developing obsolescence of left versus right - is through race and how people process the racial identity of others.

People on the left are busy outdoing each other in an effort to demonstrate how non-racist they are, while the right is split between those who are trying to prove how racist they are and the people who say they're "not racist, but...." Meanwhile, those of us in the middle, whether we tilt left or right, are too busy coming to grips with the fact that we have at least a generation's worth of prejudices to rise above that we can't be bothered to worry about outdoing anyone.

Surrender in the War of Ideas

After reading about the recently launched social network site Tea Party Community, designed as a haven for conservatives victims of "liberal bullying" on Facebook, I have just one question. I'll try to make it as polite as possible but can't promise success. Here goes...

Would these cry-babies like some cheese with their whine?

OK, that wasn't polite, let alone nice, but frankly there's no reason to be on this. Not only is it a wrongheaded approach, it's also a very un-American one. America's greatness is about the clash of ideas, not shutting out the ones you don't like or pretending inconvenient facts don't exist.

In case these misguided fellow Americans haven't realized it, the issue is not that people are discussing things about which they disagree. The issue is that we the people seem to have lost the ability to consider that other people might have highly valid reasons for holding opposing ideas. That's not surprising since partisans on all sides have trouble remembering that holding different ideas than you does not make that person less than human. I don't claim to know the answer to that problem, but I do know that people further isolating themselves in an ideological echo chamber is not going to help anything.

Plurality Rules

Lately, the observation that Republicans have failed to win a majority of the popular vote in five of the last six Presidential elections has been getting a lot of attention. Like many political factoids, it's true enough but isn't necessarily reason for Democrats to get overly excited, because Democratic candidates have only gotten popular vote majorities in three of those six elections. The 1992 and 1996 elections were both won with pluralities of the vote, with Bill Clinton never getting more than about 49%, and I think we all remember the 2000 election. As a country, we're still pretty evenly divided, giving us all the more reason to engage the people with whom we disagree rather than dismissing them as enemies.

Free Speech Fever

However much they may flirt with policy discussion, Presidential State of the Union addresses are ultimately an exercise in political theater. The President is ultimately the star of the show, but it's hardly surprising that other players want to get a share of the spotlight.

South Carolina congressman Joe "You Lie" Wilson set a pretty high bar, but Texas Representative Steve Stockman seems up the challenge, in part because he's bringing reinforcements. Stockman, whose issues with President Obama are well-documented has invited a guest who may have even more grievances with the President - yes, Ted Nugent. The invitation of the Motor City Madman points to a problem for the GOP, though perhaps not for the obvious reasons.

The problem isn't that Nugent is a somewhat overrated guitarist with chicken-hawk leanings who crapped in his pants repeatedly to get himself declared unfit for service in Vietnam but heaps inflammatory and sometimes foul rhetoric on anyone who doesn't fit his narrow view of American values, though, all those things are true. The problem lies with Republican elected officials and, in Mitt Romney's case, credible candidates who refuse to repudiate Nugent no matter how much crap he scrapes out of his old pants to flings at people who love their country just as much as he claims to do.

Patriotism has historically been the last refuge of the scoundrel, but many American politicians seem to have concluded that invoking "freedom of speech" is their best protection from actual principle. When a de facto political figure like Nugent or Trump makes a comment that pole-vaults over the line between discourse and disgusting, too many politicians are happy to wrap themselves in the Bill of Rights and invoke the First Amendment to insulate themselves without having to take an actual stand that risks alienating supporters. This is, of course, hypocritical and cowardly and as such misunderstands the point this fundamental right.

Freedom of speech, that is to say freedom from government regulation of speech, was incorporated into the Constitution so that the citizens of a country that fought a war for freedom could speak truth to power without fear of government reprisal. What that right does not convey, however, is freedom from consequences. Just because the government is precluded from restricting speech, except for narrow exceptions in the area of public safety, doesn't mean that an elected official doesn't have an obligation to call out inflammatory language for what it is. That's something Senator (and candidate) Obama came to understand about the speeches of Reverend Jeremiah Wright and something that self-identified patriots like Stockman (and Nugent) will never appreciate.

Stop, Bastard Time!

Though he never led his team to a Super Bowl victory, NFL Hall of Fame Quarterback Dan Marino continues to set the standards of greatness. Most recently, Marino has set an unparalleled standard for when you should make it known that you fathered a bastard love child. Round numbers are so cliche, but picking one's 28th wedding anniversary is simply genius - sleazy, tawdry, makes Brett Favre look like a model husband genius. I'd call Marino a magnificent bastard, but I wouldn't want to cause confusion with the undisputed bastard in his family. Way to go, Dan!

Our Sarah Jane

Actress Elisabeth Sladen who played perhaps the most iconic of all the Doctor's traveling companions, Sarah Jane Smith, would have been 67 today. Back in 2008 I remember watching the episode Turn Left, which depicted an alternate timeline where Sarah-Jane died saving the lives that the Doctor wasn't around to save. Even though I knew she'd be back at some point, when the Doctor Who universe returned to its normal state of fiction, it still made me sad. When Sladen died a couple years ago, it was of course sadder because it meant that Sarah Jane would never be back. For fans of my generation, I think that's even worse than Patrick Troughton or Jon Pertwee who we never knew as anything but past Doctors. Sladen was always Sarah-Jane, and one of the nicest things about the resurrection of Doctor Who several years back is that she remained a key part of the show's history. As the show's 50th year rolls along, it's unfortunate that Sladen and Sarah Jane are now only part of its past.