R.E.Payne

A Need for Decency and Mutual Respect in Politics

The Rocky Mountain Collegian published an editorial recently which read "Taser this ... F*** Bush."

The expletive was spelled out.

The last two words were in bold type, larger than most headlines. A caption below said, "This column represents the views of the Collegian's Editorial Board."

The questions I ask: Did this column further the beliefs and ideas of the board? Does it present an argument against President Bush? Does it help to convince anyone that their conclusions are based upon sound reasoning? It does not.

Acknowledging it is common, especially between Democrats and Republicans, to complain that it is partisanship that is undermining civil society by not being considerate of the views of the opposition, does writing a vulgar headline serve a purpose beyond self-gratification? Instead of arguing their apparent belief that the world is better off without President George Bush, I have the feeling that an over-powering mob mentality spilled forth.

What this column is about is "civility", not free speech. Although we recognize that each of us has an obligation to the greater community in the United States, law does not really attempt to enforce civility, as it does in Germany and France. Those countries have a form of law of "insult," a category of law not existent in the United States. The law is to suppress hate-speech and to regulate it.

The U.S. News & World Report weekly news magazine published an in-depth look in what it defined as the tragic decline of decency and civility in the United States. The article noted the ever growing fact that rudeness and discourtesy are ever increasing realities in the United States. In fact, it states that 'rudeness is the norm.' Therefore, am I arguing that disagreement with Bush should fall into a new category of law? No. I am arguing for civility, whether in a pro or con column on Bush or anyone else.

These collegians who dislike Bush's policies should be arguing that the world is better off with change. They should present a proposition that they can justify their opinions upon facts, morality, civil ethics, and democracy. If they are intelligent enough to attend a university, and sufficiently engaged to sit on an editorial board, one should at least expect that they are capable of penning a readable, persuasive column presenting their ideas and reasons. The fact they did not do so speaks more loudly than the ugly headline they wrote. This is not to say that we are redefining the word "civility" so that it includes any sort of criticism or challenge to authority as inappropriate. It does, however, require that the criticism be justified to be genuine, otherwise it lapses into being simply irrelevant, such as the column they wrote that we discuss here today.

It is common for Democrats and Republicans to have opposing views on most topics. It is no coincidence that the most partisan of these are both liberals and conservatives who are critical of the opposing political policies. But it is not too much to ask that they negotiate their differences with civility. By not doing so, they are encouraging acquiescence to indecency and injustice. They are, in other words, making it "OK" to go ahead with columns with ugly headlines, such as at Colorado State.

And both major parties are to blame.

On August 3, 2001, President George Bush said that "My administration is pledged to bring civility and high standards to Washington." It certainly can be argued that he made a promise not kept.

"Governor Bush and I are absolutely determined that [we] will restore a tone of civility and decency to the debate in Washington," said Vice President Dick Cheney, August 4, 2000.

Cheney, again: "Typically a break from partisan warfare, this year's Senate class photo turned smiles into snarls as Vice President Dick Cheney reportedly used a profanity toward one senior Democrat, sources said." Cheney "blurted out the 'F word' at Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont during a heated exchange on the Senate floor… The incident occurred on Tuesday in a terse discussion between the two that touched on politics, religion and money, with Cheney finally telling Leahy to 'f--- off' or 'go f--- yourself,' the aides said…Cheney, who is president of the Senate, ripped into Leahy for the Democratic senator's criticism this week of alleged war profiteering in Iraq by Halliburton, the oil services company that Cheney once ran...During their exchange, Leahy noted that Republicans had accused Democrats of being anti-Catholic because they are opposed to some of President Bush's anti-abortion judges, the aides said. That's when Cheney unloaded with the 'F-bomb,' aides said."

- CNN, 6/24/04; Reuters, 6/24/04.

"WASHINGTON - John Kerry used profane language to assess President Bush's Iraq policy and Bush's chief of staff said Sunday the Democratic presidential candidate was out of line.

The Massachusetts senator uttered a profanity in an interview in the latest Rolling Stone magazine to express his dismay over Bush's handling of Iraq.

When asked in the interview about the success of rival candidate Howard Dean, whose anti-war message has resounded with supporters, Kerry responded: "When I voted for the war, I voted for what I thought was best for the country. Did I expect Howard Dean to go off to the left and say, 'I'm against everything?' Sure. Did I expect George Bush to f--- it up as badly as he did? I don't think anybody did."

From President Bush's speech on the radio July 10, 2004:

"On an issue of this great significance, opinions are strong and emotions run deep. All of us have a duty to conduct this discussion with civility and decency toward one another. All people deserve to have their voices heard."

Although we have multiple candidates running for the nomination of each major party, only one has recognized the subjects of partisanship and decency as major topics:

Bill Richardson: "Civility and common decency in government has perished", he said in January 2007 when he announced his candidacy: "I am taking this step because we have to repair the damage that's been done to our country over the last six years," said Richardson. "Our reputation in the world is diminished, our economy has languished, and civility and common decency in government has perished…"

"Our next President must be able to bring a country together that is divided and partisan. It is clear that Washington is broken and it's going to take a return to bipartisanship and simple respect for each other's views to get it fixed," he said.

The collegians at Colorado State should get to know Gov. Richardson.

R E Gus Payne,

September 24, 2007

repayne@repayne.net