To: Uncle Sam, Washington D.C.
From: Your Northern Neighbour*
Re: Ending the Ideological Civil War
Dear Uncle Sam:
As an old friend who wishes nothing but the best for your country, I am worried about what one election night commentator described as the ongoing "ideological civil war" in America.
Those of us in Canada who visit your country frequently, realize that a strong degree of "polarization" has always been part of the American political culture. When an important issue comes up, your politicians, interest groups, and citizens quickly take sides, go to their corners, and then proceed to "duke it out." In the process, the strengths and weaknesses of alternative positions become much clearer than when proponents of conflicting views, out of feigned politeness or distaste for confrontation, compromise their positions before the debate has scarcely begun.
But usually, in the past, after this initial polarization, there is a seeking for common ground and a coming together in order to "get things done." In recent years, however, this has not occurred -- with the divisions and conflicts between Democrats and Republicans, conservatives and liberals, religious believers and secularists, whites and non-whites, young and old, becoming ever greater and more vicious.
The issue on which I know this extreme polarization is most worrisome to you is that of the fiscal and economic crisis predicted for early in the New Year if Congress and the President cannot find the right combination of spending and tax changes required to avert it. Continued polarization and conflict over this issue is also of great concern to us in Canada, since our economic prosperity is very much tied to that of our largest trading partner.
If the ideological civil war in the United States is to end in an honourable peace and positive reconstruction of the U.S. economy, we were hoping that one or both of the presidential candidates would have started that process on election night.
We were hoping, for example, that somewhere in Mr. Romney's remarks, bitter as the hour must have been for him and his family, he would have said something like the following:
"Notwithstanding the significant ideological and policy differences between myself and the President, I am resolved that there must be a 'coming together' of our two great parties on the serious, unresolved fiscal issues that divide us and the country.
In particular there needs to be a coming together of the President and the Congress to resolve the impasse over necessary spending and tax changes required to avert the financial crisis which threatens to harm us all. To that end, I am offering my services to the President, in whatever capacity large or small that he may consider useful, to achieve that coming together and that resolution."
Likewise we were hoping that somewhere in the President's acceptance speech, tempting as it must have been for him to ignore or denigrate his opponent in the hour of victory, that he would have said something similar:
"Notwithstanding the significant ideological and policy differences between myself and Mr. Romney, I am resolved that there must be a 'coming together' of our two great parties on the serious, unresolved fiscal issues that divide us and the country.
In particular there needs to be a coming together of myself and the Congress to resolve the impasse over necessary spending and tax changes required to avert the financial crisis which threatens to harm us all. To that end, I am inviting Governor Romney to join with a prominent Democrat (Bill Clinton?) to head a Reconciliation Task Force to find common ground for action by myself and the Congress on the fiscal issue before January 1, 2013."
Of course, regrettably, neither speech contained such an element, and the ideological civil war continues. But for the President and for the Republicans there is still opportunity to assert such leadership. The President, at a time when the ideological civil war needs to end, must begin preparing his Second Inaugural Address -- just as Abraham Lincoln began preparing his Second Inaugural Address as the 19th century Civil War that so nearly destroyed America drew to its close.
President Lincoln believed "reconciliation" to be as much a spiritual process as a political process and saw the hand of Providence in both the coming and the passing of the Civil War. Perhaps in this age of skepticism and disbelief in any power greater than ourselves, it may seem pointless to invoke the help of Providence. But since both your presidential candidates ended their election night remarks with "God bless America," I too will close with an invocation.
Our prayer for America is that its President and his party will make whatever changes in their positions are necessary to resolve the fiscal crisis, and that they will regard those changes, not as compromises, but as those self sacrificial acts without which reconciliation at its most profound level cannot occur.
Our prayer for America is that the Congress and the leadership of the Republicans will also adopt whatever changes in their positions are necessary to resolve the fiscal crisis, and resist the temptation (as General Robert E. Lee once did) to prolong the current civil war through guerrilla tactics.
Our prayer for America is that your mass and social media -- for whom controversy and conflict are usually more newsworthy than cooperation -- will rediscover the truth that the word "media" comes from the same root as "mediator" and begin more often to play that role.
Our prayer for America is that the weeks ahead may mark the beginning of the end of the ideological civil war and the beginning of an honorable and lasting peace.
To paraphrase one of your own most beloved anthems, "America, America, God shed his grace on thee. And crown thy good with brotherhood, from sea to shining sea."
With every best wish for the future,
Your Northern Neighbour*
*Note: The forgoing was composed by Preston Manning, President and CEO of the Manning Centre for Building Democracy and a former Leader of the Opposition in the Canadian House of Commons.
During Nevada's 2010 Senate election, an audio clip surfaced of Sharron Angle raising "Second Amendment remedies" as a viable solution to take when "government becomes out of control." The Tea Party-backed hopeful ultimately proved unsuccessful in her campaign to unseat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Ken Buck, a Tea Party-backed contender who ultimately fell short in his bid to unseat Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet in Colorado, made headlines in 2010 when he quipped that people should vote for him "because I do not wear high heels."
Christine O'Donnell captured headlines in 2010 with a now-infamous campaign ad in which she tells voters, "I'm not a witch." She says, "I'm nothing you've heard. I'm you." O'Donnell was defeated in her campaign for Senate in Delaware by Democratic Sen. Chris Coons.
Rep. Michele Bachmann said in October of 2006, "There are hundreds and hundreds of scientists, many of them holding Nobel Prizes, who believe in intelligent design."
HuffPost's Jen Bendery reported in April of this year: As many as 80 House Democrats are communists, according to Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.). West warned constituents at a Tuesday town hall event that he's "heard" that dozens of his Democratic colleagues in the House are members of the Communist Party, the Palm Beach Post reported. There are currently 190 House Democrats. West spokeswoman Angela Melvin later defended West's comments -- and clarified to whom West was referring. "The Congressman was referring to the 76 members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. The Communist Party has publicly referred to the Progressive Caucus as its allies. The Progressive Caucus speaks for itself. These individuals certainly aren't proponents of free markets or individual economic freedom," Melvin said in a statement to The Huffington Post.
The AP reported in August of 2010 on then-New York gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino: Throughout his campaign, Paladino has criticized New York's rich menu of social service benefits, which he says encourages [undocumented] immigrants and needy people to live in the state. He has promised a 20 percent reduction in the state budget and a 10 percent income tax cut if elected. Asked at the meeting how he would achieve those savings, Paladino laid out several plans that included converting underused state prisons into centers that would house welfare recipients. There, they would do work for the state - "military service, in some cases park service, in other cases public works service," he said - while prison guards would be retrained to work as counselors. "Instead of handing out the welfare checks, we'll teach people how to earn their check. We'll teach them personal hygiene ... the personal things they don't get when they come from dysfunctional homes," Paladino said. ... Paladino told The Associated Press the dormitory living would be voluntary, not mandatory, and would give welfare recipients an opportunity to take public, state-sponsored jobs far from home. "These are beautiful properties with basketball courts, bathroom facilities, toilet facilities. Many young people would love to get the hell out of cities," Paladino he said. He also defended his hygiene remarks, saying he had trained inner-city troops in the Army and knows their needs. "You have to teach them basic things - taking care of themselves, physical fitness. In their dysfunctional environment, they never learned these things," he said.