top of page
Search
Writer's picturebetsineid

I Digress


Good morning.

I have subscribers who are liberal, conservative, and moderate, and I swore I wouldn't get into politics, but I'm gonna do it, and quite frankly, a whole bunch of people should do it because the situation in the current White House is profoundly troubling and should be viewed as such by any reasonable, thoughtful citizen, regardless of party registration or the lack thereof. I happen to believe there is room for many schools of thought as long as they're aimed toward the good of the country, but for anything to work at all, there has to be a basic civility that governs human behavior and hopefully a sense of concern about the welfare of other people. The president is supposed to reflect that sort of decency both at home and abroad. The current one does not.

I am on my fourteenth president and could tell you something at least marginally positive about each one of them until now. Roosevelt led the country through a depression and a world war and created programs of assistance for people struggling under terrible circumstances. Truman was a common man in the best sense who related to common people in the best sense. Eisenhower saved the world from Adolph Hitler, literally, and deserved to be honored as president. Kennedy brought a new sense of optimism to the country and believed that everyone had an obligation to make life better for his or her fellow citizens. Johnson signed the Civil Rights bill even though he got us mired down in Vietnam. Nixon opened the doors to China even though he had a dark side that eventually got him in trouble. Ford was an honorable man with fine legislative experience who was defeated because he pardoned his predecessor. Carter probably was and is a saint, unsuited for the nastiness of political warfare, but he got bitter adversaries talking to each other. Reagan articulated what we all dream about, the desire to be safe and free and able to make a decent living with our God-given talents. Bush 41, uncommonly qualified for the presidency, gave us a sense of purpose and intelligence. Clinton, despite his terrible personal flaws, related to people ignored by too many. Bush 43 got us into a mess in the Middle East but represented the country with the dignity always shown by his family. Obama was viewed around the world as a stable, thoughtful, and compassionate leader. I pause here for a minute. Like his predecessors, Obama had his strengths and weaknesses, but I will never forget him singing Amazing Grace at the services for the people murdered at the Charleston church, a man who was relentlessly accused of not being a Christian. Here's the deal: Amazing Grace is a Christian hymn. It is about Jesus Christ. You do not sing Amazing Grace if you are not a Christian or if you're mysteriously planted by a foreign government to overthrow the United States.

I am not going to comment further about either of the Clintons. My concern is why on God's earth the Republicans, who had a slew of other candidates for the presidency, chose to nominate someone who gave and continues to give a face and a voice to the ugliest stuff I've seen in my lifetime. We're not talking traditional partisan issues here and we're really not talking jobs. Any of the other GOP candidates would have tackled those challenges but done it in a dignified, thoughtful manner. Instead Republican voters watched months of petty name-calling and the need to bully and constantly humiliate other human beings. They heard mocking and even disgustingly crude language and the encouragement of retaliatory, physical behavior and still they chose this guy as their standard bearer. What standards were they talking about? Respect for life?

Best regards,

Elisabeth


Save


Recent Posts

See All

Over and Out

Good Morning. I have made the decision, reluctantly, to end my blog. Over the past two years I have experienced numerous problems as the...

Comments


bottom of page