A symptom and a cause
“You name it, they’re there to diminish it, destroy it.”
—-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.), quoted in the Washington Post today, describing the Republican Party.
If you listen to talk radio, as I, unfortunately, must, you hear statements like Pelosi’s all the time. Conservative talk show host Mark Levin, for example, will say, every day, usually more than once, loudly, that liberals/Democrats/ Obama “want to destroy America.” (Then he plugs his book. Or says, “Just like identity thieves want to destroy your credit!” and does an ad for “Lifelock.”) It is irresponsible, hateful and ignorant for Levine (and Rush, and Monica Crowley, and lots of others) to make this and similar statements, though in Levine’s case, at least, not insincere, for he clearly believes every bit of it.
These are just talk show hosts, however. They are at least 50% entertainers, and 100% partisans, though they still have ethical duties of honesty, fairness, civility and responsibility which they regularly toss to the winds in the interest of ratings. They don’t meet their profession’s ethical standards, even though those standards are low.
Pelosi’s are much, much higher, for she is an elected official of the United States of America. She is not just a partisan; she is also supposed to be a patriot. This kind of general demonization—hysterical, dishonest, unfair, and inflammatory–epitomizes the near total lack of mutual respect and collegiality in Washington, as well as the willingness of current political leaders to make compromise and collaboration impossible in order to satisfy their most rapid and doctrinaire supporters—ratings again. Let’s be clear: democracy and representative government cannot work this way.
As the Obama Administration and Democrats are desperately trying to find people to blame for the S&P downgrade (the operative principle, apparently: If it happened on Bush’s watch, it’s Bush’s fault; if it happens on Obama’s watch, it’s someone else’s fault.), they might read Pelosi’s quote a few times. The ratings service said that one reason for the downgrade was doubt that the American political system could address the debt problem quickly, effectively, and efficiently, because the system appeared dysfunctional. That’s right, and the reason it is dysfunctional is a near complete lack of mutual trust, of which Pelosi’s words are both a symptom and a cause.
What damage does it do to an institution’s ability to work collaboratively and subjugate ideological agendas to the interest of the nation as a whole when it has been led for years by an individual who thinks and talks like Rep. Pelosi? I think we are seeing the answer unfold before us right now. The next question is whether the damage can be repaired.
One thing is certain: Pelosi has no intention of helping.
Ethics Alarms 
We should all remember that the United States is not a democracy, and never has been. It is a constitutional republic. I once read democracy described as three wolves and a lamb getting together and deciding what’s for dinner. I don’t want to live in a democracy. I want to live in a constitutional republic with responsible representattion; it is that latter part in which we are sorely lacking.
Thank you so much. I find it extremely annoying when we’re referred to as a democracy.
Benjamin Franklin’s comment “A republic if you can keep it” constantly comes to my mind. I guess we couldn’t keep it.
I’ve heard we aren’t a democracy or republic. We are a corporation,whatever that may mean.
Oh this tiresome niggling over terms again….
Is an apple round, or is it a fruit?
The United States is a democracy, because the ultimate source of the government’s legitimacy comes from the people, not from religious or hereditary authority.
The United States is a republic, because the people do not directly create laws, but elect representatives to create and enact laws for them.
The United States is a corporation, because it exists as a legal fiction representing the collective will of the people, and is not the extension of a particular individual’s personal power.
Oh yes, I am quite aware of how the practice deviates from the ideal; bicker at will.
I listened to her statement here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/08/04/pelosi_republicans_dont_care_about_deficit_want_to_destroy_government.html
…and I heard “they want to, etc,” I didnt hear “Republicans.” Maybe she was talking about people who really do want to destroy the things she mentioned.
I don’t take a back seat to anyone in disdain for Pelosi’s hyper-partisanship, but I don’t think her statement was unethical. I think it may have been accurate.
You have to admit, “You name it, they want to destroy it’ is a hysteria blank check. I”ll name it: The solar system. The Dewey Decimal System. The city of Medford, Massachusetts. Badlands National Park. Busch Stadium. My liver. The Muppets. Lindsay Lohan’s house. Medicaid. Minutemaid. The Lexington Minute Man. David Letterman. The Lettermen
The Platters. Seafood platters. Lobsters. Corn on the cob..Corn fields. Corn flakes. Rep.Jeff Flake.
Who wants to destroy all that? I don’t know, but they sure sound mean and crazy to me..
I’m not the biggest fan of Minute Maid Park. I see it as an act of war against small ball.
It’s still better than “Enron Field” .. good riddance.
-Neil
I kind of liked Enron Field. History!!!
My friend lives in Medford, how dare you threaten its security by drawing the ire of the Republicans. Actually, my buddy is a conservative. Still, we need Voltron to defend Medford.
From her statement (rant) it’s not apparent she accused “them” of wanting to destroy the solar system or corn on the cob.
Real Clear Politics quotes her this way:
“It isn’t about reducing the deficit, it is about destroying the public space. It is about destroying government — federal involvement in education. It’s about lean air, clean water, food safety, public safety. You name it, they’re there to diminish it. Destroy it.”
There’s a debating term for that kind of exaggeration; you must know what it is. Hey “they” really do seem bent on wrecking the things she mentioned, just not “everything.” I’d give her comment a “Barely true,” in the terms of PolitiFact.com.
Well, sure, if you use PolitiFact standards.
Is it fair to say that the Republicans want to “destroy government,” “the public space” (whatever that is) clean air, clean water, food safety, public safety? That sounds like Marvel Comics super-villain to me. They want dirty air and unsafe food? More crime? Really?
A lot of Republicans want safe food and clean air, but they want the free market to provide it. Har har.
Being wrong about how to do something cheaper, more efficiently or better is not “wanting to destroy.” If Nancy means “want to adopt policies that I believe will destroy…,’ that’s fair and honest. In public positions, you get no pass for deceptively sloppy rhetoric. You are presumed to mean what you say,, the way you say it.
Definitely.
Jack,
How does that square with you calling anti-civil rights libertarians as being “racially dubious”? Just because they want to abolish the CRA doesn’t mean they’re in favor of segregation.
That said, I completely agree with your characterization of Pelosi.
-Neil
I think they are racially dubious, which is to say for every genuinely principled Rand Paul, there are 12 or 100 Lester Madduxes. I have absolutely no doubt that the vast majority of people who would echo Paul’s arguments are racists, just as I think the vast number of people who oppose gay marriage are homophobic, though I personally know people who are both gay-supporters and anti-gay marriage. I also have known racists who agree that the Civil Rights Laws were essential. It takes all kinds.