Fighting a Sound Byte

After five Tea Parties, I have spoken with dozens of attendees. Each appears to have a favorite gripe about the current state of affairs in the country. With some, it is promotion of the Fair Tax as a replacement of our idiotic and grossly unfair tax code. Others see the premier issue as the birth certificate which no person has ever seen. The economically minded are outraged by the soaring debt acquired without any evident positive result. There are those who concentrate on the corruption of the new appointees who oink at the public trough in a mad rush to “get theirs” before it dries up. Unvetted (by the senate) appointments of czars (now over thirty) with executive power rile those familiar with the true meaning of the word. Still more have serious concerns about the ever changing positions of the administration whose only consistency is matching policy to poll numbers and focus group results.

Wedged into this laundry list of criticisms are attacks on the Christian churches, abortion, gay this and that, health care restructuring, war management, global warming deniers, veterans, and the usurpation of private enterprise (see: auto industry and banking) by the federal government. It is little wonder that we have been taken over by the simplistic “hope and change.” The message delivered by the opposition was simple in its brevity and popular appeal. It was as consistent as it was vacant. We are being subjugated by a sound byte.

To acquire the knowledge to intelligently argue all the above issues individually would require self-education beyond the scholarship capacity of most. It would be comparable to gaining a degree in higher education with twenty majors. Most diploma seekers have enough difficulty mastering one. The discussion becomes even tougher when the response from the White House finds the president and the vice-president announcing two diametrically opposed views on the result of the stimulus package as we learned this morning. Which counter argument is appropriate? In that regard, we find them “hopeless and unchanged.”

The objective here is not to demean those individual patriots who gather to promote liberty and restore our historical values. Politicians with huge staff and resources can’t get it straight so how can the average citizen manage to sort the wheat from the chaff in the onslaught of contradiction coming from Washington?

The starting point for any discussion of political issues in America must begin with a thorough knowledge of the Constitution of the United States of America. If one enters into the fray on any issue without a complete thoughtful study of that document, he is unprepared to wage a successful argument. For those unfamiliar with the Constitution, it can be read in about a half an hour. During that period the most frequent thought will probably be: “I did not know that!”

Somewhere in that document is an article which forms the basis of your objection to whatever you find offensive about the current government. Once the cursory first read is accomplished you will find further study addictive. You do not require a law degree to understand the intent of the founders.. High school equivalency should be sufficient. Each word has meaning and was deliberately chosen for its purpose. After all, it took the better part of a decade to put it together. In comparison, the recent cap and trade legislation passed the house in hours and contained 1,300 pages while my tiny dog-eared copy of the Constitution contains 58!

From the smallest to the largest Tea Parties attended, some folks were handing them out at no cost. All were pocket size and carried a brief message from the supplier. Mine is from the Cato Institute, 1000 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20001. It is also present on 9 pages of the World Almanac at no cost. It is easily found on the net; just Google U.S. Constitution. There is little excuse for not having a copy and even less for having it and not having at least a minimal understanding of what it states. If you are not armed with this sacred knowledge you are carrying a knife to a gun fight.

If you are ever lucky enough to find a liberal (leftist, Marxist, fascist, etc.) who is willing to discuss the issues we offer some advice. When engaging these folks bring the discussion to a halt when you hear the words #&(@, !@^&#, or any other expletives. In addition the insertion of “Bush-Hitler,” illegal war, Christianist, climate change, racist, “you’re just mean”, homeless, or hate indicates an over-saturation of Kool-Aid which will probably make civil discussion impossible. Remember, if they buy into hope and change, rationality is probably not their strong suit.

It is well to keep in mind that many voters have become disenchanted with the selection they made at the polls. If you know persons who fit this description, be kind and gentle and deal in rational thought, reasoned appeal and a measure of understanding. Please resist the temptation to say I told you so. It’s tempting but unproductive. Our government, as the founding fathers saw it, was of the people governed by law. Our electoral process made it by the people. Although it was for the people, the law was paramount. To return our republic to these basic tenets will require education, hard work, and relentless insistence on a return to those concepts which created the greatest nation and government known to man. Do not depend on any political party to do this job for you. This particular duty is yours and mine. We must prevail; each of us.


In His abiding love,

Cecil Moon