MUD

As a person who has been retired from the working rat race for a number of years, this writer finds ample time to view a private DVD collection and browse the internet at will. Although relaxing in some ways, such practice can also bring on discouragement, depending upon what happens to be watched.

Just a day or two ago, we chose to replay a 1972 film entitled The Candidate, with Robert Redford in the lead role as a chap who rose from the ashes to win a U.S. Senate seat from California, against a typically stodgy Republican old-liner. Not unexpectedly, this movie struck a decided parallel tone with the 2008 presidential race, wherein a man overcame an inherent two-strike handicap to eventually succeed after a most arduous campaign.

One major difference between real life and tinseltown is that Barack Obama has proven to be a more composed and outwardly self-assured candidate than the character portrayed by actor Redford. Nevertheless, we found the true sincerity of both the fictional and living parties virtually identical. In turn, each one faced the usual small-minded Republican opposition, promoting its customary “make the rich richer and to hell with the little guy” practices, along with the “God bless the special interest groups” motif.

Furthermore, we recently called up the 2008 election night rally in Chicago on the internet, to listen again to Obama’s acceptance address. We can confidently say that it rates with the best public speeches ever heard, not only from the standpoint of the principles advocated, but the new president’s unswerving poise as well. It is no wonder the massive crowd felt tremendously inspired.

Our estimation is that the time elapsed between Mr. Obama’s closing words and the start of rolling the ball toward discrediting him at every turn thereafter to have been no more than three minutes. In fact, we can be sure that contingent plans for such dedicated undermining of his cause had already been conceived even before the vote-counting was over.

For as long as we can personally remember, and that goes back to Roosevelt in 1932, Republican tactics have been predicated strictly upon negativity. The philosophy of “If you can’t beat ‘em, ridicule ‘em ad nauseam” hasn’t abated one bit throughout every national and lower level election ever since. The same fabricated and grime-laden accusations were hurled at John Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and plenty of others. Today, the devoted mudslingers have an even more readily available listening audience, in that the current president doesn’t belong to the “superior” white race.

It is always easier, not to mention desirable, to believe the dirt cast upon a person or collective group rather than what true good he, she, or they are striving for, and this has forever been the foundation for Republican back room tactical maneuvering.

Having offered personal support and encouragement to the Obama efforts throughout 2008, we now receive the administration’s policy comments via email every week. The most notable feature is the outright cleanliness of each such message, coupled with sound logic and fair play, consistent with the man’s campaign issues.

On the other hand, we strenuously object to the disgustingly foul Republican mudslinging which has been evident for so long, as an unfitting substitute for constructive thinking.