With the 2013 inauguration only a day away, there has been a fair amount of discussion on what President Obama should say, will say and how he’ll remedy a tepid first term for his liberal base.
Chatter is ranging from his policies on gun control, foreign policy, strengthening a climbing economy, health care and a bevy of other hot button topics, with each seemingly more divisive than the next.
While I’m a card carrying Democrat, and a supporter of most of the agendas suspected to be outlined in the inauguration speech, there is something in the political air that has left me unsatisfied.
Liberal’s have been celebrating since Obama’s victory in November as the Republican Party’s infighting has weakened it position, and credibility, as of late. Though some portend that the future of the party seems to be unsure, anyone with half a brain should have the good sense to let that little morsel lie. As entertaining as the infighting has been to watch, it won’t go beyond this, and it can’t. Firstly, every group, being or structure endures a crisis of faith that tests the validity of belief – this is never truer than in the political sphere. This happened to the Republican’s in the 70s after Nixon, then what happened? They got Reagan, with a Bush chaser.
More important than reaffirming faith is maintaining the checks and balances an opposing party provides. Sure, this phrase is long forgotten in lexicon of American Politics–where this curious phenomenon of an all powerful President-for-life seems to have replaced the actuality of the system according to the right leaning political networks–but, it is probably the most important one. Much like our governmental structure, political parties need opposition to ensure that one-sided policies don’t run rampant in the US. And, as much as I’d love to see the policies I believe in become the norm across the length and breadth of the United States, I’m a bigger believer in equal representation.
As we gear up for inauguration day our political beliefs are growing increasingly divided, contradicting the platform through which both candidates ran: uniting the nation under a set of basic, human ideals. Now, a month removed from that furore isn’t a shame that the idea of a truly United States seems more like a romantic ideal?
Individuals are parading themselves under the pretence of “the greater good,” but what is actually happening is what is best for them, and those in their circle. We are dividing ourselves from our loved ones, countrymen and neighbours at a rate unseen since the Civil War.
In the past there have been galvanizing moments to bring a limping nation to full strength. The depression found the Second World War; the 60s saw the assassination of three great men. Such a feet is impossible today because the nature of our society has created a bigger is better attitude, and something large enough to move a nation to rally behind a single banner would surely wipe-out half of us.
So, until then we will live divided, swamped beneath the belief that our personally ideology is the only way to live–well, I have news for those people: if your ideology isn’t bettering mankind, i.e. providing homeless people with homes, starving with food or just living without hate in your heart, then your ideology is shit.
So, tomorrow, when President Obama is inaugurated in for his second term look beyond the policies you hate, or the policies you love, but see a man that is doing his best to help the country, even if you disagree with him. That is one thing all Americans, liberal, conservative and independent should agree on (though they never would), they love America, and the freedom to complain too much to see it waste away into nothingness.
Satellites in the System 