For quite some time I have been complaining about the political myopia that seems to be running rampant throughout the country. It is considered by some people to be S.O.P. to try and marginalize those that disagree with them by labelling them Liberal, Conservative, Democrat or Republican.
The problem is that this is frequently done in an attempt to squash dissenting opinions even those that have merit. Walking alongside this issue is a severe case of Moral Relativism that is assisting in the prevention of real dialogue.
One of the examples of this problematic rhetoric is here. The poster posits that Americans are stupid because a survey claims that more Americans believe that Libby’s indictment is more important then Clinton’s.
He offers the following as part of the reason for his distress.
I mean come on, really. The survey should have asked â€œDid you know who Libby was BEFORE the investigation?â€, because I didnâ€™t. Clintonâ€™s lies are certainly more important than some White House staff memberâ€™s perjury. For Christâ€™s sake, Clinton embarrassed our nation.
This is sheer fluff and silliness. The issue is not who embarrassed the nation, the issue is which of these situations created a bigger problem and a bigger risk of danger to the nation. Personally I don’t waste much time worrying about whether the rest of the world agrees or disagrees with how our country is run.
As long it is done in a moral and ethical fashion, or as close as possible I am happy with it. That obviously is food for a separate post.
If the POTUS can do a good job I don’t care who he sleeps with or plays with. Again this is provided that he is not endangering anyone or breaking any laws while engaging in this activity. There is still plenty of room for legitimate criticism of Clinton, but this is not the area to focus on.
As for my claim of moral relativism I said that because I suspect that the initial poster would argue against the UN and doesn’t have a problem with the US taking unilateral action when needed.
My real beef here is with the inconsistent and illogical argument and the lack of recognition of why there really is no relationship between Clinton and Libby’s actions.