Saturday, March 5, 2016

Vulgarity goes Main Street. . .

The other evening, an otherwise pleasant evening, was spoiled when I decided to see what I had missed in the Republican "debate" -- I missed nothing and everything.  I missed nothing in that it was the ever predicable spectacle of assertions, denials, attacks, and responses.  I missed everything because it appears things hit a new low.  Apparently the whole thing has devolved into an eighth grade school yard contest.

Donald Trump assured American voters Thursday night that despite what Marco Rubio had suggested, there was "no problem" with the size of his hands -- or anything else.  "Look at those hands, are they small hands?" the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination said, raising them for viewers to see. "And, he referred to my hands -- 'if they're small, something else must be small.' I guarantee you there's no problem. I guarantee."

Rubio in recent days revived a decades-old old insult, mocking Trump for having relatively slight hands.  "He's always calling me Little Marco. And I'll admit he's taller than me. He's like 6'2, which is why I don't understand why his hands are the size of someone who is 5'2," Rubio said in Virginia on Sunday. "And you know what they say about men with small hands? You can't trust them."

The level of vulgarity that Americans will tolerate has taken whispers into shouts, subjects that were once argued about by insecure and fearful boys into the conversation of those who would presume to lead the most powerful nation on earth.  Trump is not as fearful as what the whole silly season has become -- America's new reality show naked and uncensored...  a populace willing to give Washington the middle finger instead of working to elect people of character and wisdom...   My concern is why we as a society tolerate such crude and childish things as we seek to place a candidate into an office which has grown exponentially over the last eight years, both in influence and power!  This debate is, unfortunately, a mirror of our own choices, our own judgment about what is right and fitting, and the level of our own conversation.

I am with the Dowager on this.  Vulgarity is no substitute for wit.  But I would go her one further, it is neither a substitute for character, wisdom, and ideas, either.  But the only ones who can put a stop to this are those who cast their vote.

I am saddened that the whole thing has become a joke of a choice between a socialist who wants big government to be bigger, a feminist who believes it is her turn and who has a tenuous relationship with the truth, a man whose ego is bigger than the debate stage, and a couple of others who have gotten down and dirty in a contest in which we will all surely lose.  Brothers and sisters, pray for our nation, those who seek election, those who govern, and for a citizenship who will demand a nobler character of those who would lead us....


Carl Vehse said...

"Vulgarity is no substitute for wit. But I would go her one further, it is a substitute for character, wisdom, and ideas, either. But the only ones who can put a stop to this are those who cast their vote."

Another vulgarity is that the choices offered by one political party are between two lying murdering traitors for their support of abortion. Even more vulgar is that in each of the last two presidential elections a lying murdering traitor was elected by 66 million traitorous supporters who cast their vote.

But there is One who can change this vulgar and anti-Christian pattern, and Christians should be imploring Him with imprecatory prayers to do so.

Anonymous said...

I agree the level of discourse in the Republican nominating process has hit a new low. Sad. And it's a reflection of the nation's poor moral state. But what is a Christian to do if our choices are a serial liar or a narcissist? One could vote for a third party candidate. But I'd argue that's throwing your vote away.

I've decided to pray for wisdom and vote for the lesser of two evils. Who will protect religious liberty? Who will protect the unborn (or at least not make matters worse)? Who will best protect us from Islamic terrorists? Who will encourage work versus promoting the government welfare state? These are the questions I will consider when voting. I will then enter the voting booth, hold my nose, and vote.

I used to equate Christianity with my country. No more. We are now a post-Christian nation. But there are Christians elsewhere in the world who have it much worse. Think of the Coptics in Egypt, the Orthodox in Lebanon, or the Assyrians in Iran. They either can't vote or must choose between varying degrees of Islamic persecution.

As Dr. Strickert suggests, we should pray for our country and leaders. But as Psalm 146:3 states, "Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation." Lord have mercy on our nation.


Carl Vehse said...

James: "I've decided to pray for wisdom and vote for the lesser of two evils."

Noah Webster (1758-1843) is known as the "Father of American Scholarship and Education" as well as his dictionary and \i{The American Spelling Book}, which introduced Americanized spellings of words. However, Webster also had much of value to say about our government and its elected officials, including this quote from his book, Letters to a Young Gentleman Commencing His Education to which is subjoined a Brief History of the United States (New Haven: S. Converse, 1823, p. 19):

"When a citizen gives his suffrage [vote] to a man of known immorality, he abuses his trust and he sacrifices not only his interest but that of his neighbor. He betrays the interest of his country. Nor is it of slight importance, that men elected to office should be able men, men of talents equal to their stations, men of mature age, experience, and judgement; men of firmness and impartiality. This is particularly true with regard to men who constitute tribunals of justice—the main bulwark of our rights—the citadel that maintains the last struggle of freedom against the inroads of corruption and tyranny. In this citadel should be stationed no raw, inexperienced soldier, no weak temporizing defender, who will obsequiously bend to power, or parley with corruption.

"One of the surest tests of a man's real worth, is the esteem and confidence of those who have long known him, and his conduct in domestic and social life. It may be held as generally true, that respect spontaneously attaches itself to real worth; and the man of respectable virtues, never has occasion to run after respect. Whenever a man is known to seek promotion by intrigue, by temporizing, or by resorting to the haunts of vulgarity and vice for support, it may be inferred, with moral certainty, that he is not a man of real respectability, nor is he entitled to public confidence."

ErnestO said...

It was fifty years ago that I served this country in the U.S. Army for three years with great pride. To wake up today to see the choices available for this election makes me question how did all this happen and how might this landslide to the bottom be stopped. Alas - I can only think of prayer as my faith tells me only God can help us.