http://www.suntimes.com/output/greeley/cst-edt-greel19.html<snip>The people in the super cities worry about the environment and global warming and dead Arabs in Iraq and the deficit and places like Darfur that no one has ever heard of and health care and the super rich. They worry about perverts and hippies and people who refuse to take care of themselves. They don't understand that 'Merca is great because it is strong and powerful and the greatest nation in the world and because 'Mercans are the freest and most self-reliant people in the world.
Moreover 'Mercans know that if they don't take care of themselves no one else will. We have to stay strong so that our enemies will be afraid to attack us ever again. As for all the rich people, well, they had to work hard to get rich. They don't have tenured faculty positions where you hardly have to work at all.
On the other hand, they had the votes and they won the election and in a democratic republic, if you have the most votes, you're entitled to govern. It may be fun to make fun of them, but still they were winners, and we inhabitants of the blue cities should give them due credit -- we're the losers.
Can you govern the nation without the world-class cities and in defiance of their concerns and values? Why not? In his first administration the president pretty much did that. Why not do it again? If ignoring the cities and punishing their people is a way to stay in political power, why not keep right on doing it?
Or to put the issue differently, if polarization works, why fix it?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
