AFTER TONIGHT . . . THERE’S NO GOING BACK:
Yesterday . . . One of the Readers of this BLOG, sent me a link to a current 60-MINUTES Episode on CBS, showing a Frank Luntz Profile Group, with a supposedly equally divided number of people between Democrats, Republicans, and Independents.
And from the 60-Minutes Interview, which I watched from beginning to end, the generally accepted premise by virtually all the people there . . . was that this is the worst election ever. And that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are virtually the worst two Candidates all of them could imagine.
And that’s where the similarities ended, since the People from both sides of the Great Debate, including the Independents couldn’t agree on anything and argued about everything.
FOR EXAMPLE . . . one pretty young woman, who spoke eloquently, made the argument that far too much American Money is spent on the Military, which in her opinion should go to America’s Children, which is a MOM’S APPLE PIE argument, until you would ask these Two Simple Questions, which were not asked. But if they were:
1 – Do you want the American Military to be Underequipped, Outgunned, Outmanned, and in Harm’s Way at a DISADVANTAGE?
2 – Without a Strong and Really EFFECTIVE Military, who or what is supposed to Protect America’s Children this woman is so worried about . . . from the EVILS of the World?
IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS . . . Frank Luntz declared that the problem with America, is simply that Americans have forgotten how to SPEAK WITH ONE ANOTHER, and that America has become so polarized, that neither side is willing to see the merits of the other side’s position.
I HAVE A DIFFERENT SPIN ON WHAT LUNTZ THINKS IS WRONG WITH AMERICA:
I THINK THE ATTITUDE OF FRANK LUNTZ . . . exemplifies the PROBLEM with America, because the problem has nothing to do with people who can’t speak with one another, since a great many people are NOT WORTH SPEAKING WITH AT ALL.
IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER:
I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK WITH A LEFTIST . . . who thinks he or she is entitled to anything I earn, make, or create.
I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK WITH A LEFTIST . . . who thinks that MURDERING Babies in the Mother’s Womb into the Third Trimester, without an Extraordinary Circumstance to do that . . . is in any way acceptable.
I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK WITH A LEFTIST . . . who thinks that it’s OK for anyone from one Gender, to walk into the Bathroom or Shower of someone of a different Gender who is UNWELCOMING of this intrusion.
I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK WITH A LEFTIST . . . who thinks the Promotion of smoking DOPE, buying and selling DOPE is OK on the open market, as long as it could be Regulated and Taxed.
I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK WITH A LEFTIST . . . who thinks that MY RIGHT to defend myself and BEAR ARMS should be up to him or her.
I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK WITH A LEFTIST . . . who thinks that Black Lives Matter anymore than the LIFE of anyone else.
I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK WITH A LEFTIST . . . who thinks Freedom of Expression should be REGULATED so as not to offend anyone.
I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK WITH A LEFTIST . . . who thinks that Love of Nation with Secure Borders and VOTER ID is something to be rejected.
AND I DO NOT WANT TO SPEAK WITH A LEFTIST . . . who thinks that ILLEGAL Immigrants are not really ILLEGAL, as much as they are simply UNDOCUMENTED.
THE LIST GOES ON AND ON . . . But you get my point. So where do I start talking with anyone who is DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED TO MY FREEDOMS and the Freedoms of others?
EVERYTHING IS NOT NEGOTIABLE:
DURING A LIVE TELEVISED DEBATE . . . quite a few years ago, where I stood alone against THREE other SKILLED debaters, including a Prominent Montreal Newspaper Editor, some guy who was inconsequential to me, and a Phony Political Activist, who supported French Language Supremacy in Quebec (Canada), there was an exceptional verbal exchange from me, which the people were not prepared for.
ALMOST FROM THE GET-GO . . . The Newspaper Editor accused me of not being willing to see the side of every issue proposed by others, and that I was a Hard-Assed Intransigent, since according to her, EVERY ISSUE WAS NEGOTIABLE.
THE NAME OF THE NEWSPAPER EDITOR . . . was Brenda O’Farrell, a woman comparable to me in age, with whom I had a passing, and absolutely non personal professional relationship, who from time to time interviewed me over the Phone or at Rallies, who was not a fan of my positions, who hammered this point home about my INTRANSIGENCE to the CAMERAS, which were BROADCASTING LIVE.
The Studio in which this debate was being held was small, and accommodated perhaps as many as a dozen people, one of whom was my wife ANNE, who heard it all, and saw it all in the multitude of debates where I participated. Nothing I ever said surprised her.
SO . . . I turned towards Brenda O’Farrell – and using these words, perhaps NOT exactly these words . . . but certainly close enough to these words to be exact – I said . . .
“Brenda, we don’t really know each other all that well, and it makes me feel very uncomfortable saying this in front of the Cameras, but I have always had the HOTS FOR YOU, and could see myself SHOVING YOU TO THE GROUND, and Jumping On Top . . . SO WHERE DO WE BEGIN TO NEGOTIATE?”
WITH THOSE WORDS . . . there was Stunned Silence in the Studio. Anne was holding back from laughing. The Moderator looked like a Deer Caught in the Lights of an Oncoming Train. And later during the year, Brenda O’Farrell’s Newspaper declared me to be Canada’s News Maker Of The Year In 1996.
AND AS FOR THE PHONY POLITICAL ACTIVIST . . . when I was done with him, he wished he had been anyplace other than in the same room with me.
AND THIS IS WHERE WE FIND OURSELVES TODAY:
NOT EVERYTHING IS NEGOTIABLE. And not everything is acceptable under any and all circumstances. And after this election, America and Canada . . . will never again be the same.
THE BATTLE LINES HAVE BEEN DRAWN.
Best Regards . . . Howard Galganov