The Internet Helps Us Get Serious

Print
9 Comments
Post a Comment
|
Email
Tweet

By Peggy Noonan (Archive) · Saturday, February 26, 2011

I was talking the other day with a new member of the U.S. Senate, and conversation turned to what had surprised him most in his first months on Capitol Hill. He said it was the number of people who still don't seem to understand that we're in crisis, that if we don't move now on spending, it could do us in.

I'm always surprised when I hear this, yet I've heard it a lot. "There's no sense of urgency up here."

There are many reasons for this, and some, but not all, are political. If you are from the deep left, if you're on the leftward ridges of the Democratic Party, you believe in high spending, higher taxing and a more dominant role for the federal government. So you wouldn't be alarmed at the current crisis, you'd be more or less happy: You're sort of getting what you want. If you're told entitlement spending will ultimately force severe cuts in America's defenses, you might think, "Good, fewer guns, more butter." Since you likely think America is a prime source of trouble in the world, you wouldn't be too concerned that nations that hold our debt might come to exert influence on our foreign-policy choices. In the new and emerging global world, what's so bad about a more bridled America?

But that's just the deep left. What about everyone else? How could a regular moderate Democrat, or an experienced old Republican bull, not be alarmed at spending projections and their implications?

I think some of the answer has to do with what, for lack of a better word, I'll call crisis-ism. This is a condition in which you don't know you're in crisis because you're always in crisis, you've always been in crisis, and you've always gotten through, so what the heck. Crisis-ism is the inability to apprehend that this time it's different, that this time the crisis is an actual crisis.

There are senators and congressmen who've been on the hill for 10 and 25 years, and from the day they walked in, all they heard about was the budget crisis. "This spending will kill us." But it never did. So maybe it wasn't so bad, and, ergo, isn't so bad. They are inured to warning. You can tell them 10 different ways that we're in crisis and they'll think, "Some think-tank guy told me that 20 years ago, and we're still here."

***

Another reason for budget denialism is that everyone now in Congress lived through the greatest expansion of wealth in the history of man on earth. It happened here, in America, in the past 30 years. And we were rich even before that. But when you grow up in a time of constant expansion, when you grow up immersed in the assumption that we are rich and will always be rich, that we're powerful and will always be powerful, you start to think that America can take any amount of damage and still continue. This is called optimism, but it is not optimism, it is Rich Boy Syndrome. A boy is lucky enough to be born to rich parents who are themselves the product of generations of wealth going back as far as the eye can see. But he never got into the habit of making money, never learned to respect it, and never felt protective of the system that allowed it to exist. So the money went away. Rich Boy Syndrome is thinking wealth will just continue no matter what you do. A lot of members of Congress have Rich Boy Syndrome. They think they can do anything and America will always be rich.

A final reason is simply human. It is really convenient and pleasant not to see a crisis, because if you don't see it, you don't have to do anything about it. You don't have to be brave, you don't have to put yourself on the line, you don't have to lead. You can tell yourself you don't have to be brave and lead because really, at the end of the day, despite all the screaming, there is no crisis.

***

I end with optimism, as why not. One way to change minds about the current crisis is through information. We all know this, and we all know about the marvelous changes in technology that allow for the spreading of messages that are not necessarily popular with gatekeepers and establishments. But there's something new happening in the realm of political communication that must be noted. Speeches are back. They have been rescued and restored as a political force by the Internet.

In the past quarter-century or so, the speech as a vehicle of sustained political argument was killed by television and radio. Rhetoric was reduced to the TV producer's 10-second soundbite, the correspondent's eight-second insert. The makers of speeches (even the ones capable of sustained argument) saw what was happening and promptly gave up. Why give your brain and soul to a serious, substantive statement when it will all be reduced to a snip of sound? They turned their speeches into soundbite after soundbite, applause line after applause line, and a great political tradition was traduced.

But the Internet is changing all that. It is restoring rhetoric as a force. When Gov. Mitch Daniels made his big speech -- a serious, substantive one -- two weeks ago, Drudge had the transcript and video up in a few hours. Gov. Chris Christie's big speech was quickly on the net in its entirety. All the CPAC speeches were up. TED conference speeches are all over the net, as are people making speeches at town-hall meetings. I get links to full speeches every day in my inbox and you probably do too.

People in politics think it's all Facebook and Twitter now, but it's not. Not everything is fractured and in pieces, some things are becoming more whole. People hunger for serious, fleshed-out ideas about what is happening in our country. We all know it's a pivotal time.

Look what happened a year ago to a Wisconsin businessman named Ron Johnson. He was thinking of running for the Senate against an incumbent, Democratic heavy-hitter Russ Feingold. He started making speeches talking about his conception of freedom. They were serious, sober, and not sound-bitey at all. A conservative radio host named Charlie Sykes got hold of a speech Mr. Johnson gave at a Lincoln Day dinner in Oshkosh. He liked it and read it aloud on his show for 20 minutes. A speech! The audience listened and loved it. A man called in and said, "Yes, yes, yes!" Another said, "I have to agree with everything that guy said." Mr. Johnson decided to run because of that reaction, and in November he won. This week he said, "The reason I'm a U.S. senator is because Charlie Sykes did that." But the reason Mr. Sykes did it is that Mr. Johnson made a serious speech.

A funny thing about politicians is that they're all obsessed with "messaging" and "breaking through" and "getting people to listen." They're convinced that some special kind of cleverness is needed, that some magical communications formula exists and can be harnessed if only discovered. They should settle down, survey the technological field and get serious. They should give pertinent, truthful, sophisticated and sober-minded speeches. Everyone will listen. They'll be all over the interwebs.

Third-party content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Patriot Post.

Print
9 Comments
Post a Comment
|
Email
Tweet

Comments

Brian

Not to denigrate your theories about why congress critters are blind to the financial crisis, but my personal belief is they are willfully blind to it because they have nothing, absolutely nothing, to lose by it. Their portfolios are protected from any financial collapse in ways that not even Goldman-Sachs could duplicate. They are totally disconnected from the realities of life. Hopefully the new breed of home-grown, Tea Party statesman will reverse this trend. Take away the gravy train. No more lifetime retirement benefits after one term in office. No more retirement benefits, period. Most of these (insert your own personal epithet here) are already rich when the come into office, why in God's name should the taxpayers provide them with lifetime income? Hencforth all laws passed by Congress shall be applicable to Congress. I still remember the House banking scandal and the number of Congressmen writing bad checks. If anyone in the private sector had written that many bad chacks for that large a sum, they would STILL be in prison, and the officers of the bank that allowed it to happen would be in the cell next door. Most of all, TERM LIMITS!

Posted February 26, 2011 at 10:01:04 AM

Scott

Brian...I couldn't agree with you (or Peggy) more. You said what I've (and many of my friends /colleagues)been saying for years. Those in Congress had to be wealthy to even be elected (sad to say) or had to have a multitude of wealthy backers. Money wins elections. So, as (already wealthy) servants of THE PEOPLE...they should NOT enjoy lavish retirements after short terms and unequaled health care benefits. They are so "insulated" from their actions, it's practically inconceivable.

I served this country in the USAF and was promised by my recruiter (as many others were) that I and my spouse would have FREE health care for life if I stayed in at least 20 years. I retired in 2000 and have witnessed a steady erosion of those benefits as have so many others. What was supposed to be "free" has cost me annual premiums, copays, etc. since before I retired. Congress even decided to "round-down" our retirement check to the nearest dollar. I guess since it's only pennies, why should we mind our pay being stolen from us? They could've as easily rounded it up to simplify accounting, but NO....that would've COST them! It's funny to hear Secretary of Defense Gates state that "retiree benefits are unsustainable" while we send $$ billions around the world in foreign aid, and other unnecessary "investments". It's also hard to hear that "we all must sacrifice/tighten our belts" when it was our "leaders" (and I use that term loosely) who have made backroom deals and commitments that have put us in the financial condition that our children and grand chldren will be forced to deal with as we continue to "kick the can further down the road". That's if we don't go the way of Greece or Iceland before then.

Posted February 26, 2011 at 4:41:25 PM

Eliezer Yaari

This is a powerful, clear, ground breaking article. All of us who are involved and care about social change should have this article posted on their walls. Thank you.

Eliezer Yaari

Active Chairman

give2gether.com

Posted February 26, 2011 at 5:32:05 PM

Scott

Posted February 26, 2011 at 5:34:41 PM

Scott

Posted February 26, 2011 at 5:59:18 PM

Vicki G

Ms. Noonan's introductory bit particularly struck a chord. My left-wing family never seems to question a single thing this destructive administration does. When I finally got my mother to take one question, I asked, "What about the fact that this state (California) and this country are going broke?"

Incredulous, and without missing a beat, she answered, "They always find the money somehow, and they will this time, too."

She wasn't the only one who was incredulous.

Posted February 27, 2011 at 8:49:38 PM

Pondering Patriot

Scott, I have to disagree that "those in Congress had to be wealthy to even be elected". I personally know one of the newly elected Congressmen. Nether he nor his family are wealthy at all. He spent an enormous amount of energy and time meeting people and giving speeches. I was surprised by his wealth of knowledge on a broad range of issues.

Having said that, however I do not feel we owe any Congressman or Senator a life time annuity. His salary and benefits should cease when he leaves office. Serving no longer than 10 year. It should truly be a service and a sacrifice to the country.

In Oklahoma we are blessed to have several intelligent Congressmen and Senators.

Posted February 28, 2011 at 3:39:13 PM

Richard Ryan

Patriot: You`re also cursed to be close to Missouri where we only have one house member who is intelligent.His name is Billy Long from Springfield,Mo.We have one Senator named Clare McCaskett who is a liberal Democrap, and one Senator named Roy Blunt, who is a RINO and might as well stay home.We have Kansas City and St.Louis to thank for McCaskett, and God knows who to thank for Blunt.The only thing good about Blunt is that he beat the Democrap named Joyless Carnahan.

Richard Ryan

Lamar,Missouri

Posted February 28, 2011 at 4:06:51 PM

Tricia

I agree with Brian and Scott. I do not think that Senators and Congressmen should receive their salaries and health benefits for life. I also would like to see term limits. No congressman or senator should serve more than two terms in office and once served a congressman cannot run for senator and the same should apply to senators. These people are elected to office by THE PEOPLE and should be subjected not exempted from the laws they pass for the rest of us.

Scott, you are right. When someone voluntarily joins the Military they are given the promise of health care for life for themselves and their families if they serve 20 years. They swear to uphold the Constitution and protect this great country by laying down their lives if necessary.

They do this for the love of our very GOD BLESSED

country.

Posted March 1, 2011 at 11:29:48 AM

Patriot Headline Report

The Right Opinion

More Opinion

Grassroots Commentary

More Commentary

Policy and Analysis

Our Mission

To Support and Defend -- Read The Patriot Post -- It's Right. It's Free. -- www.patriotpost.us

"The Patriot's mission is to advocate for Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and to promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. Our objective is to provide Patriots across our nation with a touchstone of First Principles through brief, informative and entertaining analyses of relevant news, policy and opinion from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations, so they may better support and defend those Principles, and enlist others to join our ranks." —Mark Alexander, Publisher

The Patriot Post is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!

Support The 2012 Patriot Fund

Name	(required, displayed)
Email	(required, not displayed)
Comments

Navigation

Options