Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Polipundit criticizes the people of Massachusetts for their continued support of Teddy Kennedy...
Now, from my perspective, he makes a good point, I can't understand why the people of Massachusetts didn't kick him out of office years and years ago. But I dare say the people of Massachusetts would disagree with me, that they think that Kennedy is just fine by them, that he does them proud.
Which brings me to the tonight's big thought. Americans now seem to be defined by our differences with one another and not so much by what we have in common. We used to be defined by what we shared, and not by our differences with one another... as things seem to exist today.
On issue after issue - whether it be Teddy Kennedy, the War on Terror, going after Iraq, affirmative action, immigations, the minimum wage or abortion rights - we define things as 'there's us... and there's them'. We don't talk about and celebrate what we share... for the simple reason that we don't share much anymore.
So.... why should we stick together? Why shouldn't we divorce? Why not let the blues and the reds go their own way? Obviously, the blues don't like having to hang around the reds... and heaven knows they sure hate having a red in charge (which is the same feeling the reds will have the next time a blue manages to win an election).
America is a huge place - there's plenty of room for all of us... we just need to re-organize ourselves.
So... I'm proposing that the two sides appoint someone to negotiate a divorce and, most importantly, a property settlement. Let's divide the country (and given the efficiencies of air travel, the two sides don't have to actually be contiguous). Let's divide the assets of the country... the gold in Fort Knox, the Park System, the military hardware, the Library of Congress and so on. The sports teams in each area would stay where they are and would truly become representative of their area (unlike the way things are now, where the NY Giants have precious little to do with NY).
And if you were living in the area your 'side' negotiated for itself, then all would be fine. If you were on the wrong side, you'd be able to move. You wouldn't have to move, but you wouldn't be a full-fledged member of that side... your status would be akin to a German living in London.
Adn then each side can go about living their lives the way they want, without interference from people who just don't see things the same way as they do. Reds would be able to send their kids to parochial schools, using taxpayer dollars to pay the tuition. The Blues could have an open border policy and let in whomever wanted to show up. The Reds could insist on strigent security measures, while the Blues could opt for a minimalistic approach, based mostly on the hope that the terrorists would focus their attacks on the Red side. The Blues could push tax rates as high as they wanted, the Reds could push them as low as they wanted... and all without opposition from the other side.
And we'd get to see who did the best...