James Buckley died yesterday. He was 100 years old. Although he had varied accomplishments, it is likely that he is not as well-known as his younger brother, William F (Bill) Buckley. One of James' accomplishments was that he was a one term Senator from NY, until he was defeated by Dan Moynihan. It was during that one term that James introduced a theory that haunts this country to this day.
James was arguing that private funding of political campaigns should not be limited, because limiting funding limited a candidate's opportunity to campaign, which limited, according to James' argument, free speech. James' argument prevailed. So now, we have abundant private money in politics, Citizens United, untrackable "dark money," bought off and owned SCOTUS Justices, and various other kinds of corruption. It is of course worth noting that James, like Bill, was a conservative, and this fact has a lot to do with his argument in favor of private money in politics.
As two frames of reference, we here in BP have a date before which no one can declare a candidacy for Commissioner (our only Village elected office). No one argues that hopefuls should be able to declare candidacies a day, or a week, or a month, or a year before that date. Has our speech been in some way "limited?" Sure. But we're fair and honorable about it, and no one complains. The other frame of reference is speculative, and it depends on whether or not James formally debated his opponents (there were three candidates, he got 39% of the vote, a plurality was good enough, and he won). If he did have to debate them, the article I read did not say he protested that he, and everyone else, was given, let's say, three minutes to answer a question, or that he demanded four hours instead, so that his "free speech" would not be limited.
I have said many times, and I will continue to say, that no one can adhere to the Rep/con agenda without being a hypocrite, dishonest, or both. It just can't be done. Let's say you're a Rep/con, and it horribly offends you to pay taxes. So one way or another, you stumble onto a government that lowers your taxes. The result is a large federal deficit. If you're honest and honorable, you take responsibility for the deficit. And if you want to lower that deficit by reducing spending, then you just do it, and proudly. You don't blame the deficit on Barack Obama, as of the day he takes office, or sit through Joe Biden's SOTU address smugly shaking your head "no," or shrieking and calling him a "liar," when he says Reps/cons want to reduce Social Security benefits (which have nothing to do with the deficit), all while you're scheming to do precisely what Biden just said you were doing.
And if you're so devoted to what the Constitution says, then you don't pretend the "Second Amendment" has anything to do with guns, and you honor, fiercely (as fiercely as you honor "free speech" and your wish not to pay taxes), the separation of church and state. Unless you're a hypocrite, dishonest, or both, in which case you just make your own rules, that have nothing to do with anything, except you and what you want.
The fact is that the majority of Americans commonly don't favor Reps/cons or their impossible-to-reconcile agenda, which disadvantages most Americans. That's why Reps/cons rely on so much money, tortured gerrymandering, lying, blaming other people for what they themselves do, and the rest. On the larger map, they can't prevail with a good argument. They most commonly don't have one. Not one that's coherent, consistent, honest, and makes sense, anyway.
James Buckley did this country a huge disservice. Maybe that's why Dan Moynihan defeated him in the next election.
No comments:
Post a Comment