|
WARS 2004 |
|
|
|
 |
|
One Nation Not
|
It may be time to divide
along 'red' & 'blue' lines
By MURRY FRYMER
of TheColumnists.com
It was inspiring listening to my governor Arnold Schwarzenegger tell the Republican Convention about that magical moment in his youth. He said that when he first heard Richard Nixon deliver a speech, right then and there he knew he wanted to be an American!
For me, listening to Arnold inspire the throng, right then and there I knew I wanted to be a Canadian.
Actually, I was born in Canada and came to Cleveland as a child. Back then I was thrilled to be leaving a place that was reputed to be the most boring place on earth. I believe it still is.
But I have learned new respect for boredom. Canadians have a certain decorum. And while the English speaking population and the French speaking population don’t exactly admire each other’s inflections, they do, for the most part, get along.
Ah yes, some years back the French made a fuss about forming their own separate nation. On the whole, nations don’t like splitting up. Presidents and prime ministers want to govern as big a piece of the world as they can. The breach was breached. A split may just have been too much trouble. And so it passed.
In the U.S., our breach of nearly 150 years ago was smoothed over too, but it took a bloody civil war to resolve it. Such is the differences between how Americans and Canadians do things.
Nevertheless, watching and feeling the enmity in the two political conventions, I think this separation idea should be looked at again. If we can do it peacefully, it may well have merit.
Look, it is pathetically obvious that the so-called “blue states,” where “liberal is not a dirty word,” and the “red states” where “go fuck yourself” is considered good political rhetoric, are now too hostile to keep this union thriving.
It isn’t just that we don’t like each other. Some marriages have that problem and thrive nonetheless. No, we just don’t want the same things. If there were a Blue States of America and a Red States of America, we probably would find each other amusing and walk the other way.
Having listened now to Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush, where the different tones and goals were obvious, I think I can say this:
*The BSA would not now be at war in Iraq. It wouldn’t have happened. The RSA, on the other hand, would probably have obliterated Iraq in the first month and moved on to Iran.
*The BSA would probably not include “under God” in the oath of allegiance, if in fact it found a need for an oath at all. The RSA would probably recite its oath with one hand on the flag and one hand on the bible, reflecting how, in their thinking, God and country are intertwined.
*The BSA would not know what Creationism is. The RSA would use the New Testament as a history text.
*The BSA would have a national health program in place and pay high taxes for that perk. The RSA would invest its health money in the stock market. In good years, everybody would get checkups. In bad years, it would be unpatriotic to get sick.
*The BSA tax code would be steeply graduated. The RSA tax code would be a flat tax or a national sales tax.
*Smoking would be illegal in the environmentally-sensitive BSA, as would diesel cars and flatulence. The RSA would declare discounts on Hummers.
*The BSA would use the highest proportion of its budget for education. The RSA would opt for defense, remaining the world’s super-power.
Well, there are many more differences. But how would all this work out?
Most of the gay people in the BSA would be married. Most of the straight people would be divorced.
Wealthy people in the RSA would send their kids to college in the BSA. The wealthiest people in the BSA would move to the RSA.
Fox would be the top news network in the RSA. The BSA would get its news from Jon Stewart’s Daily Show.
After a few years, the RSA would probably invade the BSA because the smell of marijuana was wafting over the border. Thanks to the marijuana, the BSA would not notice.
The RSA would be governed by the Passion Party of President Mel Gibson. The BSA would be ungovernable.
It would be a better world.
©2004
by Murry Frymer. The Murry
Frymer caricature is ©2000 by Jim Hummel. The illustrations
include elements taken from IMSI's Master Clips Collection, 1895
Francisco Blvd. E., San Rafael, CA, 94901-5506, USA.
You
can comment on this column online. Please address your message
to either "The Editors" or Murry Frymer. To send an
email, click here: talkback@thecolumnists.com
| Home | About Us | Archives | Talkback | Shopping Mall |