Anyone else notice the silence? Listen to what you don’t hear in the Age of Obama. Since Barack Obama has been sworn in as the 44^th president the lack of rancor and angry debate on abortion, guns, and gays has been stunning. In fact the only news on the culture front has been losses by the right as Iowa and Vermont passed pro-gay marriage laws. Otherwise, the old right-wing wedge issues of years past are met with a deafening silence in the body politic of 2009. Let us all give thanks.

A “Culture War” requires a president to stir the social pot. President Obama has not and will not lend the prestige of his office to such a destructive agenda.

The Great Culture War announced with so much fanfare by Pat Buchanan at the 1992 GOP convention has all but disappeared. There is a school of thought, of which I am a founding member, who believe the war existed only on the fringes of politics in the first place and never was a mainstream battle. To be sure, the fringe on both sides of these issues are sometimes loud and annoying but their ranks are limited to a small percentage of the electorate and a few loud, sparsely attended Washington rallies on the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade or the National Right to Life day.

During the peak years of the little war (the late 80’s and 90’s) a few inexcusable crimes such as harassment and some murders of abortion doctors were perpetrated by radicals on the right. And what are now shallow shell organizations among the Christian Right, most specifically the Moral Majority and Christian Coalition, gamed the social agenda for contributions to keep their leadership in private jets. A few politicians won elections with outrageous cultural attacks on their opponents, and the nation was subjected to Tom DeLay and Senate Majority Leader (and doctor) Bill Frist’s exploitation of a brain-dead Terry Schaivo. But overall mainstream voters ignored the battles.

Today the issues of abortion, guns, and gays barely register in single digits in the polls. There are several reasons cited for this lack of interest among the vast majority of Americans.

Keep Reading …

The furor over the anti-gay marriage comments made by Miss California, who was competing in the Miss USA contest were both unnecessary and inflammatory. It reminded me of a former gay-bashing beauty contestant,  Anita Bryant. The less than brilliant Bryant traveled the country in the ’70’s spewing hatred towards gays by her hateful speech and support of anti-gay referendums.

How about being Good Samaritans and keeping God out of politics?

I don’t know where this woman is now or if she is still alive but her sentiments certainly are among those felt by a minority of Americans who apparently don’t believe the Constitution of the United States provides for civil liberties for all our people. Some opponents of gay marriage love to quote the Bible as an anti-gay source.

I am a Christian, read the Bible daily, and attend church at least once a week (hard for some of you wingers to believe, isn’t it, that there are born-again Christians who happen to be liberals). I do not believe our Savior would have spoken out in favor of anti-gay referendums. “Give onto Caesar what is Caesar’s.”

How about being Good Samaritans and keeping God out of politics?

Having said that,  I am appalled that the question was raised at all. Given the fact that the questioner, celebrity blogger Perez Hilton, is gay makes it appear that he is injecting his own politics into what is after all just a beauty contest.  It’s time to cool the rhetoric on both sides on the gay marriage issue and leave it to state legislatures and the courts which is where the debate belongs.

Far from looking like a rookie president on his first international trip, President Barack Obama took the G20 Summit in London by storm. He towered over our European allies who had been criticizing the U.S. for months by setting a forceful but graceful tone for the meeting. Obama accepted partial U.S. blame for the economic meltdown but refused to accept suggestions by France and Germany that this was primarily an “Anglo/Saxon” inspired crisis. Obama has made it clear that the US is still the most powerful economic force in the world, planned to remain so, but made it clear the US was not going to go it alone.

America is coming back as the dominant power on the world stage thanks to Barack Obama’s many skills — whether Republicans like it or not.

The president displayed the diplomatic skills of a veteran president and, thus far, has avoided mistakes the Republican peanut gallery back home had expected (and had been rooting for). Mr. Obama, in less than 24 hours, made significant diplomatic breakthroughs that won praise from the foreign policy community. In his first meeting with the Russians George W. Bush looked into then-Russian President Putin’s eyes and found his “soul” but accomplished little else. President Obama, on the other hand, met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and, in an unexpected breakthrough, agreed to restart negotiations on reducing Russian and U.S. nuclear stockpiles which might actually save millions of real souls.

Keep Reading …

I noted with amusement The Wall Street Journal’s survey this week, “Obama, Geithner Get Low Grades From Economists.” The Journal polled 49 economists who graded the Obama-Geithner economic programs on a scale of 1 to 100. Overall, Obama received an average grade of 59 and Treasury Secretary Geithner received an average score of 51. Now this begs the question, “who cares what this crowd thinks?” This is a group whose profession failed to see the coming economic disaster for years despite some obvious warnings. Beyond that, these mostly “noted academics” (economists are overwhelmingly academics since most couldn’t find a real job) have not offered a single meaningful alternative to the administration’s programs.

Who cares what this crowd thinks? This is a group whose profession failed to see the coming economic disaster for years despite some obvious warnings.

Given the track record of economic projections by these “experts” over the years, if they were a Major League baseball team their collective batting averages would guarantee a 160 game losing season. Why anyone would listen to such a collective group of losers (from left to right) is beyond me. And to think the great Bob Woodward was suckered into writing a glowing tome about the self-proclaimed “greatest economic thinker” of the past quarter century — Alan Greenspan. The Woodward book was titled “Maestro,” but “Fraud” or “How I Believed in Santa and an Unregulated Free Market” would have been much more appropriate.

A word to future college students; forget economics courses and try woodworking or auto mechanics. You then might find useful employment. On the other hand, become an economist and learn the real secrets of Three Card Monte. Is it me or do most economists look perpetually depressed? Ah, to have the corner on the Prozac market with this crowd.

I wrote a piece this week for The FOX Forum about President Obama’s excellent housing plan. The piece received hundreds of comments — most of them negative. That’s fine. As a liberal, my writing seems to stimulate the right to have at me. I’m a big boy and can handle criticism. But personal attacks are not criticism, they are unnecessary and offensive. A few personal comments this week (as has been the case in previous writings) were not directed at me but at Rush Limbaugh’s struggle with pain pills.

Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh (AP file photo)

The Limbaugh comments I have received over the past few years appear to come from people who support my positions. Although I appreciate the support, I strongly resent the use of my writing as a vehicle to attack Limbaugh’s struggle with the painkiller OxyContin. The drug — which should be banned — has caused dependency in tens of thousands of people. It is also one of the most difficult addictions to control.

I rarely agree with Rush Limbaugh on anything politically and often attack his views. That’s what free debate in a democracy is about. But I consider Rush a brother in recovery and understand how much was required (and will always be required) for him to stay clean. If you have suffered addiction it’s unlikely you would mock Limbaugh on the subject.

From all I can tell Rush has dealt with his addiction successfully and he deserves an enormous amount of credit for facing his problem, seeking professional help and most importantly his willingness to talk about the problem publicly. I’m willing to bet that many people, similarly addicted, were moved to seek help because Rush spoke out. The reason I believe this is I to am a recovering alcoholic and addict, and like Rush have spoken publicly about my recovery.

Keep Reading …