What Are Words For?

Sometimes I wonder if modern pundits and newly minted representatives can even define words like “negotiation” and “compromise.”

They are in the dictionary, of course. But most people proclaiming fundamental political beliefs are frightened of books, magazines, websites and even newspapers not churned out by their own kind. When strung together into ideas, it seems, words challenge their hard and fast version of the world.

Besides, when a belief is held firmly, as a changeless thing, no amount of logic, fact or persuasion will cause this type to yield their ground—however porous.

When Bob Kerrey visited my office over the summer campaign season, I asked him what the Senate could do to help struggling towns like Kimball. He expressed a desire to drive funds toward completion of the rail spur, in hopes of creating jobs in town. Deb Fischer, who also stopped by, responded to the same question with “get government out of the way.”

There are “pinheads” and “patriots,” right? It’s just so simple.

And so we are treated to stubborn “everything should be on the table but…” position statements from Tea Party Express’ Amy Kremer or those in the pocket of the National Rifle Association when it comes to discussion of such critical (and complex) issues as the so-called fiscal cliff, the debt ceiling and legislation to limit gun violence. In the lead up to the cliff, President Barack Obama likewise insisted on tax increases on the wealthy. In other words, everything of theirs should be open to cuts. Everything of ours is sacred…although the Democrats did bend a little on their $250,000 demand.

What about “hypocrisy?” Oh, there are many examples to choose from, right and left. Republican representative Steven Palazzo of Mississippi voted against the initial $9.7 billion flood insurance package for Hurricane Sandy victims, after recently begging for more Federal funds for his home state to deal with a long ago storm.

When backed into a corner by reality, hardliners coil and strike back, either with smear campaigns or their own more acceptable fictions. Opponents of George W. Bush referred to the president as “stupid” or “unfit.” Those against even the slightest tax increase took to calling generic wealthy “job creators.” During the most recent election, conservative fundamentalists faced with data suggesting Obama would claim reelection decided to slap such information as “liberal” and commissioned their own studies to confirm their own beliefs.

Refusing to deal with real information was part of what cost Mitt Romney the election. In addition to calling shame on Congress for their failure to commit aid to Sandy victims, elected officials like Chris Christie and Peter King should also point the finger at Karl Rove…which brings us to little problems like “evidence” and “proof.”

Last week the story of a woman protecting her home from an intruder with a handgun proved, to some minds, the viability of the NRA mantra. Then again, one of my family friends was killed accidently by her gun-wielding husband when she stepped through their door after her morning jog and triggered the alarm.

Neither is conclusive evidence for or against gun control. They are just incidents.

Birthers, HSUS...it’s easier to claim conspiracy than base a conclusion upon something so reckless and unpredictable as honest, open minded research (which might steer one away from convenient assumption). Charles Krauthammer and other so-called “experts” claimed Hilary Clinton faked an illness. Before that people pointed the finger of suspicion at Dick Cheney when rolling blackouts hit California.

Words mean little when used by partisans on either side. Unfortunately, the most partisan (and least capable) seem to end up on the airwaves or in the halls of Congress far too often.