Saturday, May 18, 2024
33.0°F

Letters to the editor Dec. 30

| December 30, 2019 4:00 AM

Party loyalists

Like many Americans, I was surprised at the rigid attitude and position of most House Republicans concerning the conduct of President Trump as regards Ukraine. Recently, I spent hours reviewing old tapes from the Nixon and Clinton impeachment proceedings to see if I could gain some understanding. In both cases they were not helpful in that several members from the President’s own party were critical of their conduct.

So I started asking myself why would party loyalists in 1974 (35%) and then again in 1998 (11%) break ranks against a leader of their party then while Congressional Republicans now seem interested in allowing the President’s abuse of power and obstruction of justice charges (which are really much worse then in these two previous presidencies) go unpunished? The only explanation I can think of is the relative quality and character of the man – the president in each incidence. For the most part I believe the average American viewed Nixon and Clinton as basically decent and moral people.

They had many shortcomings sure, but by and large the general populace accepted that these were men who served their party, the country and our constitution responsibly. I don’t believe that’s true for President Donald Trump. In fact, I believe it’s the opposite – the average American (and especially Congressional Republicans) see Trump for who he’s always been. Someone who disrespects the law, party loyalty, is crude and crass, etc., and therefore his immoral conduct and actions are practically expected. No surprise, no shock – nothing to be overly concerned about.

This seems the only plausible explanation why otherwise fair-minded and thoughtful Congressional Republicans remain in support of this president’s conduct. I find that quite telling (or as the Des Moines Register reported in 2017 “Trump possesses worst qualities of ex-presidents” ­— a crook, bigot and an incompetent — or as Forbes did last April “Trump embodies the definition of a bad leader”).

—Pat Malone, Columbia Falls

Shallow tribal identity

If you feel deep sadness over viciousness expressed by tribalistic Republican-Democrat extremism, you are the rare one. Thank you for resisting the divide and conquer strategy successfully used against us. I use the politically incorrect term tribalistic because it captures the emotional basis of hatred. Philosophical differences notwithstanding, hatred never has an intellectual basis.

Tribal loyalty is based on the identity of us against them, tribal superiority and loyalty to tribal leadership that is unquestioned … roadblocks to recognizing common ground and learning from the other side as iron sharpens iron.

Examples of tribalism include:

1. Anyone who has a heart is against murder of innocent people (common ground). Yet the Democrat Party supports abortion murdering innocent babies, the Republican Party supports wars of aggression murdering innocent civilians.

2. Both sides believe in free speech and justice, but only for their tribe. The other tribe they viciously disparage, demanding government entities squelch their speech.

3. Both sides desire peace. Democrats’ beloved Obama spoke peace while promoting wars of aggression. Republicans’ beloved Trump gives lip service to promoting peace, yet is responsible for more civilian war casualties than Obama.

My hope is in God, not people. Nevertheless, God gives people jurisdiction over many arenas. My prayer is for deep, genuine unity arising from love of Truth and God’s laws of peace, love, justice and liberty resonating with people made in His image.

­—Annie Bukacek, Kalispell