Celebrating civility

By Tanya K. Metaksa

As we embark on the celebration of our country’s first birthday in
the new millennium, what would those gentlemen who risked their lives,
their fortunes, and their sacred honor have thought about the way their
fellow countrymen treat each other these days?

We have lost the art of being polite. Civility is not cool today.
We have become a cutthroat society where everyone is out for him/her
self and “one nation under God” has splintered into too many tiny
isolated islands of differences.

It used to be that we were able to get along with our neighbors,
co-workers, and acquaintances even though there were religious,
political, and ethnic differences. Now everything and everyone has
become contentious.

Driving is contentious. As more and more cars clog the roads and
interstates, the driving has become worse. More drivers give each other
“the finger,” don’t use their blinker to signal a lane change, or turn
it on as they come perilously close to hitting the car they are cutting
off. Then there are those that drive at excessive speeds while weaving
through traffic as if they were Mario Andretti at the Indianapolis 500.

Exercise of our First Amendment religious freedom is contentious.
Even though the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a state
religion, our government certainly seems to show certain preferences
among religions. We have seen the deadly carnage against the Branch
Davidians. In an effort to diminish their religious beliefs the
government called their religion — a cult. Now while several liberal
senators are pushing the idea of making certain “hate” crimes federal
offenses, the Branch Davidian survivors and the relatives of those
killed at Waco are in court trying to hold the U.S. government
accountable for the deaths of Branch Davidians seven years ago. Was the
attack of the BATF against the Mt. Carmel Center and the subsequent
siege and attack by FBI in 1993 a government hate crime? Many people
think that’s exactly what it was.

When George W. Bush visited Bob Jones University last spring, the
anti-religious press sprang into action — trying to divide Catholics
from conservative Christians. It’s interesting to contrast the media
coverage of Bush’s visit to Bob Jones University and their coverage of
Vice President Al Gore’s visit to a Buddhist temple in 1996 when he
collected thousands of dollars for the Clinton-Gore re-election effort.
We certainly didn’t hear the press trying to drive a wedge between
Buddhists and members of other religious groups; in fact, we have heard
very little from the press about the illegality of the contributions Al
Gore collected.

Hillary Clinton ranted and raved about the “Vast Right Wing
Conspiracy” when her husband, the impeached Bill Clinton, lied to the
American people about his relationship with a White House intern named
Monica. Her focus was on all these people who were conspiring to “get”
Bill. I truly believe that she thinks there is a “Vast Right Wing
Conspiracy,” because she is involved in the “Vast Left Wing
Conspiracy.” A conspiracy which includes all the left wing think tanks,
the women’s movement, the National Democratic Party and all its
affiliates, the anti-gun groups, the children’s groups, the pro-choice
groups, the labor unions, the animal rights groups, the gay and lesbian
groups, the federal government, many state governments, and the media.

A good example of that conspiracy is the Misinformed Mom March, which
was coordinated by Donna Dees-Thomases, a former U.S. Senate staff
member, who worked for David Letterman and was the instigator to the
phony question-and-answer interview of candidate Hillary by Letterman.
Now we are told that the Moms who visited Washington, D.C., on Mother’s
Day from Richmond, Va., had their fares and lunches paid for by taxpayer
dollars. Love that spontaneity!

In the June 18 edition of the New York Times magazine, Stephen Hall
writes about too much phony civility. He bemoans the fact that our
candidates have become too civil. He calls for “more anger, not less,
in the (presidential) campaign.” He argues that in suppressing what he
calls “high-minded anger” we have lost the passion of politicians who
believe in anything except the results of last night’s poll or
yesterday’s focus groups. As a result he says, “In these self-absorbed
times, no one in politics gets publicly angry about anything larger than
his or her ambitions.”

The press, who continuously attacks those with whom they disagree,
decries negative campaigns, but the public really pays attention to
negativity. Americans enjoy watching candidates as well as ordinary
citizens, slug it out. If we didn’t, Jerry Springer, Sally Jesse
Raphael, Howard Stern and Don Imus wouldn’t be household names.

If you look at campaign commercials that got the most attention in
the past presidential elections, there are two that stand out — both
negative. The first is the 1964 commercial run only once by the Lyndon
Johnson campaign: a picture of a daisy that turns into the atomic bomb
explosion. The message was that Sen. Barry Goldwater, the Republican
nominee, was “trigger happy” and would start World War III. Johnson won
by a landslide.

The second one was the commercial featuring Willie Horton, a
convicted felon, going through the revolving door of justice time after
time. That commercial was run by then Vice President George Bush
against the Democratic nominee, Governor Michael Dukakis. The message
was that Dukakis was soft on crime. Bush won handily.

I remember the presidential election of 1948 when I was in grade
school. I was for Dewey and some of my classmates were for Truman. We
argued passionately, as kids do, about who was better. Yet, when it was
all over we walked arm in arm out to the playground and played
together. I wonder if my classmates and I saw each other again, whether
we would still enjoy each other’s company without having our differences
drive us apart.

Our founding fathers were passionate about their mission. You can
hear the passion as you read the speeches where they argued fervently in
favor of their vision of a democracy. Given some of their differences
it’s a wonder that they managed to pull it off. Maybe it was because
they understood what civility really meant. Treating others as you
would have them treat you, even if there are strong disagreements.

Millions have come to the United States of America to escape their
past and many more have died to keep us free. It’s time we put aside our
differences, stop being contentious, and celebrate our uniqueness as a
nation. We can have many differences of opinion, but let us relearn how
to be civil and polite. After all we live in the best country on earth,
bar none.

So as we celebrate this July Fourth weekend let’s raise a toast and
vow to be more civil to each other as we say, “Happy Birthday America!”

Tanya K. Metaksa

Tanya K. Metaksa is the former executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action. She is the author of "Safe, Not Sorry," a self-protection manual, published in 1997. She has appeared on numerous talk and interview shows such as "Crossfire," the "Today" show, "Nightline," "This Week with David Brinkley" and the "McNeil-Lehrer Hour," among others. Read more of Tanya K. Metaksa's articles here.