Seriously, how do you even begin the conversation?
So I'm driving to work this morning, tuned to NPR during the commercial interstices on KTLK here in Los Angeles, when I light upon a Morning Edition feature story about "rising Tea Party star" Keli Carender (nom de t00bz: "Liberty Belle"). And no sooner had the gushing story began than I heard this bit of profundity emanating from Ms. Carender's mouth:
I tried to boil down in essence what makes me so angry about [Democratic efforts to reform healthcare]. It's this idea that he [her Democratic Representative, Norm Dicks] and other people decide what the needs are of society, and what - who's more important and what gets prioritized. And in order to fund those things, they have to take from some people to give to the other people.
The mind reels. It is difficult for me to imagine just exactly where one would enter into a rational discussion about governance with such a person, a person who so clearly has no idea what a representative democracy is, who has no grasp of the concept of taxation and redistribution of wealth?
(And it doesn't speak well of NPR reporter Martin Kaste that he let Carender's answer go unremarked upon, never mind unchallenged.)
Given that Ms. Carender has such a problem with the American form of government - you know, the one our Founding Fathers set up with that, oh, what's it called? Oh, yeah! Constitution! - and the concept of taxation, I would be fascinated to hear exactly what alternatives she would propose. One might infer from her words that the only acceptable form of government would be a direct democracy, where every citizen would vote on every issue every time it came up - otherwise, how could the government, in her words, "decide what the needs are of society, and what - who's more important and what gets prioritized"?
I mean - right?
So, as if this breathtaking ignorance of middle-school civics weren't enough, no sooner do I hear that than I see kos's story on the results of his poll of self-identified Republicans, which included this astonishing result:
Do you believe Sarah Palin is more qualified to be President than Barack Obama?
Yes 53
No 14
Not Sure 33
Okay. Hold on.
As head-shakingly unbelievable as that result might be, it is not news to me. A couple of days after Barack Obama's election, I diaried about an exit poll that showed that
44% of the people who voted for John McCain believe that a person who doesn't know that Africa is a continent [that would be Sarah Palin - o.h.] is qualified to be vice president, while believing at the same time that Joe Biden is not qualified.
What is even more disturbing about kos's poll findings is that the percentage of Republicans who think Sarah Palin is more qualified than Obama or Biden has actually risen in the past 14 months. As the pollsters might say, it appears that Republicans are trending dumber.
Perhaps the GOP is simply being distilled to its essence, and what we are witnessing is the 180-proof, eye-popping, rot-gut moonshine that remains after 30 years of lies, fear-mongering, misdirection, undermining of government and pandering to the lowest common denominator.
Which leads to the inevitable question:
How do you find common ground with the lowest common denominator?
I ask that in all seriousness. Because I honestly don't know the answer.