From the Monkey to the Democrat

The way I see it is that we have at least two well-developed views of America. The first is a direct descendent of the Founders where government was the enemy, they thought they were in charge and they told us what to do. They wore red coats and wouldn't go away so we had to shoot them. We were the militia, those farmers with guns who did the shooting.

Once the redcoats left, we got together in groups and argued about who was in charge, but not much shooting, except for a few duels to honor the French who helped us. We keep guns to let people know we haven't forgotten and that we are still a force to be reckoned with. We watch Fox news and we'll give up our guns when you pry them from our cold dead fingers.

The second major view is that we have evolved, from the monkey to the union member to the Democrat, and we are all kind of sophisticated now, live in big cities, believe that global warming means we should live in the park, heat with compost and listen to National Public Radio.

Having evolved, we look down on the gun-toting monkeys as cretins, whatever those are, and define the word "militia" as "the military." To continue our sophisticating ways, we take from the rich and give to the poor. We tax sinful activities -- like smoking, drinking, gambling, burning gasoline and being productive -- to send a message of disapproval and to pay for our beneficence -- whatever that is -- to the poor, the dispirited, the depressed, the gender bent, the addicted, the many victims of a cruel fate meted out by the most wealthy and productive and fair-minded country in the history of the world.

The first view excludes those who don't share the first view. They just want to be left alone with plenty of space around them so someone with the second view won't move in next door or walk on their lawn.

First view parents say "tough it out," and "rub dirt on it," to their children's troubles, maybe take them to boxing or martial arts classes, while second view parents take kids to get medication and hire lawyers to sue bullies.

The second view warmly embraces the poor the broken, the dispirited, the criminal, the unemployed, the shiftless, the addicts, the criminals, the crazies, and those with a propensity to the many vices the flesh is heir to.

The first view sees that as completely unfair, because all those losers vote Democratic and the ranks of loserhood are growing. The second feel it is our burden to shoulder, and drag them from their TV sets down to the polls to vote, because after all, they are just poor weak creatures who need good examples, and in exchange we get tons of votes.

Both first and second views spend money like drunken sailors, no matter what they say. The first view spends like crazy on the military because we want to keep bad people from moving in next door to America. And the first view wants to hammer the dictators, the terrorists, the redcoats, the drug dealers and other bad people.

The second view believe we must make the wealthy and productive shoulder the burden of the losers, and so invent programs that provide food, pharmaceuticals, housing, abortions, caring, sharing, and other necessities of life to their charges. We believe we must all get along, and pass hundreds of laws to force us to do that. Cumbaya.

The first view folk see the country as swerving to the left, closer and closer to the socialist state with the red flag. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," which -- while camouflaged as warm and fuzzy, requires a heavy government fist to enforce -- penalizes the productive and rewards the unproductive, and was the idea that gutted the USSR, Cuba and all such warm and fuzzy and broke economies.

The second view folks disagree, citing Euro-socialism as workable and dignified and very very sophisticated. Nothing as sophisticated as an English accent or Greek bailouts. The first view folk put stickers on pickup bumpers that say "Socialism is great until you run out of other people's money."

Can we all get along? No. The views are too different. The second view media do not understand the first view reality, and denigrate it, calling for compromise or partial surrender, or just waiting for the old white guys like Clint Eastwood to die off, for the dawning of a glorious socialist spring where the government tells you what to do, but everything is free.

It's too late for good manners. The first view is angry and itching for a fight. The second view is in charge for now and, smiling indulgently from Mt. Supermajority, will plunge leftward ignoring the first view perspective. They think they are in charge and they tell us what to do, and as in olden times, we're having us a Tea Party.