|
June 2, 2006 I try to make it a point not to spend entire columns rambling about myself – it’s just not professional. There are better things to be discussing, especially in the run-up to the 2006 midterm elections. However, since my absence from Useless-Knowledge, the liberal-conservative bug seems to have struck an already polarized website with great fervor. It seems to have struck at least one writer that I am a hopelessly idealistic liberal. Let’s talk about that. I will admit, my most recent column, In Defense of the Constitution, had a decidedly radical tenor. I neither deny this nor apologize for it, for despite the best attempts of men, women and politicians to be completely one thing or another; there will always be a few issues that make even the most tempered moderate shout out in support or disdain. However, like a vintage automobile starting up for the first time in decades, the first few columns after my return will certainly fire a bit louder than the regular running speed. A brief perusal of my columns in the past shows an avowed support for gun rights, part of my proud Hoosier heritage. Similarly, the liberal shouting train misses me on its peculiar hatred of organized religion, morally questionable embrace of government hand-outs and fully-legal abortion, and affirmative action quotas. This is to name but a few of the topics I have written on since 2004. To file my beliefs under the “liberal” blanket of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Edward Kennedy is to either purposefully ignore or painfully misread my record. Instead, most of the public work I have done, both in Indiana and here in the moral void of Washington, has involved the advancement of moderate political views. Indiana is a decidedly “red” state, but it is a state that finds more love for common sense and straight-talking than political party. Governor Frank O’Bannon proved that, as did Governor Joseph Kernan, whom I had the pleasure of working with in 2004 as both an intern and eventually an Assistant Field Director. Indiana also lays claim to Senator Evan Bayh, moderate supreme and possible 2008 presidential candidate. It has been an honor to be involved with his office. There is an obsession with defining even non-political things as “liberal” or “conservative,” as if there is no other title. With few exceptions, any person not subscribing to the Republican Party is, by default, a liberal. They hate America, religion, and all that is good with the good-old-days. This is merely an illusion, though, and those who take it seriously miss out on a vast swath of moderate Democrats and Republicans who seek measured, moderate change, a return to common-sense fiscal policy and social policies that do not give inexcusable favor to one group or another. Since writing these columns, I have received about equal amounts of angry e-mail from both liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans, each accusing me of being the other. It seems unacceptable that someone relatively young in the political sphere, who is either destined to be a “great liberal” or “solid conservative” depending on the e-mail, could be anything other than unshaped clay. Is it that uncommon to find moderate, big-tent voices in this polarized political atmosphere? A moderate need not justify himself or herself to every accusation of liberalism or conservatism, except when such explanation is merited for clarification. In politics, as in life, records speak for themselves. ------------ About the author: Max Burns is a 19-year-old moderate Democrat from Indianapolis. He has been moved from the Hoosier Heartland to the moral void that is Washington D.C. to study Government & International Politics at George Mason University. He is also the author of the fantasy novel Alcardia. Email: mburns6@gmu.edu Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|