Moderation Does Not Come Naturally

Moderation does not come naturally to humans. We over-eat. We over-drink. We even over-work and sometimes, believe it or not, over-exercise. So it is not uncommon for us to become obsessive-compulsive when defending a concept or goal that society finds worthy, such as treating people as individuals and not stereotyping them as a group. Unfortunately, this passionate devotion to an ideal can often blind us to reality.

Yesterday’s Los Angeles Times discussed how alleged Ft. Hood murderer, Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, “repeatedly earned favorable performance ratings in spite of mounting concerns about his views and behavior.” The article points to problems with the evaluation system itself, such as a “culture that encourages mainly positive reviews”. Several anonymous officers said the culture “has undercut the usefulness of the system for evaluating officers' strengths and weaknesses”. But let’s not kid ourselves. We all know why Hasan was treated with kid gloves.

In our efforts to avoid labeling people, we purposely ignore evidence staring us in the face. It is safer to hold hands and sing Kumbaya than to risk being called intolerant. The truth is that in Hasan’s case, none of his superiors wanted to risk their own careers by exposing him. In today’s world accusations of discrimination are occupational murder. Many people would rather ignore what they see than be labeled racist, sexist or any other “ist”. So despite being accused of shirking his professional responsibilities as a psychiatrist, proselytizing to patients, and repeatedly expressing his extremist Islamic views, Hasan continually earned a free pass from his superiors. Many would characterize it as a game of “pass the buck”, but it is more accurately a case of “hot potato”.

I have a friend who is a black Roman Catholic priest. He chuckles when he recalls his seminary days. As a seminarian his orthodox views often conflicted with the views of the more liberal clergy who taught his classes. Often their teachings were in opposition to Church doctrine and dogma. My friend would think nothing of berating the teachers for their contrary views, because he knew that as a black seminarian he was, in his own words, “untouchable”. The liberal clergy would make the lives of white seminarians miserable when they expressed similar views and aggressively defended them. My friend knew that a racist label against any of these clergy would ruin their cushy academic lives. So rather than single out my friend, they bit their tongues and moved him along. Whether or not you agree with my friend (as I do) for challenging the liberal clergy, he should not have been treated any differently than the white seminarians. But that is not today’s reality.

40 or 50 years ago the pendulum swung in the extreme direction of allowing racism and sexism. Now it is swinging just as extremely in the opposite direction, classifying anyone who does not subscribe to political correctness as an “ist” to be removed like a cancerous tumor. Perhaps sometime in the near future the pendulum will settle somewhere in the middle . . . although, given our track record for overdoing things that does not seem very likely.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Need a PR Specialist? Perhaps my 13 years of PR experience can satisfy those needs. I have publicized world champions such as Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfield, and mega-events like Lewis-Tyson and De la Hoya-Vargas. Contact Donald Tremblay (The Rain Maker) at 718-664-3405 or at dtremblay@earthlink.net. For more info about me visit my LinkedIn Profile.

Is Our President Oblivious?

Is our president oblivious or does he simply not care about the impact his gestures have on the American public? One thing is certain: whatever his motivation, President Obama’s actions often leave observers scratching their heads in disbelief.

Seven months ago the president created an uproar by bowing to the Saudi king. Bowing to a foreign leader would bring grief to any U.S. president, but what made this especially upsetting is Obama’s ties to Islam. (A similar reaction would be elicited were a Roman Catholic American president to kiss the papal ring). Yet, despite the fury his bow generated, President Obama did it again. This time he chose to bow to Japanese Emperor Akihito. Why?

The president has spent the past several months apologizing for America’s past indiscretions, legitimate and imagined. Maybe his bows are a show of humility to those he believes we have wronged. Perhaps the bows are nothing more than signs of respect. After all there is no reason to assume that our president has evil intentions. Yet, one wonders how he can be so mindful of showing respect to the world community, but act so callously to Americans?

Case in point: Last week 14 people were murdered at Fort Hood allegedly by Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan. The president first addressed the massacre while attending a Tribal Nations Conference in Oklahoma. Instead of opening the Ft Hood tragedy press conference by offering his condolences to the victims, the president first thanked Kevin Calvey and the Department of Interior, and then gave “a shout out” to a Congressional Medal of Honor winner. It wasn’t until two minutes into the press conference that the president even mentioned the bloodbath. Stunning, truly stunning.

Aren’t any of those high-powered administration publicists warning him that he is alienating the American people? Or have they warned him and been summarily ignored? One cannot blame Americans for wondering whether their president lacks empathy for the very people who elected him. People criticized President Clinton for not making a decision without first polling the public. I’m sure those same people would rather have a president who cares too much about their opinions than one who doesn’t seem to care at all.