Incendiary Public Discourse

One of my recent favorite books to read is Listening to the Law by Associate United States Supreme Court Justice, Amy Coney Barrett. I would call it a must read for anyone who is interested in the United States Supreme Court. The book is an incredibly helpful study on the United States Constitution and how the Court operates.

But one of the most important points shared by Justice Barrett in her book really had nothing to do with the law but everything to do with the polarized political climate in our nation today. Following Justice Barrett’s confirmation by the United States Senate, Justice Barrett was eager to begin her work as an Associate Justice and began the task of moving in and organizing her office at the Court. Prior to commencing this undertaking, she naturally wondered what type of reception she would receive from her colleagues when she began her service on the Court. As she went about moving into her office, she was deeply touched by the kind notes and expressions of good will which had already been placed in her office. But I was at once surprised and deeply disappointed that Justice Barrett shared that she chose not to identify by name any of her colleagues who had warmly welcomed her to the Court. Now does anyone wonder why that would be the case.  Of course, Justice Barrett did not want any of her liberal colleagues on the Court to suffer embarrassment, criticism, or even vilification from the Progressive left because of the acts of kindness and support they offered to Justice Barrett. Is this sad?

Dating myself considerably, but contrast Justice Barrett’s story with another story which began on March 30, 1982. On that day, President Ronald Reagan was shot in an assassination attempt by John Hinkley Jr. Reagan was rushed to George Washington University Hospital where surgeons successfully removed a bullet from his chest. Prior to the surgery, President Reagan famously mused to the surgical team that he hoped they were all Republicans! Think this type of lighthearted humor could happen today?

During Reagan’s recovery from the assassination attempt, the very first-person President Reagan’s wife, Nancy, allowed to visit the President was Tip O’Neil the Speaker of the House of Representatives and a Democrat. To be sure, Speaker O’Neil did not agree with or support many of President Reagan’s policies and made his opposition well known. But on the day of his visit to the hospital, what did Speaker O’Neil do? He got down on his knees beside the President’s bed and prayed for his speedy recovery. This widely reported act of kindness by Speaker O’Neil served President Reagan well. But it also served our nation incredibly well. How likely is it that an act like Speaker O’Neil’s would occur today? Could an act like Speaker O’Neil’s be shared and reported publicly today without concern for harsh criticism and cynicism or even a threat of physical violence incited by certain groups’ hate filled comments on social media?

While it is easy to just shrug off Justice Barrett’s story as trite and trivial, I believe the story is a symptom of an even deeper and more serious condition which afflicts our great country. In my view, we are fast becoming a rigid polarized nation, and it is reflected every day in our public discourse. Now don’t hear me saying that we should not have open, robust, and at times uncomfortable debate and discussions on important public policy issues of the day. The First Amendment guarantees this. The health and future of our Democracy requires nothing less! Bring it on! What I am concerned about is the almost routine attempt to silence, cancel and vilify anyone sharing an unpopular viewpoint. As Associate Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas once stated, “the cure for unpopular speech is more speech”.

In March 2026 in America, is it fair to say that President Trump should have had more discussion with Congressional leaders and more communication with the American public before the commencement of the Epic Fury campaign in Iran? In my view, absolutely. It is unfortunate that he did not do so, and is likely the reason for lagging public support for the campaign. Is it fair to ask how the Strait of Hormuz will be reopened for commercial shipping and what the plan will be for the Gulf State region if the Islamic dictatorship in Iran survives the Epic Fury campaign in some unhealthy fashion? Once again, in my view absolutely!  But is it accurate and fair for some Progressives in the media and Congress to say that no previous President has ever undertaken similar military action without express Congressional approval? Is it appropriate for certain Progressives in the media and Congress to publicly liken the current President to a crazy strong man who is bent on starting WWIII with an end game of being a dictator king? Is it appropriate for some Progressives in the media and Congress to make comments that are tantamount to wishing that the Epic Fury campaign is a failed undertaking because of their animus for President Trump? Is this type of public rhetoric and discourse welcome news for the autocratic leadership in China and Russia?

My point in all of this is to say that the vitriol expressed in public discourse today in America may enhance social media followers and cable news ratings, but it is not healthy, and it is harmful to our great country. It is especially unhealthy for young people aspiring to a career in public service. Will the examples they see today from many Congressional leaders become their role models for how they approach public service? If this turns out to be the case, our nation will not be well served.

God bless you and thank you for the privilege of your time in reading my blog.