When I first posted my essay on “McCainism,” noting the McCarthyesque vibe from the McCain campaign, some folks here claimed that Jon Stewart’s likening McCain to Frankenstein–inadvertently unleashing a monster he couldn’t control–was far more apt.
On last night’s “Daily Show,” Jon Stewart drew parallels between the latest speeches and comments from the McCain campaign, not to mention a mid-West congresswoman, that had a definite McCarthyesque tint to it that didn’t even involve terrorism: instead it centered around real Americans versus, you know, people like me, who live in (or near) cities and aren’t voting for McCain. You know: unAmericans.
Now to be wholly fair, I watched the full video of the Congresswoman who stated that the media should launch an investigation into who in Congress might be, y’know, unAmerican. And I tend to blame her interviewer, Chris Matthews, who basically strung together stuff that she didn’t say, acted like she said it, and then hammered her until she blurted out something stupid. She was thrashing about in the deep end and Matthews tossed her an anvil for a flotation device. Still, McCain’s team seems to be moving beyond this whole notion that there are two Americas (Linda Ellerbe pointed out that red states/blue states is entirely a media construction) and floating the notion that those who aren’t with them aren’t part of “real America.”
Apparently I’m not a real American. And if you’re not voting for John McCain, why…neither are you.
Apparently the question has been asked and answered: No sense of decency at all.
PAD
• 
If not voting for McCain makes me unAmerican, then I am proudly unAmerican and have been since last Thursday!
With that said, I am a proud American who is shocked by the depths that McCain, someone I respected since the late 90’s for his politics (seemed like a good guy), and his campaign has gone to in order to win.
Well, Evil Twin, I ain’t American, either. Never mind that I’m a quarter Cherokee, a quarter Irish, a quarter Scots and a quarter Anglo-French. Makes no diff that I was born in a bathtub on Vinton Ave. in Memphis, I’m not American.
Pete, drop me a note at my email address and send me a link to that video, would you? I’d like to see what Chris did. He’s notorious for pounding on his victims until they say something dumb.
Even before all this, I wouldn’t have voted for McCain if you’d paid me a million dollars. I remember the way he folded in 2000, when the RNC made it plain to local campaign offices that Bush was the candidate of choice and McCain supporters would lose their funding if they kept backing him. And his incessant sucking up to this administration made me want to puke. To paraphrase Joe Straczynski, I wouldn’t vote for McCain if I were dying of cancer and the Republicans were giving free chemo at the door of the polls.
Miles
Well, Evil Twin, I ain’t American, either. Never mind that I’m a quarter Cherokee, a quarter Irish, a quarter Scots and a quarter Anglo-French. Makes no diff that I was born in a bathtub on Vinton Ave. in Memphis, I’m not American.
Pete, drop me a note at my email address and send me a link to that video, would you? I’d like to see what Chris did. He’s notorious for pounding on his victims until they say something dumb.
Even before all this, I wouldn’t have voted for McCain if you’d paid me a million dollars. I remember the way he folded in 2000, when the RNC made it plain to local campaign offices that Bush was the candidate of choice and McCain supporters would lose their funding if they kept backing him. And his incessant sucking up to this administration made me want to puke. To paraphrase Joe Straczynski, I wouldn’t vote for McCain if I were dying of cancer and the Republicans were giving free chemo at the door of the polls.
Miles
Please explain what being American is, surely the Robin Hood approach to governing is not a qualifier.
Please explain what being American is, surely the Robin Hood approach to governing is not a qualifier.
They’re desperate, so they’re making explicit something that has been very much in evidence ever since Bush got elected and that goes back at least to Clinton.
The only true Americans are God-fearing, gun-toting, xenophobic, plain speaking, real people that live in small towns and rural areas.
If you don’t match this profile, you’re a traitor.
They’re desperate, so they’re making explicit something that has been very much in evidence ever since Bush got elected and that goes back at least to Clinton.
The only true Americans are God-fearing, gun-toting, xenophobic, plain speaking, real people that live in small towns and rural areas.
If you don’t match this profile, you’re a traitor.
Olbermann had a special comment last night about the focus of some from the right (the McCain campaign, that Congresswoman from Minnesota, and Limbaugh) toward the “anti-American” and “real America” stuff. (And he did it without bringing up McCarthy, which I admit surprised me.)
Olbermann had a special comment last night about the focus of some from the right (the McCain campaign, that Congresswoman from Minnesota, and Limbaugh) toward the “anti-American” and “real America” stuff. (And he did it without bringing up McCarthy, which I admit surprised me.)
“Apparently I’m not a real American. And if you’re not voting for John McCain, why…neither are you.”
Not really a new tactic amongst the supporters of the Right. Glen Beck, a man once described by Stephan King as Satin’s retarded younger brother, even wrote a book titled The Real America some years ago now. That’s become a part of his shtick when doing his little rants now. Conservative values are always held up as a part of “the real America” while Glen thinks that it’s the height of high, sly insults to nod, wink and say in a silly voice that something that someone on the left says or does “isn’t the real America.”
To be fair to Mathews, he didn’t have to work to hard to get Michele Bachmann to say something stupid. This is the woman that spent a considerable amount of time fighting an in-school screening of Disney’s Aladdin for the kids because that evil, liberal Disney film was promoting and endorsing Paganism, magic and Witchcraft. My understanding is that she’s said and done a lot of dumb things and ain’t exactly that popular with the residents of Minnesota anymore. I could be wrong and I think we’ve got at least two regulars here from that frozen Northern state that can correct me if I am.
Craig J. Ries: “Olbermann had a special comment last night about the focus of some from the right (the McCain campaign, that Congresswoman from Minnesota, and Limbaugh) toward the “anti-American” and “real America” stuff. (And he did it without bringing up McCarthy, which I admit surprised me.)”
It didn’t surprise me that much. I think he has been learning that you can dilute the power of the big guns by using them too often and when and where it doesn’t quite rise to the level of that big gun. (Great, now I have AC/DC stuck on a loop in my brain.)
Pardon my fully spelling it out rather than using the symbols in place of letters that I often try to do here, but Limbaugh fifteen pounds of šhìŧ in a five pound bag and a fûçkìņg waste of human skin at this point. The fact that he’s treated as credible or semi-respectable by news programmers and channels is laughable. He’s an old, bitter, racist who is an admitted liar and water carrier and he deserves the sane treatment that most of the press gives Savage. Ignore him and let him fade away in time.
“Apparently I’m not a real American. And if you’re not voting for John McCain, why…neither are you.”
Not really a new tactic amongst the supporters of the Right. Glen Beck, a man once described by Stephan King as Satin’s retarded younger brother, even wrote a book titled The Real America some years ago now. That’s become a part of his shtick when doing his little rants now. Conservative values are always held up as a part of “the real America” while Glen thinks that it’s the height of high, sly insults to nod, wink and say in a silly voice that something that someone on the left says or does “isn’t the real America.”
To be fair to Mathews, he didn’t have to work to hard to get Michele Bachmann to say something stupid. This is the woman that spent a considerable amount of time fighting an in-school screening of Disney’s Aladdin for the kids because that evil, liberal Disney film was promoting and endorsing Paganism, magic and Witchcraft. My understanding is that she’s said and done a lot of dumb things and ain’t exactly that popular with the residents of Minnesota anymore. I could be wrong and I think we’ve got at least two regulars here from that frozen Northern state that can correct me if I am.
Craig J. Ries: “Olbermann had a special comment last night about the focus of some from the right (the McCain campaign, that Congresswoman from Minnesota, and Limbaugh) toward the “anti-American” and “real America” stuff. (And he did it without bringing up McCarthy, which I admit surprised me.)”
It didn’t surprise me that much. I think he has been learning that you can dilute the power of the big guns by using them too often and when and where it doesn’t quite rise to the level of that big gun. (Great, now I have AC/DC stuck on a loop in my brain.)
Pardon my fully spelling it out rather than using the symbols in place of letters that I often try to do here, but Limbaugh fifteen pounds of šhìŧ in a five pound bag and a fûçkìņg waste of human skin at this point. The fact that he’s treated as credible or semi-respectable by news programmers and channels is laughable. He’s an old, bitter, racist who is an admitted liar and water carrier and he deserves the sane treatment that most of the press gives Savage. Ignore him and let him fade away in time.
PZ Meyers links to, and also comments on, both videos (Olbermann and Stewart) here:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/10/against_mob_rule_and_pandering.php
Sorry, Myers, not Meyers. 🙂
Sorry, Myers, not Meyers. 🙂
I agree that this congresswoman is a scumbag and that a lot of people in the McCain campaign are pulling really nasty stuff.
On the bright side, the incredible ineffectiveness of these negative attacks might just change the political landscape. The competitor of that congresswoman raised over $800,000 in the 72 hours after her comment, which is almost as much as he’d raised in the entire race up until now. She’s gone from an easy reelection race to a toss-up. Combine that with McCain’s bad poll numbers and voters are sending a pretty clear message that they’re tired of this crap.
I agree that this congresswoman is a scumbag and that a lot of people in the McCain campaign are pulling really nasty stuff.
On the bright side, the incredible ineffectiveness of these negative attacks might just change the political landscape. The competitor of that congresswoman raised over $800,000 in the 72 hours after her comment, which is almost as much as he’d raised in the entire race up until now. She’s gone from an easy reelection race to a toss-up. Combine that with McCain’s bad poll numbers and voters are sending a pretty clear message that they’re tired of this crap.
“These are simple farmers. These are people of the land, the common clay of the New West. You know, morons.” –Blazing Saddles
My father grew up on a farm in Iowa during the Great Depression. I’m from Omaha. I’ve got relations who send out emails about Obama’s secret islamic agenda. But then, there are stupid people everywhere (like the people who stand in front of the opening doors on the subway during rush hour).
What I haven’t seen is the realization that Governor Palin just called Mayor Rudy Giuliani and General Colin Powell unamerican.
As for population, Nonmetro areas contain 17% of the population in about 80% of the land area. (http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Population/)
“These are simple farmers. These are people of the land, the common clay of the New West. You know, morons.” –Blazing Saddles
My father grew up on a farm in Iowa during the Great Depression. I’m from Omaha. I’ve got relations who send out emails about Obama’s secret islamic agenda. But then, there are stupid people everywhere (like the people who stand in front of the opening doors on the subway during rush hour).
What I haven’t seen is the realization that Governor Palin just called Mayor Rudy Giuliani and General Colin Powell unamerican.
As for population, Nonmetro areas contain 17% of the population in about 80% of the land area. (http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Population/)
I saw the video, and while Matthews isn’t blameless I don’t think the fault is really his. Michele Bachmann is a scary, twisted, very disturbed individual. I’m strongly considering tossing some change to her opponent just to get her out of the corridors of power.
I saw the video, and while Matthews isn’t blameless I don’t think the fault is really his. Michele Bachmann is a scary, twisted, very disturbed individual. I’m strongly considering tossing some change to her opponent just to get her out of the corridors of power.
Having Palin and Bachmann say these things really gives me pause about what I’d said before. There are differences, sure: I wasn’t dividing people into pro-America/anti-America and don’t really care which side of that slash they’re on so long as they don’t go too far in either direction. I was dividing people based on red states and blue states and taking the attitude that “if you live here, you’re probably like this (although maybe you’re not).”
Still, both statements said basically “there are good parts of the country and bad ones, with good people in some parts and bad people in others.” And up until now, I didn’t truly realize nor appreciate how that sort of thing sounded.
I was already aware of the logical flaws of thinking this way, e.g. the absurdity of writing off people I’ve never met because they happen to live on one side of some line on a map, or because they live in a state that is coloured red on TV. Emotionally, like I said before, I still looked at red states, remembered how the people there gave us Dubya, and felt resentment towards the people living there.
But dámņ, I do not want to be like Sarah Palin. What really stopped me cold was when Pfotenhauer started going on about the parts of the blue states that were pro-McCain and therefore, in her eyes, good. That was way too similar for my liking to what I’d been saying about Texas (which was that you have the odd oasis of liberalism like Austin, but mostly people there are conservative).
I don’t want to be like these people, even if I am a left-wing mirror image.
One thing I can’t change and don’t want to, though, is the way I feel about individuals who are not only voting for McCain, but worship the ground he walks on.
It’s not that I’d hate a McCain voter right off the bat, but if I find they’re voting for him I’ll probably ask them “For God’s sake, WHY? Have you seen the way he’s campaigning? The guy’s like a schoolyard bully! The whole convention was basically four days of mocking Obama! McCain’s lied about how he wanted to teach sex-ed to kindergarteners! He’s making stuff up out of whole cloth about how Obama is a socialist! This is the guy who pledged to run a respectful campaign and then broke that pledge without any provocation from the Obama camp. I’m sorry, but how the hëll can you vote for anybody who uses these kinds of tactics? It’s not just the resume of the candidate that matters, it’s what kind of person he is!”
If the person were to say “Well, I wish he had played nicer and hadn’t done that stuff, but I still don’t feel comfortable with Obama because…” Then I could perhaps have a discussion. But if the person said to me “So what? It’s politics, and the idea is to WIN, and what’s wrong with being a bully? John McCain’s an American hero and a great man.” Then I would have nothing more to say to that person.
I’m gonna copy part of a post I made elsewhere since it applies here:
“When McCain makes fun of Obama, or when Palin does, or when Giuliani does, or when (Fred) Thompson does, it reminds me of people who used to make fun of me when I was a kid. I fûçkìņg hated those people, and I hate John McCain and his friends today for the same reasons. It’s one thing to compete against somebody, and it’s another thing to treat them with utter disrespect and contempt. Having been on the receiving end of that kind of treatment so often in the past, I have little tolerance for it today.
“But you don’t need to be bullied in order to hate bullies. Most of us agree that bullies are áššhølëš (bullies might not think so, but their opinions don’t matter) and we don’t want them to get away with being áššhølëš.
“So aside from agreeing with Obama politically, I want to see him beat John McCain this year for the same reason that everybody wanted to see Peter Parker kick the šhìŧ out of Flash Thompson back in the day.”
I wrote that back in September and, unfortunately, it looks like I was wrong about most people believing that bullies are áššhølëš. Forty-some percent of people polled are willing to vote for a bully. I have no idea what is wrong with them.
PAD: Now to be wholly fair, I watched the full video of the Congresswoman who stated that the media should launch an investigation into who in Congress might be, y’know, unAmerican. And I tend to blame her interviewer, Chris Matthews, who basically strung together stuff that she didn’t say, acted like she said it, and then hammered her until she blurted out something stupid.
Michelle Bachmann says six stupid things every day between the time she gets out of bed and the time she brushes her teeth.
I watched (well, partly watched and partly listened) to the whole thing too, and I don’t see it quite the same way. Bachmann was saying stuff, Matthews responded by saying “it sounds like you’re saying blah blah blah. Does that mean blah blah blah blah?” And instead of responding by saying “no, I don’t mean blah blah blah at all,” she said “why yes, I think blah blah blah blah would be a really good idea!”
This woman regularly goes on TV and says things that are either stupid, infuriating, or both. For Bachmann, this is par for the course.
One thing I can’t change and don’t want to, though, is the way I feel about individuals who are not only voting for McCain, but worship the ground he walks on.
I’m with you there. how do you feel aboutthe people who feel the same way about Obama–and I think even those of us voting for the man would have to admit that there are more people who are acting like he’s some kind of religious figure than would ever say that about Mccain.
Forty-some percent of people polled are willing to vote for a bully. I have no idea what is wrong with them.
I think that’s one of the problems with large numbers of people on the left; they not only disagree with their opposition (which is perfectly valid–that’s why you oppose them) they actually are psychologicaly incapable of even imagining that such opposition can have anything but the worst possible explanation. (though by psychologically incapable I should add that this is a deliberate choice–surely, Rob, you can imagine how someone might simply not see things the same way you do.)
One thing I can’t change and don’t want to, though, is the way I feel about individuals who are not only voting for McCain, but worship the ground he walks on.
I’m with you there. how do you feel aboutthe people who feel the same way about Obama–and I think even those of us voting for the man would have to admit that there are more people who are acting like he’s some kind of religious figure than would ever say that about Mccain.
Forty-some percent of people polled are willing to vote for a bully. I have no idea what is wrong with them.
I think that’s one of the problems with large numbers of people on the left; they not only disagree with their opposition (which is perfectly valid–that’s why you oppose them) they actually are psychologicaly incapable of even imagining that such opposition can have anything but the worst possible explanation. (though by psychologically incapable I should add that this is a deliberate choice–surely, Rob, you can imagine how someone might simply not see things the same way you do.)
I like watching Hardball, but I came to the same conclusion, that Chris almost bullied her into saying it. He has a habit of doing that. She is a professional politician, however, and could have slowed down to properly phrase her thoughts. She got swept into the momentum of Chris’ relentless questioning and didn’t want to seem like she was backing off of her “talking points.” That being said, from what I’ve been reading, I hope she loses.
I like Chris Matthews a lot, I think he’s a bright guy and I generally agree with him, but he does have a tendency to bulldoze through questions. I’ve watched a ton of Hardball in the last few months leading up to this election, and have noticed a peculiar tendency of his. He asks a long-winded question, pauses just long enough for the person to begin to respond, then continues on as if he wasn’t finished. He sometimes does it 2 or 3 times in one question. When he finally does finish, the person being questioned isn’t sure if they should respond or wait for him to start back up again. It creates lots of awkward and unnecessary tension between him and his guest.
Plus he splutters alot.
I think his is the best show out there, better than Olbermann, Maddow, O’Reilly, or Hannity and Colmes. He’s not as blatant about which side he’s pulling for as the others. I just wish he’d settle down a little.
Bill Mulligan: I’m with you there. how do you feel aboutthe people who feel the same way about Obama–and I think even those of us voting for the man would have to admit that there are more people who are acting like he’s some kind of religious figure than would ever say that about Mccain.
I don’t think anybody should look up to him that much. Presidents are human beings, and no human being deserves blind devotion regardless of what they do. If Obama as President does something wrong, he should be held to account for it.
As for my own feelings about Obama, he’s taken several positions I don’t like, which made me question whether he deserved my vote any more than McCain. But most of his positions are ones I agree with, plus if the two campaigns are any indication he’s also a much nicer guy than John McCain.
There’s one thing McCain makes a big deal about that I actually agree with somewhat. I do wish that Obama didn’t say he’d use public financing. I think if you say you’re going to do something, you ought to do it. I mean if Obama wins because of the extra money then great, but still…
I think that’s one of the problems with large numbers of people on the left; they not only disagree with their opposition (which is perfectly valid–that’s why you oppose them) they actually are psychologicaly incapable of even imagining that such opposition can have anything but the worst possible explanation. (though by psychologically incapable I should add that this is a deliberate choice–surely, Rob, you can imagine how someone might simply not see things the same way you do.)
Well, there are some conservative positions I don’t agree with but where I can understand the other person’s point of view and can sympathize.
I understand why somebody would be pro-life even though I’m pro-choice, because the idea of somebody killing a baby is not a pleasant one. I have more trouble understanding people who think life begins at conception and that an embryo is the same as an 8-month-old fetus, but I guess that’s just religion.
I understand why somebody would be for gun ownership even though I think guns should not be easily available, because maybe these people are scared of being mugged or raped and they aren’t physically strong enough to defend themselves with anything less than a gun.
With other things though, it’s not so easy. I understand their rationale, but I can’t sympathize.
Somebody might say that by torturing people, we get information that saves lives. I might counter by saying “We grew up being told that torture was wrong. We saw movies where the bad guys used torture. If we do that kind of thing, do we even deserve to survive?” They might come back with “Yes we do! Better us than them! And we’re better than them because we didn’t do anything like 9/11!” I would respond “No, we didn’t do anything like 9/11, but the American military has killed a lot of innocent people over the years.” Then I’d probably get called a blame-America-firster and we’d start really arguing.
There’s the PATRIOT Act. I might say that imprisoning somebody for years, without evidence, without a fair trial, in inhumane conditions, is wrong and goes against everything America is supposed to stand for. Also that, hey, some of these people might be innocent. The conservative might counter by saying that you need to break a few eggs to make an omelet so if some of the people are innocent that’s regrettable but necessary, and that we can’t afford to take chances when it comes to our survival. I’d come back with “Wow, okay, if that’s how you feel then maybe we should have cops imprison every single person even SUSPECTED of a crime. Or better yet, shoot them down in the street without wasting time and money on a trial. What would you think of that?!” Then another argument.
There are some things people can believe in where I can respectfully disagree, and other things where I cannot help thinking less of them for believing it.
I think that’s one of the problems with large numbers of people on the left; they not only disagree with their opposition (which is perfectly valid–that’s why you oppose them) they actually are psychologicaly incapable of even imagining that such opposition can have anything but the worst possible explanation.
To me the difference appears to be that those on the left shake their heads and wonder how people can be so benighted. Whereas those on the right already “know” the reasons why those on the left disagree. It’s because we’re unAmerican and Godless.
I’ll take questioning what could motivate people over claiming to know, and in the most negative and divisive way possible, any day.
PAD
Curious: how do you square a conservative agnostic? Clearly one (such as myself) is “godless”. I even live in a big city!
I think it is worth noting that one can be a conservative and not be even remotely religious, depending on how you define conservative (which for me is related to fiscal and states rights matters). For me, I lean Republican despite their infatuation with the religious right, not because of it.
Curious: how do you square a conservative agnostic? Clearly one (such as myself) is “godless”. I even live in a big city!
I think it is worth noting that one can be a conservative and not be even remotely religious, depending on how you define conservative (which for me is related to fiscal and states rights matters). For me, I lean Republican despite their infatuation with the religious right, not because of it.
There’s one thing McCain makes a big deal about that I actually agree with somewhat. I do wish that Obama didn’t say he’d use public financing. I think if you say you’re going to do something, you ought to do it. I mean if Obama wins because of the extra money then great, but still…
I think it’s safe to say that after this election NOBODY will EVER take public money again. The internet has made it possible for people to do way better, even if not quite at Obama’s level. If Obama runs for a second term expect this years record to be shattered.
There’s the PATRIOT Act.
Passed in the House 357 to 66. Passed in the Senate 98 to 1 (!).
Sounds more like a bipartisan act than a conservative one. Do you really think there are 98 conservatives in the Senate.
To me the difference appears to be that those on the left shake their heads and wonder how people can be so benighted. Whereas those on the right already “know” the reasons why those on the left disagree. It’s because we’re unAmerican and Godless.
See, i could not say that. I don’t believe there is anything that you can accurately say “those on the right” believe and “Those on the left” believe. I know too many people who don’t follow the lockstep of simple stereotypes. So I try to make sure I specify that I’m talking about “some” or “many” or “large numbers” of people–anything more than that is too easily refuted.
If you doubt at all that there are those on the left who take a far less tolerant approach than a simple head shake and a tongue clucking at the lack of benightedness, I could probably steer you to some websites. Heck, you could probably find some evidence in some of the nuttier posting even in this fine blog.
And if you think that those on the right disagree with any of your positions because they think you are unAmerican and Godless, how does one account for those like myself, who believe neither?
Of course, the fact that you were talking only about some liberals and some conservatives is something that perhaps should be taken for granted, though in that case it isn’t really in any disagreement with the point I made. Since I was talking to Rob it made sense to talk about how I thought his approach was common among people on his side of the ideological divide; the bad arguments of conservatives hardly seemed relevant.
>I think that’s one of the problems with large numbers of people on the left; they not only disagree with their opposition (which is perfectly valid–that’s why you oppose them) they actually are psychologicaly incapable of even imagining that such opposition can have anything but the worst possible explanation. (though by psychologically incapable I should add that this is a deliberate choice–surely, Rob, you can imagine how someone might simply not see things the same way you do.)
-Bill Mulligan
Sadly, this is true. Even more sadly, it is hardly limited to the left. There are quite a few on the right who, like this Congresswoman, who believe that you’re a traitor for disagreeing with her.
The sad reality is that the political dialogue has, for at least the last few years, has been all about villifying your opponent. While we need some really thick rose-colored glasses to see our past elections as truly civil affairs, the rise of the mass-media and the 24-hour news cycle have led us to strip even the veneer of civility, in order to hold attention as long as possible. Add in the internet, which gives the die-hard wackos a voice to scream at each other with, and eventually all we will have is noise, without any useful dialogue.
>I think that’s one of the problems with large numbers of people on the left; they not only disagree with their opposition (which is perfectly valid–that’s why you oppose them) they actually are psychologicaly incapable of even imagining that such opposition can have anything but the worst possible explanation. (though by psychologically incapable I should add that this is a deliberate choice–surely, Rob, you can imagine how someone might simply not see things the same way you do.)
-Bill Mulligan
Sadly, this is true. Even more sadly, it is hardly limited to the left. There are quite a few on the right who, like this Congresswoman, who believe that you’re a traitor for disagreeing with her.
The sad reality is that the political dialogue has, for at least the last few years, has been all about villifying your opponent. While we need some really thick rose-colored glasses to see our past elections as truly civil affairs, the rise of the mass-media and the 24-hour news cycle have led us to strip even the veneer of civility, in order to hold attention as long as possible. Add in the internet, which gives the die-hard wackos a voice to scream at each other with, and eventually all we will have is noise, without any useful dialogue.
Dustin, you’re right of course. I think part of what disappoints me with the ones on the left as opposed to the ones on the right is that I don’t consider it worth the trouble to try to convince someone who disagrees with me on religious grounds. What’s the point? I’m going to out argue God (or at least their interpretation of His arguments). But someone who believes they are arguing on rational reasons is someone i can reach or, possibly, someone who might convince me I’m wrong. When it turns out that they have their own secular blinders on, every bit as limiting as the religious ones of their supposed opposites, it’s a bummer.
Dustin, you’re right of course. I think part of what disappoints me with the ones on the left as opposed to the ones on the right is that I don’t consider it worth the trouble to try to convince someone who disagrees with me on religious grounds. What’s the point? I’m going to out argue God (or at least their interpretation of His arguments). But someone who believes they are arguing on rational reasons is someone i can reach or, possibly, someone who might convince me I’m wrong. When it turns out that they have their own secular blinders on, every bit as limiting as the religious ones of their supposed opposites, it’s a bummer.
Rob Brown said: “Presidents are human beings, and no human being deserves blind devotion regardless of what they do. If Obama as President does something wrong, he should be held to account for it.”
Teddy Roosevelt said (in the Kansas City Star on May 17, 1918): “The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.”
Both statements are correct. And should McCain win, he should likewise be held accountable if he does something wrong as president.
Rick
P.S. Seems to me people who decide that those who don’t think, act and vote the way they do aren’t “real” Americans better fit the description of “un-American.” But no doubt irony is lost on such people.
I have it. The answer.. All is solved.
What about some lovely, peaceful, thoughtful naval gazing.
Ask yourselves…”WHY DO THEY HATE US?”
Hëll it worked so well after 9/11.
Let me help..hmm where shall we start…oh how about 4 decades +++ of positioning your opponents who have differing opinions as either retarded children or EVIL (oohh scary)
Thats a good place to start. Thank me later
Talk about coincidences; I was just watching video clips of the Daily Show on Comedy Central a few minutes ago.
Did you see the one where Jason Jones visited Wasilla, Alaska? I’d be embarrassed right now if I were Sarah Palin, but I don’t think she’s that self-aware.
I also saw the clip of Matthews cornering Bachmann, and not for the first time, that woman frankly worries me. The frozen, deer-in-headlights smile is creepy enough, and then there’s the stuff that comes out of her mouth. She’s basically making the same distinction as Nancy Pfotenhauer speaking of Northern Virginia vs. “Real” Virginia (Guess what, Nancy? The votes all go to the same place!) and Gov. Palin spewing nonsense about the “little pockets of Real America.”
Yes, of course. Because it’s not like we have firefighters, or teachers or soldiers living in the metropolitan areas AT ALL.
It leaves me to wonder…what exactly does Gov. Palin think we DO in Washington, DC? She’s been here to request earmarks; did she not have time to see any other part of the city? Who exactly does Nancy Pfotenhauer think lives in N. Virginia? She was there, in fact she didn’t actually see the “real” Virginia, so what does she actually think is the True Essence of Virginia that NoVa so conspicuously lacks?
If asked to guess at how Michele Bachmann defines anti-American politicians, however, I’d venture a fairly confident guess that her definition is based on criticism. Anyone who criticizes the things America has done, both to its own people and abroad, are those whom I’d guess Rep. Bachmann sees as anti-American.
Who was it who said “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism”? Criticism is not treason; if Americans don’t point out when their country is behaving like the biggest bully on the playground, the rest of the world will do it for us, and they won’t be nearly so gentle about it.
Talk about coincidences; I was just watching video clips of the Daily Show on Comedy Central a few minutes ago.
Did you see the one where Jason Jones visited Wasilla, Alaska? I’d be embarrassed right now if I were Sarah Palin, but I don’t think she’s that self-aware.
I also saw the clip of Matthews cornering Bachmann, and not for the first time, that woman frankly worries me. The frozen, deer-in-headlights smile is creepy enough, and then there’s the stuff that comes out of her mouth. She’s basically making the same distinction as Nancy Pfotenhauer speaking of Northern Virginia vs. “Real” Virginia (Guess what, Nancy? The votes all go to the same place!) and Gov. Palin spewing nonsense about the “little pockets of Real America.”
Yes, of course. Because it’s not like we have firefighters, or teachers or soldiers living in the metropolitan areas AT ALL.
It leaves me to wonder…what exactly does Gov. Palin think we DO in Washington, DC? She’s been here to request earmarks; did she not have time to see any other part of the city? Who exactly does Nancy Pfotenhauer think lives in N. Virginia? She was there, in fact she didn’t actually see the “real” Virginia, so what does she actually think is the True Essence of Virginia that NoVa so conspicuously lacks?
If asked to guess at how Michele Bachmann defines anti-American politicians, however, I’d venture a fairly confident guess that her definition is based on criticism. Anyone who criticizes the things America has done, both to its own people and abroad, are those whom I’d guess Rep. Bachmann sees as anti-American.
Who was it who said “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism”? Criticism is not treason; if Americans don’t point out when their country is behaving like the biggest bully on the playground, the rest of the world will do it for us, and they won’t be nearly so gentle about it.
Bill Mulligan: Passed in the House 357 to 66. Passed in the Senate 98 to 1 (!).
Sounds more like a bipartisan act than a conservative one. Do you really think there are 98 conservatives in the Senate.
First, props to Russ Feingold!
Second, I think that those in the Senate and House who voted for it let everybody down. Either they thought certain civil liberties were expendable after 9/11, or they didn’t bother to read the whole bill (John Conyers talks about that in “Fahrenheit 9/11”), or they thought the Bush Administration could be trusted with that kind of unchecked power because some of them still thought that deep down Bush and Cheney and the rest were decent people…
I don’t know. All I know is that it was a product of the times. It never would have passed if the whole country, Congress probably included, wasn’t scared to death of another terrorist attack. Also, a lot of people who voted for it have changed their minds since, haven’t they?
Rick Keating: Teddy Roosevelt said (in the Kansas City Star on May 17, 1918): “The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.”
After reading that, I feel that the guy definitely deserves his place on Rushmore.
It’s not Chris Matthews job to save someone from themselves. Good for him for outting this psycho on the national scene!
It’s not Chris Matthews job to save someone from themselves. Good for him for outting this psycho on the national scene!
Let me help..hmm where shall we start…oh how about 4 decades +++ of positioning your opponents who have differing opinions as either retarded children or EVIL (oohh scary)
funny thing is, you could make a good argument that both conservative AND liberal extremists have been doing that. With plenty of examples to show it…of course, that might have been your point 🙂
It’s not Chris Matthews job to save someone from themselves. Good for him for outting this psycho on the national scene!
If PAD says that Matthews was stringing together stuff that she didn’t say, that isn’t quite kosher. But it doesn’t look like it takes much to get her to say stupid things, so my sympathy is pretty small. A smart person can easily turn that sort of thing into a plus. If a reporter was making up statements and claiming they were mine I would gently correct them, state my actual position and ask them whether or not their ineptitude in getting a simple quote right caused them to question their choice of careers. hëll, defending yourself against false charges is often way easier than defending some of your actual beliefs, if they aren’t popular.
Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile.
Great quote, Rob. The sad thing is, I think that a lot of people would have a much more difficult time praising a president they did not vote for than they would criticizing one they did vote for. It’s like that Jules Feiffer cartoon that came out (I believe) around the time of the first gulf war, where a character sits in bed, despondent over the fact that everything seems to be going the way the conservatives thought it would. “I CAN STAND BEING WRONG … WHAT I CAN’T STAND IS THEM BEING RIGHT.” Or something to that effect (I’d love to see the original cartoon again–it speaks truths far beyond the issues of that time).
(Though, in looking for it I did stumble across another great quote I offer as a friendly token to all my Democratic friends as something they can use as a caption for their George Bush dartboard: If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. – John Kenneth Galbraith
No, but I think there were 98 idiots (and I wrote my Senators to tell them that).
Aw, dámņ. There I go again, being ill-mannered….
No, but I think there were 98 idiots (and I wrote my Senators to tell them that).
Aw, dámņ. There I go again, being ill-mannered….
Personally I’m tired of both sides these days. Too many on the Left are ready to claim that actions being taken by the Right as a whole are because they’re racists, hate minorities, fascists, etc. Too many on the Right want to label the Left as a whole as Un-American, sympathetic to terrorists, communists, socialists, etc.
Yeah, you’ll find a few bad eggs on each side that fit one of those labels, but you’ll find far more that don’t.
Personally I’m tired of both sides these days. Too many on the Left are ready to claim that actions being taken by the Right as a whole are because they’re racists, hate minorities, fascists, etc. Too many on the Right want to label the Left as a whole as Un-American, sympathetic to terrorists, communists, socialists, etc.
Yeah, you’ll find a few bad eggs on each side that fit one of those labels, but you’ll find far more that don’t.
Rog, most of those guys voted for the PATRIOT Act because they were buffaloed into it. Hardly any of them read it. It’s a nasty, dangerous piece of lgislation that needs to be repealed right now, largely because it guts habeas corpus and due process. It established the American equivalent of the Gestapo/KGB, and has quietly gutted the Constitution over the last seven years. Its very existence is criminal.
Read Naomi Wolf. I love her almost as much as I loved Molly Ivins. She speaks plain and to the point, and has no compunctions about calling a fascist a fascist.
Miles
I saw this live and must disagree with Peter on Chris Matthews pushing into saying something stupid. The Congresswoman kept making veiled remarks about Obama and liberals throughout the interview (i.e. they have un-American views). Chris forced her to be explicit. He pushed her to state clearly what she was hinting at with her comments. It was a scary moment when she finally made her McCarthy-like comments but it was necesary to expose the type of thinking that goes with a some American’s are pro-America and some American’s are anti-American. Comments today by North Carolina Republican Rep. Robin Hayes only serve to confirm that this is part of far right GOP philosophy and strategy.
I saw this live and must disagree with Peter on Chris Matthews pushing into saying something stupid. The Congresswoman kept making veiled remarks about Obama and liberals throughout the interview (i.e. they have un-American views). Chris forced her to be explicit. He pushed her to state clearly what she was hinting at with her comments. It was a scary moment when she finally made her McCarthy-like comments but it was necesary to expose the type of thinking that goes with a some American’s are pro-America and some American’s are anti-American. Comments today by North Carolina Republican Rep. Robin Hayes only serve to confirm that this is part of far right GOP philosophy and strategy.
Here, anybody who missed it can watch it on Youtube and judge for themselves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGRKrUHR0OY
Me? I think she meant what she said.
Here, anybody who missed it can watch it on Youtube and judge for themselves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGRKrUHR0OY
Me? I think she meant what she said.