Why Can't "Liberals" Get Mean?
by Laracolvin

In reading a open letter to Barack Obama written by Stefania Pomponi Butler on Momocrats the other day, I got to thinking about liberals and anger. Butler ends her letter w/the quote Joe Biden's mother told him when he was bullied as a kid, "Bloody their noses so you can walk down the street tomorrow." I admit, the imagery of Obama bloodying McCain and Palin is swift and gratifying for me - and I don't like blood or violence.

There comes a point when one does have to answer for the lies he/she speaks and the relentless hammering on people's fears, and I hope that time comes for McCain and Palin. And wondering when - and how - their judgement will arrive has me questioning why can't "liberals" get mean? And if we do, does our integrity remain intact?

Now, of course, I'm not saying all liberals have integrity. Let's not use the rationale (___ is x; ___ is y; so x=y) that is so prevalent in this campaign. But what I am saying is this: liberals (and progressives) have a history of caring about others. The GOP would dispute that. In fact, John McCain (and many of his supporters) paint the Democrats as folks who don't love our country and whose self-interests are more important than our collective well-being. Which makes me giggle, really. Think about the issues the majority of Democrats (or "liberals") support and tell me if they are centered in self-interest:
- Sustaining the Environment;
- Healthcare for all Americans;
- Equal pay for all women;
- Good education for all children;
- A prosperous Economy - both national and global;
- All women's right to choose;
- Safe retirement for our parents;
- A country that embraces the differences of its people;
- Building generations of citizens committed to service to others;
- and Honoring in both policy and ideals the rights and liberties of all human beings.

Tell me, please, where is the self-interest?

But we do have a problem that is both a blessing and a weight - one I think is reflective of our country's history and our place as Democrats or liberals or progessives in it. And that problem is this: we can't fight dirty. We won't. It isn't that we don't know how because we do. We are the scrappiest of voters - the fist fighters of the American public. We work hard, often for lousy salaries, because we believe in what we are doing, for whom we are doing it. And because of that, I think we are often conflicted when it comes to throwing the big punch. "Who will it hurt?", we ask. "Is this the message we want our children to learn?", we wonder. "Is it true?", we question. And, "is it right?", we murmer.

I think we know the truth - that a dirty, violent campaign will hurt the wrong people, it sends a message that is antithetical of our joint ideals to our children, and we do lose integrity if we resort to lies and rancor. And the truth hurts. It's lost elections for us before, and there is a chance it will lose this one. I'm terrified. And angry that 1/2 of our country simply isn't listening. So angry in fact that the vision of a bleeding McCain and Palin delights me (and I'm not proud to be saying that). But I have to wonder, is the cost of "getting mean" worth it? Is a win at the expense of our souls a win that I want to claim?

And I have to say, I just don't know.

 

Cross-Posted at Notions of Identity

Submitted by Laracolvin (view blog) on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 09:29

Comments

 

Liberal Meaness

Liberals get mean all the time. They just don't do it in a way that helps them win elections. Part of why half the country isn't listening is because they feel sneered at and put down by liberals.

The Democrats don't need to bash McCain and the Republicans more, they need to talk more about Democrat values in a way that non-liberals can connect with. And start by not dismissing the fears, values, and religious beliefs of moderate to conservatives out-of-hand.

Sara

Submitted by Sara Gunderson on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 10:27
 

How so?

Thanks for commenting, Sara. So my question is how do liberals and progressives sneer and put down half the country? I've heard a lot of dissention on this site about politics, both respectful and disrespectful from all sides, so I'm curious as to examples. Also, your point, which was echoed in the article I linked from the NYT, about Democrats talking in ways that non-liberals can connect with - what would that look like? I thought talking about the issues was one way to do that. 

Can you provide some examples to support your comment? Or at least give me your "perfect world" answer? I'm insanely curious.

 

Thanks.

 

Lara

Submitted by Laracolvin on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 17:51
 

All too often I hear

All too often I hear comments from liberals that disparrage conservatives on the basis of their beliefs, practices, and lifestyles. People are written off because they own guns, hunt, are not environmentally aware, believe homosexuality is a sin, hold strong religious beliefs, are anti-abortion, don't hold college degrees or obtained them at conservative colleges, etc.

Democrats and other liberals tend to use the language of issues and causes. When people are consumed by their day-to-day lives, this type of language tends not to engage.Worse, it can come across as superior and patronizing.

If we want to reach people, we have to talk to them where they are at, not where we wish they were. We have to be willing to set aside our main concerns when we are talking with people who hold different concerns, or else figure out how to reframe things to make them more relevant.

Sara

Submitted by Sara Gunderson on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 01:31
 

Thanks, Sarah

Sara - thanks for giving me some specifics. I understand what you're saying, and I have definitely seen evidence of that. I've also seen examples of Obama and others actually talk about real people and be criticized for it, so I'm sure there is no perfect answer.

BUT - what you say makes sense, and I will consider it in the future when I'm trying to make an argument w/a conservative - or anyone really.

I really hope the Obama/Biden campaign managers are reading these comments. They could learn so much!

Thanks again for following up.

Lara

 

Notions of Identity

Submitted by Laracolvin on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 04:50
 

Having just walked away...

from co-hosting iVillage's politics debate board (part of the reason iV made the choice to have the board handled at a higher level than usual), I have to disagree.

The nastiness from both sides was eating at my soul.

And after I voted in the primary 8 January, I was rather aghast at how Barack vs Hillary played out, from the candidates through their respective supporters.

It was inevitable things would remain contentious once we moved past conventions. Little did I know how this would play out.

I'm used to the swiftboating tactics. It worked, and it will be used again until an effective counter is found. What I was not expecting was the reaction to Palin.

People were writing from a place of outrage, almost absent some contemplation. Comments were landing all over the place about being vice president and a parent of five, and then a mom of a preggers 17 year old. Liberals were screaming all over the country, and well...

we didn't cover ourselves with glory. What did happen was a backlash that might well have given McCain all he needs to win.

I surely hope winning elections has not been reduced to who can make use of the dirtiest tactics and dirtiest attacks. If it has been, our country is in far deeper trouble than we all think it is.  

 

nelle

&

llhaesa

Submitted by nelle2nelle on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 18:47
 

Interesting...

Thanks, Nelle! Your comments are so interesting to me because the swiftboating and nastiness associated with that eats at my soul more than anything. And of course, the reactions of voters who believe the lies and don't do any further research to counter them.

Palin is a non-issue to me at this point. I think most of the American  people have exhibited we can't debate on the platforms and at the same time intellectually consider issues of race/class/gender. And while I think it's extraordinarily important to do so and have these conversations, I'm not sure I'm willing to have it right now. The civil liberties and human rights at stake in this election just weigh more to me, and discussions of Palin and sexism have distracted many of us too much from the election. This is just my opinion, of course.:)

 

 Thanks again.

Lara

 

 

Notions of Identity

Submitted by Laracolvin on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 04:54
 

Perception is such a huge thing...

it colours all and drives each of our opinions.

Before going there, was just looking at CNN's electoral map (as well as the Washington Posts, CNN's is almost 2 weeks old) and daily tracking poll... the electoral map still shows (however accurate it might be) that Obama has the easier path to 270; the polling suggests MacCain/Palin momentum has levelled off.

Anyway... sometimes we can't pick what is or isn't an issue, they just become topics we all have opinions on and talk about.

Swiftboating ticked me off 4 years ago; 2 months ago I was responding to posts questioning McCain's service record. Excuse me? 4 years ago we were upset by this being used on Kerry, and now those of you who were against this 4 years ago now decide to use it against the right?

Lets just say that my comments on this did not play well, excuses flew back as to why it was all ok now.

On rights, I've advocated a position that rights should not be subject to the whim of voting, it makes no sense to have the potential ability to mess with the Constitution and pull rights away once legal precedent is established under it.

Obama and his team could have avoided much of this with better choices and strategy. Folks, there is a prior track record of tactcs... please learn from them.

 

 

nelle

&

llhaesa

Submitted by nelle2nelle on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 06:52
 

Do you contract?

Maybe the Obama campaign should give you a call, Nelle, as an advisor! :) 

I do wonder, though, how much of the questioning and hypocrisy is Obama's campaign or just other folks out there w/their thoughts and the campaign takes the heat (this happens w/the Republican campaign, too, of course)...but that, too, is up for discussion and debate. 

I also recognize the tendency to paint the Democrats and Republicans each as a monolith in posts of this kind, which they are not certainly. 

 

As always, thanks for the thoughts, Nelle.

 

 

 

 

Notions of Identity

Submitted by Laracolvin on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 07:26
 

lmao

I'm not the one, but can think of someone else who is heavily involved here (and who decided to support the other candidate) who might well have helped him with things - I learned that the hard way. ;-) 

 

nelle

&

llhaesa

Submitted by nelle2nelle on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 07:40
 

I completely take your point

It seems you're not referring to attacks from individuals but from the party. It's a characterization portrayed in "Recount" where Warren Christopher played the too-nice diplomat while James Baker went for the jugular. It was in the portrayal about Joe Trippi four years ago as the rare liberal attack dog. It's in John McCain's wholly reprehensible joke at a Republican fundraiser about Chelsea Clinton's looks back when she was an adolescent.

Mean.

And frankly, I'm seeing it here on BlogHer. The liberal contributing editors are impressively thoughtful (in my biased view) and above the fray with their discussions, while the conservative posters seem to be...shall we say, provocative?

And that's me being nice. Too nice. What can I say, I'm a liberal.

Mom-101

Submitted by Mom101 on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 19:23
 

You're right

Yes - I was definitely talking about attacks from the party, not individuals; however, indirectly (and perhaps poorly) I was getting at many individuals' willingness to be manipulated by the attacks. OF COURSE we see and read distasteful "stuff" from everywhere, from both sides. But since I've been a voter for three elections, I've seen a trend: the Republican party swiftboats and attacks on a personal level and the Dem party tries to run on the issues. And yes, of course I'm biased, too. But I'm extremely open to considering arguments to counter my claim!

Thanks for commenting!

 

Notions of Identity

Submitted by Laracolvin on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 04:41
 

In 2004...

The Democratic ticket went after the Republican ticket by way of Mary Cheney.

The end result was to make Bush and Cheney look like they were the supporters of gay folk, while Kerry and Edwards were viewed as violating her privacy to live life on her terms.

Amazingly, in this election, feminism has been flipped just as gay rights was flipped 4 years ago. The left played right into it with its initial reaction to the Palin nomination.

The left tries to play the game, but it doesn't play it very well. They haven't yet learned how to make the right eat their own issues & stances.

nelle

&

llhaesa

Submitted by nelle2nelle on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 04:59
 

I see your point

Great example. You said, "They haven't yet learned how to make the right eat their own issues & stances." This is what gets to me! B/C it should be about the issues & stances, not Mary Cheney or Sarah Palin. And around we go, right?! :)

How do you think the left can make this point? What would it look like? I keep asking, but I can't seem to get an answer...(perhaps that is a problem, too, no? No one seems to know how).

Submitted by Laracolvin on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 05:08
 

Har! If I could answer this...

I'd be hosting nelle live! on MSNBC, ;-) Now there's a scary thought  (thinking on some of the lyrics from The Who's Tommy ...and I became aware this year...)

America is first and foremost a centre of the road nation. Not left, not right, mix and match depending on the circumstances. One potential issue solution from column A, one from column B, and oh... that is different than it was four years ago, so this one sounds good...

if we go waaaaaaay back to when Hillary was doing health care in the Bill administration, the two worst things that happened was not Harry and Louise or whatever names they were. The problems were Bill running like the wind away from defending the need to find solution, and secondly, throwing open the doors for Americans to evaluate the issue beyond just what we have and having government do it across the board. Huge mistake, and even in this election, there was fallout from that error. Mix and match. Find the centre that most can appreciate.

We seem to try and kick the centre in the teeth all too often... (and Hillary was firmly of the centre, despite what you might hear. She is certainly a mile right of me.) We champion feminism vicariously through her campaign, then when she loses a close race, we say see ya, too bad, so sad... discarding a  precious x percentage of her votes, not even trying to find a way to retain the feminist vote. It need not be Hillary, but there were and are other ways, but it got tougher by holding out and letting McCain reach for this ground. Tougher to win back than to retain. 

So back to your question, what to do?

Be on point, speak to specifics, within reason. Stop attacking McCain on any history beyond the Senate. When you do raise his pol record, be specific, not vague. Vague sounds like an attack, specific sounds like reasoning, because it screams for your own solution to accompany it.

And really... I'd not take kindly to complaints on something from an employee (where I supervising again, which does not appeal to me in any way, shape, or form) when they come unaccompanied by their proposed solution.

Don't use what you (you is generic here and throughout) decry back at your opposition. In other words... don't call out a candidate as a lousy mom when you are attempting to move heaven and earth to end such outlook.

Don't use examples from their personal lives. Don't ever mention their personal lives. Film of an opponent screwing in the Capitol Rotunda? Pretend you never heard of it.

If say... choice is the issue, say something like "we will never agree, but there are things most of us can agree on to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and resultant abortions..." Go there. Be reasonable. Appeal to the centre.

On health care... and again, reach for the centre. Create the framework, call for a national discussion, set simple and few parameters... everyone covered, off the back of employers. There are hundreds of variations of how to do both and together. Point that out. Point out the old scare "they are going to have government deciding your benefits and coverage' has no place in a position that is open to listen and evaluate and to press the discussion, to hold people to find our own consensus.

Avoid this 'McCain votes with Bush 90% of the time nonsense.' Most people appreciate that McCain goes his own way. Tieing Bush to his tail isn't going to fly. Instead, tie specific policy advocated by McCain to Bush - when the facts say he is in agreement. People like the truth. They'll think for themselves.

Don't run from positions when asked. Dammit, if you support gay rights, don't make a big deal about it - but don't dance, and don't run the other way, as if some bully is chasing you with a squirt gun and you might get wet. Stop and say America believes in equality, and move on. Doesn't America believe in equality? On a macro basis, I'm pretty sure the average American likes to see themselves as believing in such. No need to go off on details in this instance.

When the right calls for tax cuts, point out that sooner or later following this call every election will leave us with no revenue and no services. At some point, the tax rate is bare bones. Encourage finding bare bones, and encourage fairness.

When big government is mentioned, point out our military is part of the government, yet is considered the best in the world. When it is mentioned we are weak on defence, point out Dick Cheney was the first to propose a defence cut in his last year as Secretary of Defence under the first Bush president.

OK, I'm going to stop here, and well... go put my helmet and kevlar on.

In summation... moderation and the centre - its where America lives.  

 

 

 

 

nelle

&

llhaesa

Submitted by nelle2nelle on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 13:47
 

No need for kevlar!

I think you make great points on many levels, Nelle. I particularly like your suggestion of no critiquing of the opponent w/o proposed solutions. Oh, wouldn't that be a nice day in politics?

AND thank you for getting specific. I love specific.

Lara

 

 

Notions of Identity

Submitted by Laracolvin on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 16:17
 

Mom101, that link is broken

Mom101, that link is broken for some reason.  Here's another one.

Submitted by miteegirl on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 20:06
 

Army Picking on McCain

Those mean patriotic defenders of our country are picking on McCain again.  Who do those latte drinking, MRE-chomping, tank driving elites think they are anyway???

Army Times:  Flip flop or Fib? 

Submitted by miteegirl on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 21:25
 

LOL!

EXACTLY, miteegirl!

You, know, it always astounds me that because I'm a progressive Democrat, I'm perceived by the media and many conservatives as either an elitist or yuppie (is that still a word?)or total smelly hippie radical -- of which I'm none! Truth of the matter is I have trouble paying my rent, too. The gas prices are killing me, and my credit card debt is sooooo not pretty. I'm an average citizen who works in education because it matters. Yet much too often I get criticized for being out of touch. It's frustrating to be sure.

 

Notions of Identity

Submitted by Laracolvin on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 05:02
 

It's hard to watch right now

Thanks so much for this post. I agree with much of what you said - being one of those liberals myself. :) It is so difficult to watch what is going on right now. To see Obama's campaign shaken up so much from the Palin brouhaha. John McCain made a brilliant, strategic choice, and I think that is what the Republicans do so well. They are great strategists and also seem to know how to unite their party. Obama has this gift. The ability to bring people together, to energize people. He needs to find that rhythm again.  I hope his campaign refocuses again on the issues and lets Sarah Palin go on about her business. And perhaps it is time for those of us who are Democrats ourselves to get off our behinds and help to register people to vote and support our candidate. Not sit back and watch it all from the sidelines. (I'm speaking to myself here.)

Great post and I've enjoyed the comments!

JCK

http://motherscribe.blogspot.com

Submitted by JCK on Sun, 09/14/2008 - 07:05
 

All too often I hear

All too often I hear comments from liberals that disparrage conservatives on the basis of their beliefs, practices, and lifestyles. People are written off because they own guns, hunt, are not environmentally aware, believe homosexuality is a sin, hold strong religious beliefs, are anti-abortion, don't hold college degrees or obtained them at conservative colleges,

Yes, I agree that does happen and yet in my opinion I see more sensativity on the part of conservatives about such attacks.  I think that the liberals are trying to say we respect your rights to live your values and practice your faith we just do not wish to have them imposed on us.  Maybe we don't say it eloquently enough, but for me it always comes back to the same issue.  This country was founded on freedom of religion and the right to live as one chooses within the laws of the land. Okay then if you choose to live more conservatively than I do, but why  do you feel the need to enact laws that make me adhere to your faith-based beliefs and choice of lifestyle?  Why does it filter into our political process? What happened to separation of church and state?

 

 

 

Remember, life is a journey, not a destination. Here's to Living Well! www.themadgoddess.blogspot.com & www.lwbms.blogspot.com

Submitted by judithL on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 06:00
 

I Wish That Were True

Yes, I agree that does happen and yet in my opinion I see more sensativity on the part of conservatives about such attacks.  I think that the liberals are trying to say we respect your rights to live your values and practice your faith we just do not wish to have them imposed on us.

I wish that were true. And maybe for the average liberal on the street it is. But I hear the mocking tones and the ill-disguised contempt in the voices and words of those who represent liberal values to the public. Too often I find myself agreeing with the essence of what they are saying, but cringing inside at the delivery.

Part of the problem is that there isn't respect. I'm not talking respect for ideologies that stand in direct opposition to liberal values. I'm talking respect for the people that hold the beliefs. It is too easy to fall into the habit of caricaturing the opposition. The left employs labels just like the right does. And labels exist primarily to silence and to marginalize.

Sara

Submitted by Sara Gunderson on Mon, 09/15/2008 - 23:39
 

Glass Houses

 

But I hear the mocking tones and the ill-disguised contempt in the voices and words of those who represent liberal values

And I hear the cry of "bleeding-heart" liberal with the same disdain and superiority.  Is that to make me feel that my personal values of compassion and good Samaritanism are somehow child-like and not worthy of serious consideration let alone respect? 

Remember, life is a journey, not a destination. Here's to Living Well! www.themadgoddess.blogspot.com & www.lwbms.blogspot.com

Submitted by judithL on Tue, 09/16/2008 - 11:27
 

We are all guilty

At times, I think we've all been victims of this type of behavior and zeal. And I know I've been guilty of the same superiority - even unintentionally. Gena's post here has some great advice on how to have these conversations in a passionate but still civil way.

Just an aside, I appreciate the tone from all of you who have commented on this thread; it would have been mighty easy to slip into disrespect, but everyone here has maintained such civility. AND we've thrown out some concrete suggestions, I think, that could actually work! So thanks to all for keeping this conversation going.

And now - go visit Gena's post and comment there! :)

Lara

 

Notions of Identity

Submitted by Laracolvin on Wed, 09/17/2008 - 04:48
BlogHer

© Copyright 2008 BlogHer | Terms of Service