Response to SteveAudio
I tried posting this on Steve's site, but Haloscan apparently thought I'd typed too many words. It's not alone in that opinion.
Sez Mr. Audio:
Steve, thanks for the attention. As I've hung up my political-blogging shoes, it's nice to be remembered, albeit ambivalently.
You start from the perspective that the two candidates aren't all that different. On several dimensions, such as voting records, I agree with you. On framing -- on which I place a premium, given the president's role as an opinion-shaper, especially with the urgent need and (now, sadly, lost) opportunity to repudiate the Reagan Revolution -- and campaign tactics, not so much.
Seems to me that you're so convinced that the candidates couldn't possibly be importantly different that you don't consider the underlying issues -- generously linked and documented -- behind my passion. Further, it's so beyond the pale for me to consider/criticize such things that you've labeled my writing "hate speech."
Do me a favor, if you would. Get out a magnifying glass and a fine-tooth comb and show me the "hate speech" in that excerpt.
Oh, God, I just re-read it, and I see that toward the end, I wax ironic about the Obama camp's destruction of two fellow Democrats by framing them as racists. My shame will be my undoing! Is there a program somewhere I can check myself into to cure me of my benighted aversion to slander and the trivializing of racial issues? Stop me before I hate again!
Bien, c'est la vie, for reasons I describe below.
I, too, was an Edwards supporter who was cut loose when JRE folded his tent... one week before I went to the polls.
As I looked back on what I'd learned from the campaign, it was evident that Obama was incredibly far from "asking for my vote," as I noted in the post that singed your eyebrows. And Hillary was arcing leftward, reinvigorating her "It Takes a Village" populism. Thus, it wasn't that hard for me to re-affiliate, even though Gore or Edwards would have been my clear preference.
Regardless of how it played out, I wasn't going to waver on my pledge to vote for the Democratic presidential candidate in November. I never have before, and I certainly wasn't going to start now, in the wake of the ruin the Repubs have wrought upon our country these many years and decades.
I will say, however, that no Democratic nominee (or presumptive nominee) has made me search my soul about that pledge like Obama has, not even close. I would never in 100 years in Iraq vote for John McCain or any of these GOP shitheels, but for the first time, I found it hard to hang up the phone on my inner Nader. But I did, but I did.
Throughout the campaign, beginning in 2006, I found myself increasingly alarmed at things Obama said that disempowered Democrats and denied the political realities that made me blog to begin with -- namely the ruthlessness, corruption, valuelessness, and incompetence of today's Republican Party. Even as the Obama camp successfully propagated the meme of Hillary as a stop-at-nothing party destroyer, I've seen a very different picture, with Obama destroying the Clintons with trumped up charges of racism, one of the most shocking things I've seen a Democrat do in my lifetime.
Alas, IMHO, the last good alternative to Obama seems to be falling just short of enough superdelegate votes to give me a better than hold-your-nose (and firmly!) option this November, and so I've stopped making it my business to point out his flaws.
On my way out the door, I saw one more dose of how fucked up things have gotten in my party and the leftysphere, and it made my decision to cash(less) out all the easier.
The good news is that, if my assessment is correct, the Democratic Party is about to achieve unity, the kind of unity that Alice Palmer and Blair Hull could tell us a thing or two about.
Sez Mr. Audio:
...I really can't understand the hate speech directed at both by their partisans in the bloggersphere (y!pctp!). Corrente was the first high-profile blog that added me (back when it was just me) to their blogroll, and then gave me front-page posting privileges, and I have never forgotten that. I have personal relationships with several of the front-pagers, and while I hadn't checked in there lately, I was shocked to find this...Following that statement comes the first of two excerpts from my blog posts.
Steve, thanks for the attention. As I've hung up my political-blogging shoes, it's nice to be remembered, albeit ambivalently.
You start from the perspective that the two candidates aren't all that different. On several dimensions, such as voting records, I agree with you. On framing -- on which I place a premium, given the president's role as an opinion-shaper, especially with the urgent need and (now, sadly, lost) opportunity to repudiate the Reagan Revolution -- and campaign tactics, not so much.
Seems to me that you're so convinced that the candidates couldn't possibly be importantly different that you don't consider the underlying issues -- generously linked and documented -- behind my passion. Further, it's so beyond the pale for me to consider/criticize such things that you've labeled my writing "hate speech."
Do me a favor, if you would. Get out a magnifying glass and a fine-tooth comb and show me the "hate speech" in that excerpt.
Oh, God, I just re-read it, and I see that toward the end, I wax ironic about the Obama camp's destruction of two fellow Democrats by framing them as racists. My shame will be my undoing! Is there a program somewhere I can check myself into to cure me of my benighted aversion to slander and the trivializing of racial issues? Stop me before I hate again!
Bien, c'est la vie, for reasons I describe below.
I, too, was an Edwards supporter who was cut loose when JRE folded his tent... one week before I went to the polls.
As I looked back on what I'd learned from the campaign, it was evident that Obama was incredibly far from "asking for my vote," as I noted in the post that singed your eyebrows. And Hillary was arcing leftward, reinvigorating her "It Takes a Village" populism. Thus, it wasn't that hard for me to re-affiliate, even though Gore or Edwards would have been my clear preference.
Regardless of how it played out, I wasn't going to waver on my pledge to vote for the Democratic presidential candidate in November. I never have before, and I certainly wasn't going to start now, in the wake of the ruin the Repubs have wrought upon our country these many years and decades.
I will say, however, that no Democratic nominee (or presumptive nominee) has made me search my soul about that pledge like Obama has, not even close. I would never in 100 years in Iraq vote for John McCain or any of these GOP shitheels, but for the first time, I found it hard to hang up the phone on my inner Nader. But I did, but I did.
Throughout the campaign, beginning in 2006, I found myself increasingly alarmed at things Obama said that disempowered Democrats and denied the political realities that made me blog to begin with -- namely the ruthlessness, corruption, valuelessness, and incompetence of today's Republican Party. Even as the Obama camp successfully propagated the meme of Hillary as a stop-at-nothing party destroyer, I've seen a very different picture, with Obama destroying the Clintons with trumped up charges of racism, one of the most shocking things I've seen a Democrat do in my lifetime.
Alas, IMHO, the last good alternative to Obama seems to be falling just short of enough superdelegate votes to give me a better than hold-your-nose (and firmly!) option this November, and so I've stopped making it my business to point out his flaws.
On my way out the door, I saw one more dose of how fucked up things have gotten in my party and the leftysphere, and it made my decision to cash(less) out all the easier.
The good news is that, if my assessment is correct, the Democratic Party is about to achieve unity, the kind of unity that Alice Palmer and Blair Hull could tell us a thing or two about.
Labels: VLWC
posted by Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy at 11:14 AM
11 Comments:
I appreciate you taking the time to respectfully disagree with me.
I will post a rebuttal probably tomorrow night.
Best regards,
Steve
Here's my smaller point: I read this http://www.correntewire.com/obama_stump_speech_strategy_of_conciliation_considered_harmful, and while I agree with virtually all of Lambert's policy points, I disagree with his analysis.
1. Of course we need to tear down and destroy the VRWC. But I see no evidence that they will act differently under either candidate's administration. And I see no evidence that HRC's approach would be different. So why the venom against BO?
2. Obama's rhetoric is designed to bring swing voters to the table, and there is some evidence that's taking place. We all know that American's vote against their own interests, his speech is meant to appeal to those voters specifically.
3. HRC had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the left re: withdrawal of troops and the war in general. So why the full-throated support?
4. Misrepresenting or blatantly mis-interpreting a candidate's speech and positions is hate speech by virtue of its dishonesty.
1. Of course we need to tear down and destroy the VRWC. But I see no evidence that they will act differently under either candidate's administration. And I see no evidence that HRC's approach would be different. So why the venom against BO?
As documented in zillions of links and quotes on Corrente, Obama's basic frame is an equivalation (http://www.correntewire.com/equivalating) that says the right and left are equally guilty in a "gridlock" that is the fundamental problem in Washington. How this false and disempowering position doesn't get a massive "fail" from committed lefties is beyond me.
2. Obama's rhetoric is designed to bring swing voters to the table, and there is some evidence that's taking place. We all know that American's vote against their own interests, his speech is meant to appeal to those voters specifically.
The country needs real change, and the public has been very clear, both in the 2006 midterms and the amazingly low ratings for both parties in Congress, directly attributable to the lack of progress on getting out of Iraq. This is an absurdly stupid time to be falling all over ourselves in a rush toward the right. To be sure, we have two centrists running, but one is heading back left and one has leapfrogged her to the right. I prefer the one who's cutting left.
3. HRC had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the left re: withdrawal of troops and the war in general. So why the full-throated support?
She voted for the AUMF, something that even Hans Blix (not to mention John Edwards and John Kerry) thought was a reasonable thing to do. Like any sane person, she sees how stupid what Bush did with that authority was. Obama, though, after having the good sense to oppose the AUMF (even if he's frequently, um, misspoken about the circumstances in which he did so), didn't have to be dragged kicking and screaming into continuing to fund the war. I can't say as my support for one of the other is more "full-throated" re: Iraq.
4. Misrepresenting or blatantly mis-interpreting a candidate's speech and positions is hate speech by virtue of its dishonesty.
a) No, that's not a definition of hate speech. I suppose in a world where "fairy tale" = racism it is. But more importantly...
b) Where have I done that?
Only time for this one right now:
As documented in zillions of links and quotes on Corrente, Obama's basic frame is an equivalation (http://www.correntewire.com/equivalating) that says the right and left are equally guilty in a "gridlock" that is the fundamental problem in Washington. How this false and disempowering position doesn't get a massive "fail" from committed lefties is beyond me.
Of course, but you're not going to get right-leaning voters wo have historically voted against their own insterests by telling them we're going to destroy all they think they hold dear.
It's indeed framing, and it's unfortunate, but it will work. If the country were so hungry for change, the polling for McCain would be much lower. That he is polling where he is tells methat many are still tending Repub., even though GWBush polls as "Teh suck".
He's basically saying 'can't we all just get along' rather than telling a large part of the country that they are idiots. Clearly they are idiots, but we won't win by telling themthey are. For some historical perspective that Ifeelapplies today, read this: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/books/chapters/first-chapter-nixonland.html?_r=1&scp=190&sq=&st=nyt?pagewanted=all&partner=USERLAND&oref=slogin
I watched the Democrats lose in '72, after being perhaps even more energized than now, because the Right framed us as traitors. That won;t happen now, but there are still so many ways to sabotage this election, I don't want that to happen.
Nixonland 1st chapter link.
Steve,
This is a false choice:
a) Sell the completely fallacious meme that our problem is bickering partisans on both sides
b) Take a page from Al Franken's fictitious book, "I Fucking Hate Those Rightwing Motherfuckers."
There are far more honest and constructive frames along the continuum between those positions.
We keep hearing how Obama is the greatest orator since Jesus, and yet he's trying to squeak in as president by telling incredibly accommodating lies.
Here are some typical Obama quotes:
“We need to put aside our partisan differences”
“The truth of the matter is, the American people are sick of the partisanship and name-calling.”
Wait a minute, that was George W. Bush, immediately after the GOP was blown out in the 2006 Midterms. This pretense is a handy way to whitewash the four-alarm disaster that is Bush and the Rubber Stamp GOP Congress. It's not needed, and it does us no good.
Again, look at the polls about the (un)popularity of Congress, and the frustration that it's not taking more progressive action. Look at the incredible turnouts in the Democrat primaries. The country is ready for actual Democratic leadership, and yet we're running scared.
Perhaps that's why we're not getting any daylight vs. the Mythical Maverick Moderate McCain?
to quote Steve:
Obama's rhetoric is designed to bring swing voters to the table, and there is some evidence that's taking place. We all know that American's vote against their own interests, his speech is meant to appeal to those voters specifically.
Why the hell is it OK for Obama to tack right in just about every policy statement, but it's wrong for Clinton to do the one thing each and every politician after in American history has done -- value white male middle class voters over any other minority (save the rich)?
Every other piece of framing that Clinton, Kerry, Gore had used focused on making white male voters comfortable while allowing other groups a place at the policy table. When Obama so blatantly framed the Clintons as racists before black voters had made a decision between the candidates, he forced Clinton to reach out to the voting blocs left, which only set her up for more accusations of racism.
If anyone wants to examine how a person with views that close to Obama's could be demonized, start there: Politicos cynically using the same phrases the VRWC had used for 16 years.
HRC had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the left re: withdrawal of troops and the war in general. So why the full-throated support?
Because she *could* be dragged. And, because she's developed credibility with the military, she has a better shot of working within the system to slow and stop the war. No, I didn't like her vote, but Obama hasn't done a damn thing to stop an appropriation, hold a committee hearing or otherwise *act* like ending the war matters to him, *as a congressman*.
You rock, VL.
好秘书 中国呼吸网 肿瘤网 中国皮肤网 癌症康复网 中国公文网 工作总结 个人工作总结 半年工作总结 年终工作总结 单位工作总结 教师工作总结 教学工作总结 学校工作总结 德育工作总结 财务工作总结 医务工作总结 安全工作总结 乡镇工作总结 党员工作总结 团委工作总结 公司工作总结 实习工作总结 班主任工作总结 党支部工作总结 办公室工作总结 学生会工作总结 工作报告 政府报告 述职报告 述职述廉 考察报告 自查报告 情况报告 调研报告 调查报告 申请报告 辞职报告 实习报告 验收报告 评估报告 工作汇报 思想汇报 汇报材料 情况通报 情况汇报 心得体会 学习体会 工作体会 培训体会 读后感 领导讲话 庆典致辞 节日致辞 开业开幕 演讲稿 竞聘演讲 就职演讲 比赛演讲 征文演讲 节日演讲 演讲技巧 工作意见 活动策划 工作方案 整改方案 实施方案 企划文案 营销方案 培训方案 应急预案 规章制度 法律法规 事迹材料 先进事迹 个人事迹 申报材料 学习材料 考察材料 经验材料 交流材料 自我鉴定 工作计划 工作规划 年度工作计划 学校工作计划 个人工作计划 团委工作计划 工会工作计划 单位工作计划 党支部工作计划 民主生活会 入党志愿书 入党申请书 入团申请书 转正申请书 党性分析材料 先教活动 整改措施 剖析材料 公告通知 模板范例 贺电贺词 常用书信 合同范本 社交礼仪 法律文书 论文
here
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home