« Around The Sphere Blog Roundup October 11, 2007
Onward Through the Fog (Or: The Urgent Need to Reform Health Care) »
Graeme Frost, Senator Mitch McConnell: and An Earlier Eye-Witness J’Accuse
Oct 11th, 2007 | 13 responses
Update: It’s been reported on MSNBC that erroneous assertions about the Frost child and family that have spun out of control to allegedly include death threats and falsehoods broadcast via internet and radio, may have originated, in part, from the offices of Republican Senator Mitch McConnell who represents Kentucky… ironically, a state that has many constituent families and children who would dearly love to have the benefit of SCHIP.
It is alleged that the falsehoods about various aspects of the Frost family’s life were contained in an email from Senator McConnell’s office to a certain journo. Thus far the Senator’s office is said to be refusing to confirm or deny.
It appears that ‘fair play’ amongst some elected representatives includes a nod to giving out a child’s home address on the internet, and other methods meant to publicly harrow a child and his relatives… all as a response to said child telling about his own experience of being badly injured in an auto accident and how a government program helped he and his family recover and move forward in life.
If these matters of unleashing a harrowing on the child and his family from a Senatorial office are true, then those who have knowingly poured such botched Frankensteinian sewage into the public discourse no longer see child, mother, father, siblings, life force. They see instead: object, thing, threat.
It makes an enormous clang to witness some individuals coldly condemning critics of General Petraeus but thinking a kid whose gone through a long recovery from a terrible auto accident is just more ok fodder for the old steam fitted and clanking machine.
But, it’s not the first time some, and I emphasize the word, some, politicians have used children (comatose adults, soldiers with paraplegia, persons killed in disasters) as though they are sacrificial missiles specifically made to launch at ‘the opposition’ in some senseless blood feud … wherein the missile-launchers walk away afterwards to rest their corns, polish their crowns, and smoke cigars together…
whilst those they used as attack targets or missiles are left bewildered, hurt, still hungry, still sick, still unsheltered … or still dead at the side of the road.
The first time I was an eyewitness to certain politicos doing exactly this strange couvade-like battle was in the early 1990s.
I was in Washington about to testify before the Ways and Means Committee on Welfare Reform. I’m a former welfare mother who has given much thought, outspoken criticism, and what I hope is clear-eyed support regarding shaping welfare policy… but that’s a story for another time.
The relevant part, is that while I was in chambers for the many days of welfare hearings, a group of Democrats brought in large blown-up photographs of kids in need; those who benefited from and those who most desperately utilized welfare programs. These were photographs of real children who were the little daughters and sons of suddenly out of work miners, the children of mothers whose husbands had died, children of adults who had abandoned the family, offspring of husbands and wives of which one was desperately ill and the other suddenly out of work.
The pictures of these little children were compelling; Some were skinny little boney-bones, dried out hair, big eyes, beautiful but impoverished children. The Democrats indicated that these children were the ones that the welfare reform act, which proposed nearly eliminating help to the needy, would most hurt.
Within a day, the ‘other side,’ a group of Republicans, organized overnight and dealt what they thought was the death-blow reply. The following session, they came into chambers with equally large blown-up photographs in full Kodachrome color. The little ones portrayed in those photographs were their own children and grandchildren, beautiful little children with luminous eyes, shiny hair, velvet dresses and smart little suits.
This group of Republicans indicated that their own children were the real children who would be harmed if welfare programs were not done away with… that the future of their own children would suffer if those other children who were not theirs… were given governmental relief; medical, nutritional, educational aid and care.
As you might imagine, these shots were heard round the Capitol world. There was an ensuing hurl and whirl of the incumbent ‘How dare you!?’ and the recumbent, ‘Well, how dare YOU!?’ This seemed most centered on those who had gotten caught up in ‘who said/ pooh-bah said,’ those who had then abandoned seeking to discover the most useful and workable tolerances needed to create best possible outcome in the welfare issue for the many sides. They were far too busy flanging themselves upon their horses and riding off in all directions.
Yet, a far larger group of governing representatives went to work under the din, somewhat like a group of engineers trying to work out a new engine despite the fact that small but powerful factions of management were in a non-stop fisticuffs on the garage floor right next to them.
I can appreciate the heat people felt over the photographs carried by each side back then. I can. And, I had my own form of being taken aback…especially by governing adults’ too easy loss of consciousness about solving difficult issues… issues that required much thought and ‘staying with it’ and suffering with it all until the final forms were cooked all the way through.
Instead, too many, like teenagers following a bad companion who comes to the bedroom window at night beckoning them to an illicit joy ride, were seduced into belly flopping into being rabble– which is so much easier and simplistic. And which gets the back slaps and approving hoots, but doesn’t get the larger job done.
The Frost family, is one more case wherein we are forced into a waste of time, money and resources, so that some can perform what amounts to the most recent and predictable Punch and Judy “filibuster that doesn’t look like a filibuster,†Show. Like a bad sitcom; we’ve seen this all before.
I’ve read widely on the latest contretemps, not just two sides, but the many sides involved, including the excellent coverage by my cobloggers here on The Moderate Voice. And I keep thinking back to why I became an Independent who has had alternate membership in both parties back when I thought it was important to vote in primaries.
It isn’t that I don’t like either party; there are fine people who belong to all parties; helpful thinkers who get things done that are good for many; there are people in both parties that I want in my lifeboat.
It’s just that sometimes the cr–, rather than the cream, rises to the top of ‘parties,’ and you cant get anything done with all the same old predictable hind-ends blocking the way and screeching endlessly over who has the right to say or not say, do or not do… all these being moot points regarding the much larger issues at hand.
Where I grew up in the backwoods, when there was gridlock on the highway, we knew the back ways through the forest, the two-track paths that you could only see if you squinted…and we would veer off-road to get where we were going in half the time as those huddled up on the big road. Sometimes you can get far more done on various issues by going a different way, rather than waiting in que for the ‘gempmums and ladies’ to ‘get it,’ or to get over each other… or themselves.
I don’t have a plaint about journalists looking into the Frost’s background with veracity, and I don’t have worry for Graeme Frost; his little heart is a huge one that may provide shade and shelter for many others by the time he is full grown.
But, I do have concern for those adults too easily seduced into thinking that bar talk and saloon behavior is useful discourse, and those who think that inaugurating a game of ‘telephone’ to purposely encourage rumor, innuendo and invective to spin out of control, is worthy and statesmanlike.
Yet, with or without Senator McConnell from Kentucky clarifying what his office is really up to, if anything, I think we can fairly much guarantee that there are greater minds, right now, as we speak, who are driving off-road to get away from the ‘public rabble’ pile-up and pile-on, regarding this issue.
Those off-road drivers are taking a different pathway toward the same goal as before, no doubt, engineering, drawing up amended plans. Despite those who seem to so love ‘the slime-light,’ these other thinkers and doers not embroiled in rabble rousing, will make progress on the SCHIP issue. It just wont be showy in public. Just like the seams in fine welding, hard work if its done right, hardly ever shows on the surface. What shows instead, is the end result: an engine ‘with a heart’ that runs strong and burns efficiently.
There’s no reason why the SCHIP program can’t do the same.
13 Responses to “Graeme Frost, Senator Mitch McConnell: and An Earlier Eye-Witness J’Accuse”
I’ve been thinking about the Frost family during these days of non-stop blogs about them, and I keep wavering about what I think of the boy’s appearnce in the public eye.
At first I thought it was okay for the boy to be spokesperson; then I thought it was too manipulatative and melodramaitc; then I changed my mind.
Here’s my question: what’s so different about using representative people or the blown-up pictutes idescribed in this post from using words to advocate for a policy or program? A speech is just a pictue painted in words. , Words are chosen to accent some facts and to obscure other facts, just like pictures are chosen to dramatize certain things while leaving other things out. I can’t find a clear line between the two.
I appreciate the busy bees that get the work done amid the clamor, but the annoying clamor is what democracy is all about. The clamor keeps the working bees informed about what the work is that they need to do.
Right now I think it’s all just fine. The only thing that ruins it is that opposing sides are not satisfied with taking their turn at the pidium and then sittiing down to let the opposing side speak. Instead, everyone rears up to tear each other to pieces by any mens they can.
The current means of tearing each other to pieces rests with blogs, whether self motivated or spurred into action by mean spirited politicians.
If we could just learn to speak our minds and then sit down, it would all be okay. Even holding up large pictures would be perfectly okay.
The props used matter far less than the civiliy of the participants and the audience.
Doma,
I think the problem with the ‘picture’ approach is that it tends to force emotionalism to take over. Who can look at a picture of a cute kid and not just want to say, “Oh, the heck with it, he needs healthcare coverage and regardless of whether or not this is the best way to give it to him*, we need to hurry up and solve this, so whatever is currently on the table is the way to go.”
If the picture approach is really just one part of the whole discussion, and if objective debates can really arise from one anecdote (to some extent I think that has actually happened after the Frost episode- if you take out all of the ridiculous noise and the unacceptable smears on the family), then it has some merit. More often the negative stuff outweighs the good IMO though.
*By “best way”, what I mean is the best way which will help him and his family, along with all the other millions of kids who might need help. And, is it a way that is sustainable, and that helps the healthcare system become better and more affordable for all instead of worsening the real problem of healthcare costs?
One must be proud to support the knuckle draggers from Republican McConnells office. Death threats to 12 year olds and Michael Schiavo are the face of “Commpassionate Conservative”.
What Rudi said. Apparently McConnell was relieved that Rush and Malkin took up the banner and rallied the right wing, so that he didn’t have to. After all, swift-boating a Vietnam veteran is one thing but death threats against a 12-year old can generate bad PR for the party.
[...] at what Mitch McConnell’s office has been accused of doing, as far as that S-Chip controversy : Graeme Frost, Senator Mitch McConnell: and An Earlier Eye-Witness J’Accuse » The Moderate Voice Democrats and their cries for social reform and responsibility are a far cry from the days of [...]
The republicans are heading for a mighty fall and while their lock-step support for the war is their biggest problem, their association with the Malkins, Haniitys, Limbaughs and Coulters is what has finally turned a majority of the country against them.
As much as those on the right would wish it were so, most people don’t connect organisations like Moveon with the Dems. For one thing the Dems were quick to condemn them, unlike the republicans who are happy to defend Limbaugh’s crass ‘phoney soldiers’ comment.
While the far left remains on the fringes, vocal but without real influence, the worst of the far right is at the heart of today’s republican party, or at least that’s the perception, and its growing day by day.
The news of McConnell’s aide and his involvement in spreading lies about the Frost’s confirms the link.
Good…now the GOP leadership can’t blame it on “loose cannons”. Well they will I am sure, but it was McConnell’s office that lobbed the cannonball out there in the first place.
I have been wondering what irritive factor if any, Bill Clinton introduced in all this most recent kind of fisticuffs when he moved ‘to the right’ in some of his policies, such as welfare.
I wonder if ‘stealing thunder’ from ‘the right’ means the keepers of such thunder then have to create other kinds of ‘thunder’ to hold their place, or try to.
I am just wondering about the underpinnings to all this newly strange feather fighting that used to be done pretty hard with packed pillows, but now seems to be being done by flailing with the whole chicken
dr.e
The government caused the problem with health care in America by over socializing medicine to the extent it is not completive, and we want to exacerbate the problem? Kids have health care. The needy already have health care. The U.S. is not a socialist state ( see http://tinyurl.com/2znnvl ). No one is entitled to be given a house, car, food or health care, etc. If we want these things, we have to earn them. The government does not earn money. Perhaps some of us should take a civics class and learn about America. We all have to labor for what we want. For those who need help there are the charities and state programs. We need to fix the health care issue but we cannot fix it unless we know how it is broken. For the answer, please see http://www.InteliOrg.com/
CS-
To my mind, the judgment about ‘pictures’ ends up one way if iconsidered on a theorretical level, but another way when it’s considered on an acuality level.
I agree with you in principle, but ti all breaks down when I try to apply it to specific cases.
When Pres. Bush delivers major addresses with military personnel as a backdrop, is that not equally a case of appealing to emotions and doversion from the substance of the issues? Are the military not a ‘human shield’ just like the Frost boy is accused of being?
Our calls in these cases depend too much on whether we agree or not on the policy being advocated. In the end, we arrive once more at the ‘I’ll know it when I see it’ judgment about pornography.
That’s why I think it’s a msitake to try to make rules about the props, It’s impossible to find a definitive line where the inappropriate begins ans ends.
I dislike (no, hate) all pushy advetising Still, it teaches me to adopt scepticism about all advertising. I let the advertiser speak, and then I apply my own judgement as to whther or not the ad was believable.
I think a healthy scepticism and, above all, civility
would lead us to discussing substance. The alternative, as in the present case, is to spend days arguing about the props- because there will never be agreement about which props are appropriate in which instances. We would be much further along in discussing health care, if we hadn’t been diverted by the firestorm over props.
A parting thought: I was remembering the cute Roberts children at his confirmation hearings. Where they not there to show what a fine unstanding family man Roberts was? What do his children have to do with his competence as a Judge?
Would he be less competent if he were childless, single, or even gay?
You see? Props appealing to emotion.
Dr E-
I, too, have been watching the strange twists on policy among Democrats like Clinton.
I son’t know, of course, but I wonder tif it’s not a case of focusing on the need to win and to be able to govern . As we see in the Senate, winning or winning a majority is not enough, and the result is a stalemeate where nothing can move forwzrd.
We cna’t just jettison the oppostions and the obstrucionists out of the country. Some means of winning over a portion of them on policies are necessary. Wether the more unsavory moves to seduce part of the oppostion are necessary, well, that’s another matter.
Clinton just proved that the crazies on both sides will go after you if you try to reach out to both and govern from the center.
I agree with Dr. Estes that the right had to villanize him and find issues that struck more emotional chords -abortion, guns, gays with social conservatives, because they couldn’t hit him on economic issues, and he was where most of the country was on social issues.
The reason conservatives went after him with such a vengeance (not saying that there was nothing there to go after) was that their only recourse to him governing in a moderate way that pleased most of the public was to magnify his flaws (which of course, were numerous). He did manage to govern well in spite of Monica Lewinski and the impeachment. He left office with a 70% approval rating (the reverse of Bush) which is what makes conservatives hate him so much. The sinner, far from being vanquished by forced accountability for his sin, flourished.
Clinton didn’t hide under a rock after he left office, he made speeches, created his global initiative, raised money with the president’s father for Katrina and tsunami victims. Rather than being a detriment to his wife’s campaign, he is her biggest asset. Rather than being shunned by the movers and shakers, he is sought out by them. He continues to lead the party and lead world efforts to find practical solutions to big problems. Rush and Sean just can’t stand it.
lots of thoughtful comments here; sometimes I think it would so cool if we could all just be in the same living room and not have to pound at the keyboard… but that idea about one underpinning being devoted not ‘to the work,’ but to trying to stay in power… that rings over and over; reminds me of turf rumbles we had as kids. Groups often (Hamas comes to mind as does the Catholic church, and Jewish communities that do social work and aid relief as well as fight to keep turf. Have to think more about this…
And, meanwhile, I just wanted to mention again, that the SCHIP bill was a bipartisan effort, with many from both sides being disappointed about the veto. Those same people are working together, (I am laughing) yes, actually working together (imagine that), to bring the bill forward again. That’s probably the bigger story now; those people working together while the swale goes on all around them.
I can see that the dearth of direct info about the bipartisan folks in media, I think… leads to the story being buried, and one wonders, I do, if that too is some kind of strategy to silence news of matters that increase depth of understanding, not just highlight to ‘OJ adnauseum proportions’ the stick fighting in the streets.
dr.e