An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« Will McCain-Palin Follow Up Ayers With Wright?

Bush Happens »

The Only Thing We Have to Fear…

Posted by POLIMOM in At TMV.
Oct 11th, 2008 | Comments

Like my fellow TMV bloggers, I’m glad to see John McCain attempt to confront and unravel some of his supporters’ increasingly worrisome (mis)perceptions about Barack Obama. I agree with those who say that the direction McCain’s campaign has gone was both disappointing and surprising, and I have no trouble understanding why some Republicans and conservatives have withdrawn their support of him as a result.

A few days ago, there was a video from a rally that showed John McCain’s reaction to the crowd when he asked his new thematic question, “Who is Barack Obama?”. Although he didn’t speak directly to the shouted answers of “Terrorist!”, I thought his face reflected both surprise and distaste.

Clearly he, or someone in his campaign, has finally recognized the combustible emotions that have been brought to life. I wish McCain had seen the dangers sooner; this was a profound miscalculation.

The coming days will tell us a lot about John McCain. Will he continue the effort begun, and tell people the truth directly? Or in the face of lower poll numbers, will he succumb to external pressures from an ever-angrier base that’s demanding he ratchet up his attacks?

I truly hope he maintains this latest approach, because what’s been manifesting — however irrational it may seem — is rooted in an exceedingly volatile aspect of human nature: fear.

And to those who are inclined to fire back at the angry McCain supporters, I can only say that dismissing or verbally attacking people who are afraid is an extraordinarily bad idea. Because fear is a very dangerous emotion.

I’ve written more here.

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

GreenDreams

Thanks for writing this. I never liked McCain, but the fear and smear Rovian tactics have hurt him badly. These tactics may have won him the presidency except for the financial meltdown. But either way, they cost him his integrity. He has unleashed this hatred by basing his whole campaign on the idea that you should fear an Obama presidency. Sadly, he continues to do so, still running the same hateful ads.

Anyone can see the effect this has had on McCain. Watch this video:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/223572.php
Watch McCain's face as he confronts the hatred his campaign has stirred up. Stirred up with full knowledge and intent. A shameful campaign from a formerly honorable man.

I'll believe he's done with that when he pulls the ad "Dangerous". Until then, his attempt at tamping it down while stoking it up is sheer hypocrisy.

GeorgeSorwell

Almost every day I hear very worried people talk Obama as a Muslim, an Arab, a Terrorist.

If I try to say otherwise, that's when they start to actually seem frightened. I never attacked anyone (doing something like that in person is asking for a punch in the nose). I stopped being just dismissive long ago, because it never worked.

Any disagreement at all is considered dangerous. They think I've fallen for something dangerous. They think America is on the verge for falling for something dangerous.

They think they're the last bulwark of sanity left in America.

I could never find a way out of that cycle.

I agree with you that it's out there. I agree with you that it's a problem. But I have no idea what to do about it.

Polimom

They think America is on the verge for falling for something dangerous. They think they're the last bulwark of sanity left in America."

This is exactly right, George. Once I'd fully wrapped my mind around that aspect of things, my perspective shifted dramatically. This is beyond normal election-year partisan emotion. The people who are growing so very angry are absolutely sincere because they're genuinely terrified.

It's a huge problem, I think.

Polimom

I should add that the groundwork for all this was laid long before the McCain campaign started directly stoking the fire.

denisedh

Dan Riehl's comment from the continuation of your post:

"There may indeed be blood in the streets before the current political and economic issues before the nation are resolved. But it won’t have much of anything to do with Race, it’ll be about the fundamental principles of this Republic a great many Americans are not prepared to give up without a serious fight.

And the rage won’t just last days … it could be a battle fought for years and not always without its victims. Can you imagine the look on the faces of the Obama-loving Ayres apologists at the New York Times when the bombs start exploding in their lobby, instead of the Pentagon?"

He said that he doesn't advocate this kind of action, but his words romanticize violence and suggest contemplating sweet revenge--and offering a way for the terrified (who feel powerless) to regain their sense of agency. Riehl obviously enjoys freedom of expression, but his statements are irresponsible.

Silhouette

Oh my yes. The Rush Limbaugh crowd is easily spooked....lol...

They don't think too well for themselves. Maybe Rush should be a co-defendant in the inciting to civil unrest in time of war thingy..?

Palin at the very least should be either publicly warned or indicted for inciting to disrupt a civil process (the election). Clearly, if Obama was dead, the election would be disrupted. I can't believe she allowed herself to be filmed presiding over a mob. More bad strategy.

The McCain/Palin ticket is failing Darwin's test. It is unfortunate they seem to revert to tyranny over and over again. Our founding fathers established this country specifically to escape tyranny in all its forms...in all its forms.... To utilize tyranny to incite civil unrest in time of war is the highest form of treason that comes to mind.

casualobserver

I think this country ought to try less federal government as the means to quell either the fear or the loathing. The less you try and make 250 million people live in the same box of rules and ideas for how one should go about living their lives, the calmer, more confident, more at ease they will be.

I doubt the people of the 19th century had much genuine fear or loathing of the federal government or the candidates for President.

The more we have centralized rule making the worse off we've become in terms of living out our lives with individual freedoms.

Would that woman fear whether obama was an Arab or not if she knew he, his ideas or his acquaintances would hold only limited sway over her life?

Ricorun

CO: I doubt the people of the 19th century had much genuine fear or loathing of the federal government or the candidates for President.

If you ignore the Civil War, its aftermath, and everything leading up to it, you may be right. But I don't think you can.

Anyway, Greendreams is right -- to avoid hypocrisy McCain has to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. His "Dangerous" add is just that: dangerous.

StockBoySF

"And to those who are inclined to fire back at the angry McCain supporters, I can only say that dismissing or verbally attacking people who are afraid is an extraordinarily bad idea. Because fear is a very dangerous emotion."

Agreed, when it comes to calling Obama a terrorist, Muslim, unpatriotic, etc. these people clearly have been listening to too many folks like Hannity, Limbaugh, etc. And of course they've believed the campaigns which have stoked these fires. I am more mad at the media which propagates such false information than I am at these people who believe it. Though I do wonder about their critical thinking skills....

However, once race is thrown in, that's a different story. Obama is who he is and many people will not vote for him because of his skin color. While one can only point out that Obama is not a terrorist, Muslim, etc., one has to take a different approach (and perhaps no approach at all) when confronted with a racist.

StockBoySF

GeorgeSorwell: as far as what can be done about it.... McCain and Palin can tell their audiences (like McCain did yesterday) that Obama is a decent family man who McCain has major differences with. McCain can also say that Obama is patriotic and squash any other false characterization that rears its head at McCain's rallies.

After all, I've heard Obama say many times that McCain has served his country honorably. McCain can at the very least show respect for Obama and set the record straight.

Of course McCain is free to question Obama on his judgement and other matters, (which I may disagree with) which are fair game in political races. But to imply your opponent is a terrorist and unpatriotic is crossing the line.

kritt11

They should tell their audiences that Obama is decent and a good American who has devoted his life to public service that they disagree with on the substance of his stands on the issues. That what they believe will work to solve our country's problems and why. Period.

McCain has sacrificed his reputation for straight talk and fairness by adopting the very tactics that Bush operatives used against him and that he condemned as unfair in 2004 against Sen Kerry. So the issue of character can fairly be used against HIM.

Palin likewise has a lot of "splainin" to do-- and will be up to her ears in bad publicity after the explosive Troopergate report hits the airwaves. It strikes me that there are some significant character flaws revealed by that investigation's findings.I think she will be too busy telling voters why she lied to Alaskans about Monegan's firing and why she decided not to cooperate with the legislative committee only AFTER she became McCain's VP pick, Her credibilty will be put into
question as it should be.

Also,I wonder how many moderates know that she got her start in politics with the aid of a radical secessionist and a John Bircher--- both leaders of far right wing fringe groups.

Jim_Satterfield

Conservatives always seem to be behind the times. We're up to over 300 million people now and have one of the most extensive infrastructures in the world underlying this nation. Those who think that we could drastically shrink government and everything would magically work out and this country could survive as one nation are reality challenged IMO.

Polimom

Jim -- I agree with you to a point. There's absolutely no way (in my mind) that the US could return to the 18th century vision (or even the 19th century version) of government.

But because that's true does not ipso facto mean that it cannot be decentralized somewhat. History has an unfortunate number of lessons on this topic; the Soviet Union is a prime example of the risks inherent in further consolidation of federal power.

kritt11

CO- We are not facing the kind of problems that can be handled on a local or state level. The problems we now face-- global warming, massive worldwide economic collapse, scarcity of vital resources like water and oil,the collapse of the nation-state, collapse of entire industries, and

the threat of nuclear terrorism-- obviously require global solutions not regional ones.
I agree there should be some wiggle room to account for regional differences but thats it.

StockBoySF

Since I have libertarian leanings some of what the Birchers "preach" makes sense to me. But having said that I don't agree with a lot of what they say and I think they're all off their rockers.

blog comments powered by Disqus