Less Toxic Rhetoric: Maybe, Maybe, Maybe
I’ve taken some heat for a comment I made in Joe Gandelman’s article entitled “The Demonization Of Obama Escalates While GOP Congressional Leaders Drag Their Heels“. Here is the comment I made:
I figured this would happen after Republicans and Conservatives endured 8 years of hyper toxic language from the Left concerning former President Bush. Even if President Obama succeeds with a more bi-partisan way of governing, that doesn’t mean THE PUBLIC will. An eye for an eye indeed….
Let’s get something deadly straight here, I….AM….NOT….A….PARTISAN. I’ve never been one. Yet I’ve seen Liberals and Conservatives fire toxic verbal barrages at each other with flair and happiness. And Democrats and Liberals, if you think the terrible and disgusting language that some of you used to describe former President George W. Bush Jr’s personal traits, way of speaking, demeanor, and executive decisions were warranted, then shut up when some Republicans and Conservatives fling it right back at you. Because in partisan politics, it is an eye for an eye.
For the record, I can’t stand hyper toxic rhetoric in politics. It inflames people and frequently causes and equally hyper toxic response. We’re human and, in words, many of us are more lethal than piranhas in bloody water. As far as former President Bush goes, I feel he did the best he could under the circumstances but that doesn’t mean I just pooh-pooh his mistakes. He’s made a substantial amount. But I respect the man for his service in a job that’s beyond tough. So when I heard and saw some in the Left in blogs and on the radio basically equate Bush with everything bad under the Sun, I winced hard. Because I knew that when Democrats and Liberals got their guy or gal in the Big Chair, the Right was going to “give it” right back and hard. Why? As I said before, in partisan politics, it is an eye for an eye. Am I just picking on the Left? Please. I know what the Right said and did to former President Clinton. I’m not stupid. The back-and-forth is as American as apple pie.
I sincerely hope that President Obama, Congressional Democrats, and Congressional Republicans can put their heads together, quash partisanship some, and come up with some solid initiatives for the USA. Maybe they can work together in a more positive way. Maybe. And maybe their example will trickle down to those of us outside the Beltway. Maybe. And maybe those of us outside the Beltway who feel that we must apply the very worst (I emphasize very worst) to our elected leaders simply because they are “out there in the public eye and I don’t like them or don’t like their policy and I’m going to let them have it” will chill a little. Maybe.
But until all those maybes are resolved, it’s business as usual. An eye for an eye. Hyper toxic rhetoric. And America keeps rolling along with plenty of bumps in the road.
4 Responses to “Less Toxic Rhetoric: Maybe, Maybe, Maybe”
Sorry, but this post just seems to prove that you are a partisan. This is your sole attempt to not appear as one.
Yet the quote you refer to from your other post is purely partisan, criticizing only one side. It's all their fault. The poor, poor Republicans (according to that post) are just reacting to the toxins spewed by the Left. Frankly, I call BS on anyone who tries to create some false equivalence between what went on with Bush and what happened to the previous administration.
The Clinton Chronicles
The Arkansas Project
Troopergate
The Clinton Body Count
Blame Clinton for Enron
Then there are the media products you are fully aware of from Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Michael Reagan and all of their local station imitators. A list far more vast than any of the Left. False equivalence is dishonest, T. Yet so very many insist on using it.
I'm picking on The Left today Jim because Obama is President and The Right is on the “attack”. And Jim, have you seen the some of the anti-war rallies? I went to a few. They wanted Bush dismembered, equated with Satan, so on a so forth. There are still folks wanting Bush to die for “crimes”. Have you read Democratic Underground? What about some of the Kos folks. The RIght doesn't solely own the mantle of verbal nastiness. It's an shared award.
So don't run the false equivalence game on me. And stop acting like your side is some kind of victim to bad ol' Republicans. When y'all both have been bad to each other. I'm calling it as I see it. President Obama is going to get his fair share of outright nastiness from the Right. That's a fact of freakin' life. And as I said in my post, hopefully Obama and Congress can “get over it” and lead by example.
False equivalency by butt. More like true equivalency with sprinkles on top!
TS–I have read your posts here for at least a year. Throughout the heat of the election cycle, you consistently saw both sides of the coin….or took both sides to task.
Your posts, sir, are the ONLY contributions here that have consistently met the definition of “center.”
Without your contributions, Gandelman's blog would have to be called The Liberal Voice With The Occasional Random Postings of the Disenfranchised.
First, since you have never come across as a partisan before this kind of post surprised me.
The problem is not that there aren't people on the far left who are just as nasty and vindictive as any on the right. But I am referring to quantity and how mainstream the nastiness is to the party. How mainstream in relation to the party is most of what you cited for the left compared to the right wing radio, tv and print personalities from the right that I cited? How many best selling books that are nothing but vicious attack screeds are there from the left? Where is the liberal equivalent to Limbaugh in terms of audience and influence over the Democratic party. The fact that they exist isn't enough. How much real power do they have? How well do they represent a large and powerful part of the party? That's where your comparison fails, T. Failure to admit that is what creates a false comparison.