Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
It’s hard to be a Democrat ...
Posted by: McQ on Monday, November 12, 2007

So says Nora Ephrom at HuffPo. It's an interesting post, if for no other reason than to get a little peek inside the head of a "progressive" activist. For all that it matters, her lament is no different than that of many on the right concerning the Republican party. She says the top 5 reasons she lists for being a Democrat all say "Supreme Court". You hear the same from the right. The difference, however, is the "why" each side sees the SC as important. But that's a post for another time.

She pretty much settles in to complaining about how bad the Democratic Congress has been. She makes the same arguments that I saw the right making when they had the majority there ("even if you can't get the bills passed, put them to a vote and make the Democrats defeat them!"). And, unsurprisingly, she finds Chuck Schumer not to her particular liking. Like much of the netroots community, she takes off after Schumer and his endorsement of Mukasey for the next AG. Her favored strategy is to reject Mukasey and make them nominate someone else (this based on Mukasey's waterboarding waffle). And if that person won't denounce waterboarding as torture, reject him or her as well.

OK, again, no different really than the right screaming about a Republican Congress standing up against a Democratic president or acting like a majority when they are the majority. In fact, other than one single paragraph, Ephrom's entire piece is pretty much what both sides have said from time to time about their own parties. It was this paragraph however, that made it something else:
It's especially hard to remember that the real enemies are the Republicans, when the Democrats tend to break your heart and the Republicans are just the boys you'd never go out with anyway.
I sat there and thought, "wow, and here I thought those who'd attacked our country were the enemy". I've always considered the left as the political opposition. You kill enemies. You oppose the political opposition. You capture and incarcerate enemies. You defeat the political opposition at the polls by presenting better ideas and options. Etc.

But this one paragraph goes a long way in explaining two things. BDS and the obvious wish by some on the left to see the US fail in Iraq. It probably explains a lot of other things as well, but those two immediately pop into my mind.

Their enemy is a domestic political one, not one which can (and gleefully would) actually murder them (although if you delve into some of the more fevered swamps in the Netroots, no doubt you can find accusations that Bush wants to do that as well). And they've declared total war on that enemy and are waging a no-quarter fight for political supremacy, even if that means something like failure in Iraq. There's something fundamentally wrong and very dangerous with that sort of thinking.

I'm not naive enough to think the same sort of thinking doesn't exist on the extreme right as well. Having lived through the Clinton years and seen some of the nonsense spouted then, I know better. But it was interesting to read this in a fairly innocuous political post which, for the most part I have no issue. A post that is considered fairly tame by Netroots standards and certainly doesn't seem to have stirred any controversy there. It was just casually thrown out there as if it was something with which everyone agrees. Perhaps it is that casualness which disturbs me most. If in fact Ephrom sees that as an accepted truth on the left, we're further along the road to our own political destruction than I imagined.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
when the Democrats tend to break your heart and the Republicans are just the boys you’d never go out with anyway.
Sorry lady, but I have too much self respect to ask you out anyways without your brother offering to pay me.
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
I don’t think referring to the political opposition as the ’enemy’ automatically connotes ’capturing’ and ’killing.’ There are plenty of Republicans and conservatives who are not deranged that consider the left the enemy and for good reason. Likewise, I’m sure leftist have good reasons, BDS aside, for feeling the same way.

Lately, debate isn’t over whether the marginal tax rate should be 25% or 26% or some other relatively trivial difference. Differences between left and right are significant on wide variety of issues. It’s probably going to get more extreme, not less. A real battle is occurring for the direction of the country and the costs are very high.
 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
The whole ’enemy’ thing is one of context. The farther one gets on the left the more the GOP becomes the enemy to defeat. It seems to me, that for some on the fringe left, victory in Iraq, or the war on terror, is defined by beating Bush. When I see a ’peace’ activist in a Che t-shirt it makes me wonder what they are thinking.

This is also true for the fringe right. There are some ugly ones out there.
 
Written By: tkc
URL: http://
You make a mistake, I believe. Nora Ephron and the rest of leftwing Hollywood are not on the Far Left. It’s all about posturing and creating an image, like wearing a tie-dyed shirt to church. Oooh, what a rebel! If you confronted the no-longer-working Nora E. (that’s why she’s posting there; HuffPo is Hollywood’s sitting room for the eternally washed up) and the rest of the Hollywood HuffPo ilk with what Leftism actually means, they’d give you a blank stare as their brains shut down for a minute. They have no clue. Nor do they care.

When she was making studio films, N.E. directed for the masses ("You’ve Got Mail" etc.), which made her seem geeky to the cool kids (the washed up faux Hollywood leftists bitterly sitting on the sidelines). She’s got some ’Che cred’ to engender now.
 
Written By: Come on, please
URL: http://
Each side has some assorted mixed nuts, but on the right, they don’t wield anywhere near the power that they do on the left. Even some of the religious right did some Guiliani ass kissing recently.

And I also think there’s a little bit of implied Zen-like symmetry being projected here as justification for the conclusion that I just simply disagree with. People seem oddly comforted by assuming things are balanced. I guess it spares them from having to be judgmental. Something we’ve been programmed to abhor for the past 50 years, to our own detriment sometimes.
 
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
And I also think there’s a little bit of implied Zen-like symmetry being projected here as justification for the conclusion that I just simply disagree with. People seem oddly comforted by assuming things are balanced.
Yep.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
I don’t have to wonder any more what happened to bipartisanship.

There is none.
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
What is so great about bi-partisanship? I find it is usually an agreement between both sides to screw us over. On another note, what is so great about comprimise when the stand you are taking is just?

 
Written By: tkc
URL: http://
Heh. Reminds me of George Carlin: "The word bipartisan usually means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out."
 
Written By: Bryan Pick
URL: http://www.qando.net

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider