Sowing, reaping and politics Posted by: McQ
on Thursday, September 11, 2008
Clive Crook analyzes the Democratic reaction to the "pigs and lipstick" flap and points out:
When they rage at unfair Republican tactics, part of that fury unavoidably spills over into anger at the electorate for being so gullible as to fall for it. Far better to rise above this sort of stuff, and radiate confidence that the electorate will see through it. If Obama gets angry at the electorate, or can even be plausibly accused of it, he is finished.
I don't think Obama will get "angry at the electorate", or at least not any time soon. But Crook has a point which Democrats love to deny - with the anger comes condescension. It is the condescension which comes through loud and clear when they feel the electorate is rejecting them and their message.
They're stupid. Their gullible. They vote against their own best interests. Blah, blah, blah ...
As if to demonstrate the point for everyone, TH comments at The Atlantic site on Crooks advice:
Why not be angry at the electorate? 90% of the electorate is comprised of complete and utter idiots. That's the only way this election is so close right now and the only reason McCain wasn't laughed off the stage when he introduced Sarah Palin as his VP choice.
Accuse me of "liberal condescension" if you wish. And I know serious journalists need to maintain the appearance of balance. But this is absolutely absurd. McCain's sex ed advert is worse. Republicans get elected by lying, plain and simple, and they do it because they know it works.
So I'd counter the thesis behind your op-ed the other day. The reason Republicans win elections and Democrats lose them isn't because Democrats don't have enough respect for regular folk or are condescending toward them. Democrats lose elections because they give regular Americans far too much credit. Republicans know how to pull the strings and they do it very well.
Naturally, it couldn't be their message or their methods, could it? Of course not - it's those nasty Republicans who've called Sarah Palin everything but a child of God and by doing that so angered a portion of the electorate that when the lipstick and pig kerfuffle happened they were unwilling to believe the offered Obama explanation.
Gullible damn herd. I'm beginning to believe the Democrats think politics would be a world of fun if they didn't have to bother convincing voters to vote for them. Kind of like the radical environmentalist's perfect world - no humans.
To folks like TH, and many many other leftists, there is a delusional aspect.
Naturally, it couldn’t be their message or their methods, could it?
But to admit that would require an honest self-evaluation. So in love with the narrative they have chosen, they can not conceive of an intelligent, caring person ever disagreeing with their brilliance.
To such a narcissist, reasons must be invented for why their message does not resonate.
Come on, people like that don’t care (that much) about winning, losing, actually being right or wrong, or helping (or hurting) people. They are only concerned about the GLOW. The glow they receive from knowing that they and their Inner Ring are better and smarter than the next guy. If they win, they know it’s because they’re better and smarter. If they lose, it’s because people are too dumb to know that they’re better and smarter. They have an impregnable armor of smug to protect them from reality; no matter what happens, or what others say, it’s all just evidence that they ARE better and smarter.
Democrats lose elections because they give regular Americans far too much credit. Republicans know how to pull the strings and they do it very well.
Well, if "pull[ing] the strings" are just soooooo effective, why don’t the Democrats "better the instruction" and engage in some of their own? You want to win, don’t you? Do what you must and damn the consequences!
13 … Each class or course in comprehensive sex 14 education offered in any of grades K -6 through 12 shall 15 include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted 16 infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread 17 of HIV.
Now this is supposed to be abrogated by this section:
7 All sex education courses that discuss sexual activity or 8 behavior shall satisfy the following criteria: … 12 (2) All course material and instruction shall 13 be age and developmentally appropriate.
I guess the question is .. what part of “instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV” are not considered “sexual activity or behavior” ? For those that are considered “sexual activity or behavior”, which are appropriate for Kindergarten ? If the answer to both of these questions are “none”, why was “K” included in the initial section ?
At the very least this leaves the door wide open for a plethora of ingenious interpretations as who defines "age and developmentally appropriate."
But in light of the following, the question still stands: just how dumb does the McCain campaign think people are?
"I have had a strong and a long relationship on national security, I’ve been involved in every national crisis that this nation has faced since Beirut, I understand the issues, I understand and appreciate the enormity of the challenge we face from radical Islamic extremism," the Senator declared. "I am prepared. I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn’t a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn’t a governor for a short period of time." - John McCain, October 2007
"I’m so proud that she has displayed the kind of judgment and she has the experience and judgment as an executive... She’s been commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard ... she’s had judgment on these issues. She’s had 12 years of elected office experience, including traveling to Kuwait, including being involved in these issues. I’m so proud she has the experience and judgment as an executive." - John McCain, September 2008
"Charlie, again, we’ve got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time, it is for no more politics as usual and somebody’s big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they’ve had opportunities to meet heads of state." - Sarah Palin, September 2008
And regarding the kindergarten ad: when Karl Rove tells you you’ve gone too far, isn’t that a lot like Idi Amin telling you you’re too intense?
