You can't flip on the television or surf the net without a picture of Sarah Palin popping on-screen. The hockey-mom, the lipstick-on-a-pig, the perpetrator of conservative wet-dreams the world over, Palin is pushing her book Going Rogue with a small-town book tour cutting through the small swatches of the counties carried by the McCain-Palin ticket in 2008 in states that (surprise!) will be battlegrounds in 2012. And guess what? The crazies are coming out to their local Wal-Marts and strip malls in support. It brings back a nightmare I frequently struggled through during the last campaign. This was that nightmare:
The nightmares are back again with the onslaught of this book tour, dredging up visions of the frightening 2008 campaign and conjuring visions of a 2012 run. (The New York Times offers a nice overview of the mayhem here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/us/politics/22palin.html?hp). For anyone out there claiming it's impossible that she'll run in 2012, I disagree. She will run. She craves the attention far too much and the delicious hypocrisy of deriding a national media that just helped sky-rocket her book to the top of the best seller charts. Though my friend and former Obama organizer Kevin Avery will point out that she has less experience than President Obama, I contest that those things don't matter for a Republican. For a Democrat? Of course! But not a Republican with the backing of Fox News and a slew of grassroots support.
It's crucial for Democrats to recognize that there is a different set of standards (especially for a mixed-race president) and to accept these standards instead of arguing for a change to the rules of the game. She will run. It will be competitive.
"Kevin Witzigreuter, 38, a Fort Wayne firefighter waiting in line next to Mr. Miller, chimed in: 'And he can’t even make a simple decision about what to do in Afghanistan. We’ve got men and women fighting overseas. Either man up and fight the war to win it, or get out.'"
Regardless of your stance on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, it's irresponsible to suggest that taking the time to make an informed decision is a fault in one's decision-making abilities. I'm guessing too that no military family or soldier would call these types of decisions "simple."
Another quote: "'It’s more fun talking politics with people who agree with you,' said Lucy Vigmostad, who was celebrating her 18th birthday by being first in line in Grand Rapids."
Temporarily indulging the temptation to over-generalize, statements like these all-too-often seem to sum up the approach many Americans take toward political debate--what's the point of arguing with people? What could they possibly say to change my views? Who cares what they say or think?
Beyond that, it's a problem that stems beyond politics into our classrooms. It's becoming more and more rare to find students who engage with ideas and don't descend into stubborn ignorance or logical fallacies (or even are willing to change their perspective when presented with compelling evidence). It's the reason why Fox News has a large and loyal viewership that can completely ignore and dismiss organizations like Media Matters.
What I find most frightening, and what anyone should regardless of one's political leanings, is the uninformed, blind hatred spewed out by those who gather in lines at 3 a.m. and wait hours for Sarah Palin sign their books (and in one case, jeer her as she boards her bus, leaving some-300 families without a signed copy of her book after she promised to sign for 1,000 people). If you want to see a real horror film (at least a horror film for anyone in favor of level-headed informed debate, even with those who totally disagree with you), check out this clip from outside a McCain-Palin campaign stop:
I guess I aim this post more at my conservative readers, though I'm not sure how many people (if any) are conservative nor how many people in general read my blog regularly. I beg you, conservatives wherever you are and however you stumble upon this, to reject open hostility that works against the democratic process, to embrace logical debate instead of falling victim to ad hominem attacks or straw man arguments or slippery slopes or faults in causality. Palin is not the kind of divisive leader we need in this country. Whatever his faults, President Obama has made quite a bit of effort to bring bipartisanship into the White House by retaining some of President Bush's former advisers (to the frustration of some Democrats). Unlike Palin, he is engaged with what is happening in the world around him and takes the time necessary to make the well-informed decision. I stand in step with a lot of conservative and liberals who are frustrated over his policies, but I can respect his intellect and trust (yes, trust!) that he genuinely cares about leaving America much stronger than it was when he inherited it.
I encourage conservatives (and liberals for that matter) not to see voting for the opposition as a concession or a loss if your only choice on the party ticket is someone like Sarah Palin. Think of it as a sign that you reject rallies where one feels comfortable shouting the n-word in reference to President Obama and the presenter (in this case, Palin) doesn't even pause to berate such hate-speech. Vote with this mindset so that America won't descend into the madness depicted above. (No, that clip was not a preview of the movie adaptation of McCarthy's The Road). Have the courage to engage with those of different viewpoints and the strength to make solid arguments and concede points when your arguments are weakened. If we let personal attacks and ill-informed views trump common sense, it won't matter who's in charge of Congress or the White House. There will be no country left worthy of government.
No comments:
Post a Comment