So, Rove is viciously misrepresenting democrats, and the democratic response is again, what? Oh, right, calling on him to take it back.
Bullies are hard to deal with. They make us mad. There are a few ways to take this anger.
Get steamed at the bully and demand that they take it back. This generally gets one nowhere by itself. Picture the nerdy kid trying to ask the bully if he could talk to him in private or saying, “would you pretty please stop beating me up?” That’s the course the democratic party is by and large taking.
Then there’s “the high road”, or passivity. Rein in the anger, and do nothing. It’s a course I’m well familiar with, and one I don’t generally recommend. It changes nothing. Unless you’re relying on independent witnesses to stop it (schoolyard monitors/an independent media/a skeptical or compassionate population), that won’t change anything either. And even if there is a protective agent, when the cat’s away the mice will play.
In the democratic case, calling for Rove to apologize is like the nerdy kid asking the school bully to apologize without any authority likely to intervene. I’d say, instead of pretending he’s playing a fair game, denouncing him is about the only shot the democrats have for any short term progress. Not calling for an apology, but saying he’s full of shit. That he makes shit up, has nothing backing up his words. Take a position of power. Define him. Call him a bully. Call him a liar. Use strong language (I’m not talking profanity, but ‘asking’ and ‘apology’ are not strong words). Delegitimize him in the public view. Otherwise the dems will keep on losing.
Ties in pretty nicely with the article
Sadly, the denouncing option gets the “oh, look at the democrats, they’re so hateful and angry” response, which the media just laps right up.
Rove is very good at this kind of gutter politics, and he’s got what passes for journalists around here nicely trained for it.
iawtp. I think the last election was much more about machismo than gays. Democrats have been trying to take the high road, which just looks nelly or fussy and in any event doesn’t attract most voters.
“the last election was much more about machismo than gays”
I think this is true and intensely frustrating to most progressives. Among many “red” voters there’s this underlying rancor that feels the need to kill/nuke/fuck something, anything, so they’re grateful for any leader who provides a neatly encapsulated enemy (whether foreign or domestic) on which to vent. I browse conservative forums once in a while and these people take sincere, deep emotional satisfaction in every Iraqi insurgent killed, as if the insurgents are responsible for some old and grievous sin against their family. My European and Asian acquaintances can’t identify with this bloodlust at all.
At the risk of killing a scu thread with a comparison to a country that starts with G and rhymes with Spermany, I’ll say that’s the only first-world example in recent history I can think of with a similar phenomenon of such unfocused animus.
You are right.
(and got it … your email address is now flagged as “safe”)