|
I also think you have a point. It may be that our Democratic Party leaders' "niceness" in the face of rightwing incivility, threats, bullying and rude and offensive rhetoric and behavior helped to bring on this violent attack. Bullies have to be put in their place. You can't really be "nice" to them. And if you don't stand up for yourself and others, in the face of bullying, you are asking for trouble. The Republicans have been escalating their bullying rhetoric, name-calling and domineering attitude for some time now, culminating in the most bully-like, aggressive and violent administration we have ever seen in this country--the Bush Junta. The far rightwing has taken their cue from the Bushwhacks and possibly also from the Democratic response, which has too often been to be afraid of the rightwing and of their support in the media--to back down, to cower, to cringe and to change policies to suit the right and then the far right--for instance, backing down, or fudging around, on women's rights and gay rights. Social Security is now on the chopping block. Will the Democrats defend this essential last vestige of the "New Deal" or will they cower and dissemble, and start cutting benefits that are already grievously inadequate and chipping back future generations' access to Social Security (raising the retirement age, etc.)?
Well, what do you think they will do, based on recent experience? I think it's pretty obvious. And the right and the far right see their opportunity to start destroying Social Security and looting it and privatizing it--in this "niceness"--"let's all talk about it"--posture of Obama and the Democratic Party leadership. In truth, the Democrats should be saying, "No!", "No!" and (very loud) "NO!" "You will NOT fuck with Social Security! We will rouse the whole country against you!" Fiery language, inspiring language, FDR's language: "Organized money hates me--and I welcome their hatred!"
I sure would like to have seen this from our Democratic Party leaders on the 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines, now owned and controlled (largely) by one, private, far rightwing corporation--ES&S (which just bought out Diebold). But they are either frightened or in collusion on the matter. I have been absolutely shocked by this. How come our own party leaders are not fighting for--insisting upon!--transparent vote counting in the public venue?
I DO see your point, MannyGoldstein--I am so bloody sick of this compromising attitude!--but I don't think this was the right occasion for coming out with boxing gloves on. The people there were hurting. We're all hurting. I have lost someone to this kind of shooting spree--I've been hurting. It was NOT the right moment for fighting words, or, at least, it was Obama's judgement that it wasn't and I respect that decision in this case. I don't like his "let's all sit down and talk" attitude in a lot of other circumstances, where "we the people" are losing to our corporate rulers and war profiteers, big time. Damn, I wish he would fight back! I can't believe he couldn't have gotten a public option on health care from a Dem Congress, if he had fought harder against rightwing politicians and media. And now ES&S has done its thing and we have a far rightwing Congress. We're going to lose some more and God knows how badly.
But it was a reasonable judgement for the President to speak mainly for the AZ victims and NOT to the far rightwing political climate that fostered such horror and mayhem--for the moment. It would have been very, VERY difficult to find the right balance between the two, if he had attempted to do both. It was a MEMORIAL not a policy forum--in a state where incendiary rhetoric has been prominent. People were crying. The dead are hardly buried yet and the wounded are still in the early stages of recovery. Very tricky business to use such a situation to address the larger problem--rightwing intolerance and insane anti-government ravings--with the strength that that subject requires. Maybe he will never do it. But it would have been a highly perilous course to do it on this occasion and could very easily have backfired.
Perhaps you are reacting to Obama's judgement and behavior on these others things, such as those I've mentioned--our "common good" policies-- or other things--war, the national security state, loss of civil rights--in wanting him to come out swinging? I'm just saying, don't dump all that on this occasion.
|