Nobody in American politics is willing to admit defeat, especially in the war of ideas, but we do have a long tradition of resorting a certain alternative: personal attacks. Read just such a tactic in Politico regarding Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz.
From the article:
---
She’s accused Republicans of wanting to reinstate segregation and of waging a “war on women.” She has asserted, somewhat nonsensically, that the GOP wants to make illegal immigration — by definition against the law — “a crime.” She’s also been mocked for driving a foreign car after pounding Republicans for not supporting the American auto industry.
---
So for pointing out Republicans' sexist and discriminatory policies, and for apparently purchasing a reliable automobile, DWS is apparently a bad pick to lead the DNC. So obvious.
Let's reverse this argument for a second, just to prove a point. Critics say Wasserman Shultz is too aggressive to be a good party leader, so I guess that means a better chief would be passive. Rather than attacking a lengthy, disturbing record for Republicans of trying to redefine rape, preventing women from getting equal treatment in the workplace and generally backing legislation that is "anti-woman," a good DNC leader would applaud creative legislation which more narrowly defines forcible sex, commend those with the bravery to oppose the Lilly Ledbetter Act and celebrate the continuation of the good ole boy network as a wonderful tradition in politics.
And she would by a car that could not get to 200,000 miles without being traded in.
Yes, that is what a winning message would be for Democrats. To have someone that politely acknowledges bigoted policies as an interesting alternative, and who regularly states that GOP leadership is probably just doing the best they can. That will win elections.
For some reason, Democrats have always been queasy about playing hardball when it comes to politics, never mind that we only win when we defend out ideas. The same things being said now about DSW were said in 2006 about Howard Dean. He had lost the nomination for president because the Democratic establishment was sure America would prefer the nice nap that comes with every John Kerry stump speech over feeling any fire in your belly should a candidate scream too loud. When he took over the DNC the following election cycle, the right rubbed their hands supervillain style over the impending implosion which would result if Democrats stood on principle. Instead, we took back the House and the Senate.
If you look back at elections past, Democrats win when we stand on our ideals and fight for our beliefs. When we get squishy about it, it sends a message to America that we don't really take our own crap seriously, and the voters side with the always-strident GOP.
The people are really scared about with DSW is that she is strong woman who speaks the truth without stuttering. But hesitation always sends the wrong message. Stating beliefs with conviction is not a liability. It is a strength that demonstrates leadership both within our own ranks and to the public at large.
Let's celebrate that for once.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Amen!
ReplyDeleteThat Politico Con-Job really pissed me off.
They quoted Huckabee at length as their proof of DSW being too aggressive. The 5 Democrats they quoted all supported her.
Like I said: Con-Job