changing the culture of politics

Because of the snow/ice I happened to home this afternoon to receive a call from the Obama campaign asking for a contribution.  The caller said that Obama of course cared about universal health care and getting out of Iraq, but that what was really different about his campaign was that he wanted to change the tone of politics.  I thanked him for the call, but said that the election was a long way away and I wasn't ready to commit to a candidate yet.

I agree that the tone of politics is truly ugly these days.  I listened to a bit of the radio while cooking dinner tonight, and so caught a Republican Congresswoman saying that voting against the "surge" in Iraq meant that you were in favor of the terrorists winning.   Does she really believe this crap?  I'm not sure which horrifies me more -- that she'd believe that half of Congress (and, more importantly, half of the country) supports terrorism or that she doesn't believe it but thinks it's politically effective.

And I'm truly appalled by the misogynist and frightening crap that Amanda and Melissa have been taking and that forced them to resign from the Edward's campaign.  I want to repeat what Melissa wrote, because I think it's important:

"There will be some who clamor to claim victory for my resignation, but I caution them that in doing so, they are tacitly accepting responsibility for those who have deluged my blog and my inbox with vitriol and veiled threats. It is not right-wing bloggers, nor people like Bill Donohue or Bill O'Reilly, who prompted nor deserve credit for my resignation, no matter how much they want it, but individuals who used public criticisms of me as an excuse to unleash frightening ugliness, the likes of which anyone with a modicum of respect for responsible discourse would denounce without hesitation."

Frances Kissling should not be the only religious leader who is speaking out against this, no matter what you think of Amanda's original posts.

But I'm not sure that the quality of discourse can be elevated one-sidedly.  Obama makes a point in his book of how during his Senate race he told campaign staff to remove from his website language that suggested that all those who oppose abortion are motivated by a desire to control women.  And there certainly are those who truly care about fetal life.  But there's also a bunch of people who seem to care a lot more about fetal life than about living women or children.  And always assuming that your opponent is decent and well-intentioned is as great a mistake as always assuming that your opponent is evil.

I want to tip my hat to Cecily, who does this about as right as anyone I know -- keeping on talking with people who disagree with her on abortion, but consistently drawing the line at abusive language and behavior.  But you can ban trolls from your blog.  I don't know what's the right way to deal with trolls who get themselves quoted on NPR and the New York Times.

Comments

[merseydotes]

It does seem like arguments and attacks that previously would have been considered off the table or below the belt are perfectly acceptable now. Maybe it's because we're all so desensitized to media, but it seems like the campaigns and politicos are trying to find new ways to make people's eyes pop and get them involved.

[trishka]

i was thinking about your post, and you know, i think it is possible to change the tone of politics from just one side. i think it has already started, and i think the person that is responsible for the nascient change is - michael j. fox.

his commercials for claire mcgaskill were dignified & civilized & courteous. the response from the rightwing noise machine was horrendously, um, not. and it backfired on them; people responded.

this may be pollyanna of me, but i think many people, moderates in particular, are getting to the point where they've had enough.

[dave s]

Last time, Edwards was the 'Mister Nice' candidate - and it got him chosen for Veep. This time, he is clearly going more towards attack, and I think this was demonstrated in part by the choice to hire Marcotte and McEwen. Marcotte in particular has consistently derided those of whom she disapproves/with whom she disagrees, and I was, as was anyone who looked at her site even occasionally, aware of this. Now, Edwards (or whoever hired them) may well have assumed "What Happens in Vegas, Stays in Vegas" - that regular readers of lefty blogs are different people from the Catholic League, and you could reach out to each separately. Another phrase used for this in politics is "talking to the room" and it was applied to former Senator Allen's macaca moment, and to Representative Bachman's telling a crowd of Christians that God wanted her to win her race.

There really is no Vegas, and no room, any more. You have to present the same face to every crowd. Whether this will select for or against a more civil tone in politics will be a very interesting thing to watch in this election.