Dear Progressive Bloggers
You’re doing it again. You’re not seeing what is really going on. You are missing the bigger picture. You are looking at trees and missing the forest. Do you really, after all this time and all these defeats, think the Right is stupid?
You mock the Republicans for blatantly acting politically, and ignore that they ARE ACTING POLITICALLY. In other words, they’re acting in the way that will in the long term gain them more support for their candidates and issues.
You mock their politicians for flocking to this because of a Republican talking points memo telling them this will gain them a political advantage, yet you do not see that THIS WILL GAIN THEM POLITICAL ADVANTAGE.
You’re nitpicking details and ignoring the larger narrative. They are “trying to save this poor woman.” They are “defending this poor woman’s family.” Meanwhile, you are pointing out discrepancies in the finer details. “What about her husband?” you ask when they talk about her parents. “She can’t feel pain,” you say, when they accuse Democrats of starving her to death. How many people hear that they are trying to save this poor woman? Everyone. How many people, over time, will pay attention to the nitpicking details?
You THINK what the Republicans are doing is unpopular with the public because you see the issue details in the polls and think they matter. Polls say people wouldn’t want to live if they were in her situation. Polls say the state should have precedence over the Feds. But have you seen polls that reflect the larger narrative that the Republican machine is spreading? Do the polls ask if Republicans are trying to save this poor woman’s life, while Democrats are trying to kill her? What do you think those polls would say?
You point out how hypocritical the Republicans are being without thinking about WHY. Stop arguing details, getting all caught up and pinned down. Start arguing the larger narrative.
Tune in to Limbaugh. Go read the Right’s press. They are escalating this. Ask yourself why.
And watch your backs.
March 23rd, 2005 at 1:41 pm
Yea they made a few slick moves, but they are now settling down to the common stupidity of the rest of us. They are about to lose control of this. The preachers who Hector the red-staters. who are actually serfs who live off of corporate and private subsidies that are fed through the tax exempt donation scheme, are about to really lose their grip on this one.
I say we let Terri live. I really do believe in a culture of life. Those people who want her to be left to live are really good folks. Let’s not get them to vote for the fascists again, okay?
March 23rd, 2005 at 1:47 pm
I agree with the analysis, Dave, but what do we do? We have to do more than just “watch our backs.” There has to be a way of framing this issue that won’t fall into their hands. What is it?
March 23rd, 2005 at 2:14 pm
I agree to, Dave, but not for a minute do I miss the Republicans’ intent - they are very, very, good at what they do. Having wooed Fox and CNN, (most average peoples’ news outlets), into largely emotional representations (as opposed to legal representations), everything is now dumbed down into polarized and jingoistic camps, which the Repubs love!
What ‘we the People’ are to do?- hell if I know, other than to keep on writing, keep on phoning, keep on voicing our outrage at how well they do what they do…
March 23rd, 2005 at 2:24 pm
What do we need to do? We need to do what we need to do in general:
We’re arguing the details of their lies instead of reaching the broader, general public with a larger narrative that reinforces public acceptance of the benefits of underlying Progressive values.
March 23rd, 2005 at 2:40 pm
Again, I agree. But I also think that, given the cinematic, hyperbolic (and in Ms. Schiavo’s literal case, i.e. that she will die soon) that we also have to address the specific things the Repubs are doing, right now. And then, once this woman dies and/or is swiped up into ‘protective custody’ by the Florida DCF, and is subject to more exploitation, then, then…whatever the outcome, we never, ever stop addressing the larger narrative I think you’re talking about..which is the incredible and frightening hubris of this administration and this Congress.
March 23rd, 2005 at 3:11 pm
I think the polls did ask about whether congress was sincerely interested in the case or playing politics - most did not beleive there was a sincere interest. The problem is not that the Republican spin is believed but that Democrats are perceived to be part of it to a certain extent.
We need to attack Republicans as hypocrites who don’t care about anyone - because that’s what people believe anyway - even their own supporters. Blogs have done this by pushing the Texas law that Bush signed. Were the media mentioning that until the blogs did? That law proves Bush is totally full of shit. Blogs were excellent in highlighting that.
But for some reason most dems simply refuse to attack. It would be pathetically easy to brand the Republicans as the party of hypocrisy and corruption, the party that doesn’t care about anyone but their corporate backers. The party of shameless grandstanding and immoral exploitation. The script writes itself. They prove themselves on every issue.
Once the media have a frame like that the stories write themselves. Hypocrite Republicans go on about X but in secret do Y. They won’t say this now for one reason and one reason only: Dems refuse to attack the Republicans. Compare how the media always say that Republicans are about “moral values’ for no other reason than that’s what Republicans claim.
But to use Dave’s phrase, it’s not enough to gripe about why Dems won’t simply stand up and fight. Ask why they refuse to do so.
March 23rd, 2005 at 3:35 pm
I agree with you too, David. The subtext (which isn’t a “subtext” to political junkies like us-if I may so bold as to call you that), is that many Democrats have been slinking away from being true Democrats, ever since the last national election, (if not before), and have fallen into some sort of jello. I’m really pissed at many of them. And I bet many of their constituents are, too. Where’s the backbone? Is it really all about ‘electability,’ (as opposed to principles!) anymore?
I truly wonder.
March 23rd, 2005 at 3:39 pm
To answer my own question there are 2 reasons. For the Democrat politicians it’s because they are paid by the same corporations as the Republicans far too often. For the lefty blogosphere there’s this silly silly idea that goes around that attacking Republicans is bad pragmatically or ethically.
It’s not. It’s very good pragmatically and ethically.
Negative campaigning wins even when it’s total lies — Bush has proven that. And note that Rove went after Kerry’s strongest point - his war hero status - not his weaknesses. Dems should ceaselessly attack Republicans moral values image. It’s easy because unlike with Kerry they really are pieces of shit with no moral values whatsoever. They have no principles — not one — except greed.
It’ll be easy to present Republicans as corrupt hypocrites that care nothing for the poor because everything they do screams out they are like that. The media will cover this as a point of view if Dems keep saying it. Their twisted “ethics” of he said / she said demand it.
It’s good ethics to condemn the immoral. Don’t give me that crap about “judge not lest ye be judged”. This is not about personal humility but about the truth and about the common good. These people are apostates, they are false prophets (in biblical terms) and people of good conscience are called on to stop their lies.
Republicans say it’s about saving a life.
Responses:
Bush doesn’t care about people.
Bush doesn’t care about healthcare.
Bush doesn’t care about saving lives - he never bothered about the Tsunami victims
Bush just passed a law to kill the same class of people - for MONEY
Bush will do anything to try and score points - he politicises even person tragedy
Republicans are all like Bush
Republicans love to screw with people’s lives
Republicans wasted a bunch of money that could have saved maybe a million lives
Republicans hate the constitution
Republicans hate the rule of law
Republicans love to change the rules if they can’t win
Republicans are pro-death unless the “life” they are saving literally has no brain (foetus / brain dead)
And so on and so on and so on….
March 23rd, 2005 at 3:40 pm
I’ve heard a few liberals standing up for the bigger issues. Not enough, but a few.
-Sanctity of marriage
-Right to die
-Respect for the Constitution
-Respect for the Courts
-State rights
-Seperation of Church and State
Don’t know how I’d answer the ’starving to death’ meme though. That’s a simple and effective skew of what is really happening. But the repubs have a lot of practice at this sort of thing.
March 23rd, 2005 at 3:52 pm
“Don€™t know how I€™d answer the €™starving to death€™ meme though.”
Simple:
(1) 30,000 kids die a day of starvation - Bush is cutting aid.
(2) Bush says he cares about a woman who died 15 years ago
(3) Hypocrite Republicans play to the camera by bringing a loaf of bread to a woman who can’t eat - because she died 15 years ago. They don’t care really. It’s all for show. it’s all a game with them.
(4) Bush passed a law to starve to death everyone in this position FOR MONEY
and if you want to get really below the belt there’s always (not recommended),
(5) “If her parents were so concerned about her starving herself it’s a shame they didn’t help her 15 years ago when her Bulimia was killing her. It’s a bit late now isn’t it?”
Anyway the point is that if you go for their hypocrisy it’s easy peasy to come up with lines of attack - you are spoiled for choice in fact and can pick whatever goes best at the time.
March 23rd, 2005 at 4:00 pm
And incidentally if that last suggestion (attacking her parents’ sincerity) seems so nasty you think it would always backfire then consider for a second that the Republican leadership have already attacked her husband’s sincerity from the floor of the house on national TV.
March 23rd, 2005 at 4:12 pm
David, like I think Mike says, our response will have to come, both now & consistently, by challenging the evangelical base-kissing, and exposing the lies and hyprocrisy of this administration.
We need to call not only upon wimpy congressional democrats, but also upon CNN (trying so desperately and pathetically to gain Nielsen points on FOX, by being sanitized-for-our-mis-comprehension), to please start acting like responsible elected leaders, and a responsible news organization, respectively.
This country is going so down, so fast, and most people don’t know what to do, but we must do something!
March 23rd, 2005 at 5:35 pm
I disagree, Dave.
I don’t believe this is a Left & Right issue that requires us to stick our finger in the air to determine a response. Because I respect life, I defend it, and always will. This then becomes a right vs. wrong issue, a moral value issue.
I don’t think it’s right to play politics when peoples’ lives are on the line. I don’t think it’s right for politicians to intrude into family lives except to protect the weak from abuse by the strong.
You are correct that the GOP is trying to boil it down into simplistic terms of morality, too. But the clearest defense of that approach is to look how the Democrats in Congress voted. They, too gave Terri and her family every possibility of every kind of review available.
And the judicial system has been uniform in their decisions:
1) every medical opinion by physicians appointed to the case who’ve observed Terri and her records has concurred: she is not capable of cognitive thought, or even of interpreting sights and sounds. She is simply not there.
2) Michael conveyed what Terri’s wishes were and no one has yet proven he’s been dishonest.
3) No evidence has emerged that he’s abused his role as her guardian nor that her care has been substandard.
It is said that thousands of others live in permanent vegetative states. I’m aware of none that have been kept alive for 15 years like this.
Saving Terri’s life is impossible. Her life was probably lost due to bulimia. Where is the hue and cry to teach Americans more about such eating disorders, so thousands of lives could be spared? Those are the lives that can be saved.
When the polls show evangelical Protestants split almost 50-50 on this issue, it’s clear the GOP is only holding half of its most fervent base with their spin. And why?
Because some matters are too clear to be spun, and too personal. There are a number of lives in addition to Terri’s that stand a better chance of being saved. Her parents’. Her siblings’. Michael’s. And when Terri’s shell is allowed to pass, each of them may regain the chance to live complete lives again.
If the GOP wants to claim that all they’re trying to do is save Terri’s life, simply reply that Democrats have been there with them, but after every medical review determined there was no Terri left for 15 years, it was simply time to respect her last wishes and permit her the final grace of going to God.
As to the claims that there’s some sort of cruelty to starvation, I recall that author Scott Nearing chose to die that way. That’s when I learned that the hunger pangs disappear after about the fourth day, and for most, the only agony thereafter might be the knowledge that death is coming if they prefer to live. In Terri’s case, without the cognitive thought to understand the difference between life and death, there’s no mental anguish likely. With her tube removed now for over 5 days, no physical pain nor mental anguish, Terri’s not suffering. She’s moving towards her final peace.
March 23rd, 2005 at 6:00 pm
Our population has been and is right now being subjected to what can only be described as €œmass opinion conditioning.€ The most efficient propaganda machine that has ever existed is at work in our country. What we are seeing here is just another move to create issues out of non-issues and attach a hidden emotional apeal to their agenda of lies and deceit. A non-issue should be kept a non-issue and not be given our exposure or our time.
March 23rd, 2005 at 6:32 pm
If I sounded like I believe this is a Repub vs. Dem issue, I must echo Kevin’s view that is nothing like that, in my opinion. Sound-byte-driven media personnel, politicians, and paid talk show talking-heads say such things.
If anyone chooses to cut through all the hyperbole, one gets back to the proven, court-validated fact that Terri Schiavo did not want to ‘live’ the way she has, for the last 15 years. And so what is lost now, in the lazy, sensational media, is this: the rule of law. The laws that have upheld Ms. Schiavo’s right to finally not live, in this way that she told many she never wanted to live.
Would that we could all shut up and let her find her chosen peace, but no, others have turned this woman’s (and potentially others’?) most private, personal choice into a political circus.
March 23rd, 2005 at 6:41 pm
Here’s your larger issue: The gov’t is telling people when they can live or die. I own my life, not the gov’t.
March 23rd, 2005 at 6:52 pm
A political circus? What else is new. I say just let her live. The reality is that we can no longer afford to think in terms of the ancient liberal/conervative paradigm. The reality is, the real conservatives are MORE disturbed by this neocon/neolib fascism than progressives (which, in absence of a better decription I guess I am). Just check out the very conservative International Forecaster is at:
http://www.theinternationalforecaster.com/trainwreck.php?Id=69&PHPSESSID=9b25690b51c5cfa01eb777b 12b3d4ac6
The real cons are talking revolution.
March 23rd, 2005 at 7:03 pm
Blues, you say ‘let her live’ because it serves some political agenda? I say let her die, because that’s what she wanted, and told her husband, some time before her heart attack.
I say that the reality is that the collective we can no longer afford to think in terms of any political party/agenda. This was always and is still such a private matter, that judges have thankfully validated.
Maybe I’m not getting your meaning. I’m just saying this isn’t political at all. It’s personal (i.e. any individual).
The circus seems quite apparent and loud, to me. And we must remain a nation of laws, not circus vendors, eh?
March 23rd, 2005 at 7:14 pm
The actual “issue” itself has little to do with the politics. People own their life, but not their death. Terri Shiavo might have expressed an opinion about what to do with her body after her death. She also might have expressed an opinion on what colour wallpaper to use in the spare room. Well she’s dead now so her opinions only matter to the extent that it comforts the living to honour her memory. The Western tradition is to show honour by allowing the dead person to distribute their wealth and decide what happens to their body after death. That is the legal situation too.
That€™s when I learned that the hunger pangs disappear after about the fourth day
Personally I never got hunger pains when fasting but usually it lasts 3-4 days. After that you feel fine for the next few weeks. However after several weeks (four, five, maybe six) the pain returns (I’ve heard!) and this time you have to cease the fast or your body starts to eat itself and you can become permanently injured (eg go blind). But all that applies if you are conscious of course.
I don’t understand how she survives a week with no water. That’ll kill you in 3-4 days won’t it? Are they putting her on a drip? I thought I heard she had no water but it seems impossible to suvive a week without water.
March 23rd, 2005 at 7:22 pm
The larger narrative: remember the thesis laid out in “What’s .. Kansas?”: the goal is to lose and lose again: to be the fighting underdog with no victories.
The more likely her death appears, the closer they are to a TV movie of the week, of which the Congressional intervention was a last-minute [sports metaphor]. Why are Rush et al. playing this up as something besides a foregone (fatal) conclusion for Schiavo? So that the stunts will forever be enshrined as something more than cynical ploys.
I still say that the GOP will take a beating. People know she’s dead.
March 23rd, 2005 at 9:27 pm
Start arguing the larger narrative.
Dave,
There is no arguing, that the emotionally shrill rhetoric from the pro-Life Right is filling the MSM, and the distortions their arguments are based on are going unchallenged by mostly the cable networks, desperate to prolong the controversy. And, I’ve seen debates faulting the Democrats for either not taking advantage, or calling the Republicans on their hypocrisy. But, two points I wanna make.
The current state of our media is not accommodating to arguing a larger, detailed narrative. Yes, it’s happening in the blogsphere, but not on cable networks that allow outright lies by DeLay and Frist to go unchallenged. The news networks are hemorrhaging the pragmatic, educated viewers to web, leaving them to fight over the Fox News viewer base that have no concern for the facts.
Second, it’s not just us Democrats that feel they are being called ‘killers and murderers’ - it’s also the overwhelming majority of empathetic Americans who, although deeply saddened by what is happening, feels it’s none of their business.
March 24th, 2005 at 12:03 am
Dave,
Terri is dead. She has been dead for years. That, apparently, is a fact. The issue is about the shell of a body which used to hold Terri. So you need not think you are arguing for Terri’s death.
It is important to stand by important truths. Acknowledging the reality of death is an important truth, pointing out the five doctors who examined Terri is the right thing, pointing out that her brain melted years agao is the right thing, pointing out her right to have her body put to rest after her humanity is gone is the right thing, calmly telling hysterical people it is wrong to pretend Terri is alive just because they are afraid to face the facts is the right thing to do. it is our job to help them face reality.
The larger issue of having the courage and responsibility to face facts is a strong arguement to make to even right wing fundamentalist republicans
Lastly. the administrations policy of blustering past the facts with their chest puffed out only impresses the simple folk as long as BushCo doesnt look like they are losing which they are.
BushCo is fueled on fear and confusion, his own and that of his supporters. The strongest and most effective arguement we have and have ever had is to stand smartly, kindly and couragously for the clearest and most important truths we can find. We are doing that now. Dont let their whining and feetstomping rattle you, we are doing the right thing. and it they will see that and respond or see themselves crazier and crazier even by their own standards, either way they lose the crowd.
March 24th, 2005 at 6:49 am
“Did you know that in the Bush 2006 Health & Human Services budget, he totally eliminates the federal Traumatic Brain Injury program which has helped thousands of Terri Schiavos in 4 states since 1997?”
Here’s a link to the proposed budget at whitehouse.gov
Search for “Traumatic Brain Injury” and you will quickly get to the part where Bush proposes the program be axed to save $9 million.
I wonder how many millions congress and the president have spent on exploiting the Terri Shiavo case?
I didn’t realise the original commenter had already put an article up on this.
March 24th, 2005 at 7:56 am
I agree that we are doing the right thing here.
Not that withdrawing the tube is the right thing, that letting the courts do their job is the right thing, and that telling the legislative branch not to try to play court is the right thing.
Personaly and as a matter of faith, I think the feeding should continue. I see a significant distinction between a feeding tube and a respirator. If it were my call, the feeding tube would stay in. It isn’t my call, and I don’t want to make it so. The distinction between a feeding tube and a respirator is too fine and personal a point for legislation. I don’t think the law is wrong here.
But if the legislators are right about this case, if they are saving Terri’s life, that makes them infinitely more wrong in what they are doing than if they are just prolonging her death for cheap political points. When that many courts agree with total unanimity, the law is obviously clear in the case. And if the law is that clear and wrong (I don’t think it is wrong, but there is such a thing as humility) it desperately needs changing. If they are saving Terri’s life, they are killing many other people every day by treating her as a special case. If they are right on the merits of the case, the separation of powers isn’t a roadblock to saving a life but a map for how to save many.
March 24th, 2005 at 12:44 pm
This was a bungled attempt to politicize the courts. It failed miserably.
Americablog explains it thusly, and I agree.
posted on americablog.org today
Why do Republican judges want Terri Schiavo to die?
by John in DC - 3/24/2005 10:31:00 AM
Newsflash people. As I suspected, it’s, once again, the GOP judges who are staking out the position that Terri Schiavo should be permitted to finally die with dignity. Not only is the Florida judge a big ole Republican, but of the 3 appellated court judges deciding on this yesterday, the dissenter (i.e., agreed with the religious right) was a Clinton appointee, and the two judges who said it’s time to let Terri go were a Bush and a Clinton apppointee.
But oh, it gets even better. When an emergency appeal is filed with the US Supreme Court, it’s filed with one justice who gets to decide if they’ll take up the case. Well, last time the appeal was made to conservative Justice Kennedy, A REAGAN APPOINTEE, and rather than simply accept the appeal like a good Republican clone, he instead referred it to the entire court for THEM to decide. The entire court, the majority of which is republican appointees, voted it down.
Let me reiterate that. A Reagan judge declined to take the appeal - i.e., declined to save Terri - then the majority Republican appointed US Supreme Court declined as well.
So now the religious right and congressional republicans think even Reagan appointed judges are too activist and too liberal. Then who IS proper to be a judge if even a Reagan appointee is too liberal? Or, is the problem simply that the religious right and the GOP won’t accept ANY judge that doesn’t rubber stamp any and all of their extreme views?
March 24th, 2005 at 1:47 pm
Bush doesn€™t care about people.
Bush doesn€™t care about healthcare.
Bush doesn€™t care about saving lives - he never bothered about the Tsunami victims
Bush just passed a law to kill the same class of people - for MONEY
I personally happen to think that these statements and the host of others that went with them are true. And that’s fine; I consider myself awake to the maneuvering and masterful reframing of the American political conversation in which the Bush administration has engaged over the last five years. So are most people I meet. But so what? I live in New York! It’s blue-state country up here.
Most of the votes that get the neocons elected come from Middle America, which is far more likely to be driven politically by religion and patriotism than the average New Yorker. But here’s where we progressives start to go wrong…we throw up our hands and say “Oh, great. There’s no way we can compete with the conservatives in those areas! They can just wave that flag and that cross and armies of votes swing their way! Better just concentrate on getting out the truth about how Bush really doesn’t care about X, Y and Z…”
Then we get nailed when the neocons sigh, smile and lament that these poor misguided liberals can’t do anything but attack their virtuous intents and block their bona fide effort to make life better and safer for all Americans.
Well guess what? We CAN compete in those areas! When it comes to it, we’re just as patriotic, just as dedicated to our spiritual beliefs as they are. But we won’t come off looking that way in battles like the Teresa Schiavo case until we realize that morally the high ground does not belong to the Bush administration, much as they continually claim it does.
Wanna talk spirituality, Mr. President? Morality? Then behave as a true believer in the love and the power of the Lord would, and encourage the people who trust you to guide America down a moral path to submit to His will, which seems to have been to call Teresa Schiavo home to eternal life for some time now.
That’s the attitude to go with, everybody. Going around saying the President is evil and amoral is only gonna confuse and alienate good people who really believe most of the things we do anyway. Let’s start telling the real truth.
He’s moral. Just not moral enough.
March 24th, 2005 at 4:38 pm
Can we all say HYPOCRISY? Aren’t these the self-same conservatives always toting “States’ Rights”?, especially when it comes to discriminating against ethnic & minority groups. Oh no, the Feds didn’t have the right to tell them that they couldn’t keep blacks from voting or sitting wherever they liked on a bus or integrating ‘their’ schools with those negroes - those decisions should have been left up to ‘the States’.
But now, these same “States’ Rights” nuts are DEMANDING that the Feds get involved to save Terri Schiavo, though every expert medical opinion has shown that there is no hope for her to emerge from her 15 year long vegetative state. Even though G.W. signed a bill during his tenure as governor of Texas in 1999 that would allow for physicians to override the wishes of family members when faced with the same circumstances as Terri Schiavo.
These are the same folks who complain that government is way too intrusive in the lives of its citizens, even though these same right wingers didn’t have too much a problem with something as intrusive as anti-sodomy laws on the books - even though that could be considered a private and consensual form of expression, which is one reason why the Court finally overturned it. Well, here’s the the judiciary at least, stepping back and allowing the citizens (Michael Schiavo) decide what’s best for HIS wife.
The best irony of all is that most of these Supreme Court judges are either Reagan or Bush Sr. appointees. That’s got to be giving the right massive headaches.
Yeah, so much for “States’ Rights”.
March 24th, 2005 at 10:18 pm
Do the people who elected Bush really feel the same way people who voted against him do? According to their widely reported voting patterns, important issues that are key to their family’s well-being like health care, education, taking care of wounded vets and their families, the quality of the air their children breath and water they drink are much less important than preventing gays from getting married and keeping women from having abortions.
Bush has always made his agenda clear; corporate interests trump the basic needs of individual Americans.
We ARE all effected by this man’s determination to undermine the very foundations put into place to protect average Americans. However, as long as 51% of Americans see him as a true and earnest Christian, they believe he is good and steadfast leader no matter what he does to the contrary.
I’m no biblical scholar but I spent enough years in Sunday school to know that Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount did not endorse usury, as epitomised by the new bankruptcy bill. Nor did that sermon espouse forsaking the widows, children, elderly or sick like Bush’s new budget does. This President and his Congress have made a point of giving to the rich and taking from the poor. They think the Jesus’s Golden Rule is that GOLD RULES. Forget ‘do unto others,’ or being good stewards of earth and all things on it. Their “Christianity” and “deep moral values” have nothing to do with the quality of life of their fellow Americans. They lie and see their lies as a means to an end. Machiavelli could not have created a better “Prince.” For this administration and Congress, ethics is a thing of the past, thats why Republicans have evicerated the ethics rules they created.
The question that remains is how to explain to frightened and put upon Americans that their “Christian” President is a fraud; that his staunch support of anti-abortion measures, the death penalty, poor Terri Schiavo and his war for democracy do not keep them safe or help them in their struggle to live decent lives and give better lives to their children. How can we reach out to people who see FOX as balanced and fair news reporting. How can you explain that this Congress’s love of Mammon will always and in all ways dictate what it legislates and that their representatives are no longer fighting for their real needs. This administration sends our children to war, and proposes slashing Veteren’s bennifts. They rush to “save” Terri, while proposing to cut the very Medicare bennifts that have taken care of her. They push putting large caps on malpractice cases, even though it was a malpractise award that paid for all of Terri’s extraordinary rehab and therapies.
My life is one of an average American. I am a mother with a 7 year old child and husband as well as the primary care-giver to a dying mother. Medicare is currently paying for my mother’s in-home hospice care. This is a true blessing, allowing my mother to end her life in her own home surrounded by the people who love her. This hospice service costs Medicare 10 times less then housing my mother in a nursing home. Yet it is one of the services Bush proposed to cut. My mother’s medicines ran $1,200 per month, Bush’s new Medicare drug provision reduced those costs by $73 dollars. It was obviouly not engineered to really help seniors. In contrast, New Jersey’s unique drug bill has cut my mothers monthly costs for medicine to $300.
I also know how important and precious Social Security is. Social Security put food on our table when my father died, and Social Security plus scholarships, grants and college loans put both my brother and myself through college. My mother raised us on a paycheck that began at 8 grand, and never rose above 15 grand. However that steady and secure job gave our family good health care, and supplied my mother with a small but vital pension. Social Security pays for her meager living expenses.
Now this administration wants to do away with all of these vital programs. Corporations no longer have to supply decent healthcare alternatives to their workers, nor do they have to adequetly fund their worker’s pensions. Bush’s new medicare drug entitlement is nothing more than a phamacuetical give-away. Social Security has been targeted for extinction and government sponcered college grants and loans programs, which he already gutted during his first administration are once again on the chopping block.
So again I ask, how do you touch the hearts and minds of people who staunchly support Bush and this Congress when they don’t seem to care or understand how dangerous Bush’s agenda is to their lives and the lives of those they love the most? This is not a rhetorical question. The future of this country and the lives of its people really does hang in the balance. This administration has already done so much damage to the fabric of this great and wonderful country. Unless leaders arise who can captivate, educate and empower these people, the true values this country stands for will disappear forever.
March 25th, 2005 at 8:19 am
David,
While I agree that the issues are bigger, and the Right is constantly trying to frame these issues for future political gain, they also have mastered the ability to shoot down every attempt by progressives at answering or reframing the issue. It’s not that we don’t have logical, rational, and fair answers.
It’s that the Radical Right is trained to fight back with carefully rehearsed retorts. Even more maddening, they’ll point out that our answers, if carefully rehearsed, ARE carefully rehearsed. Progressives who debate by the rules lose because we’re too polite, and those who don’t are ridiculed for being overly emotional and negative.
The Right also has cleverly managed to project their own weaknesses onto the Left, so as to divert their adherents’ attention from those weaknesses.
I think of it as the most successful ‘idea virus’ campaign in modern times—one that constantly adapts to efforts at eradication by convincing the body that the ‘good cells’ are actually the virus.
So, more than ‘waking up’ to realizations that the Right is doing what they are doing, it’s incumbent upon us to be proactive instead of reactive, learn framing techniques that focus on so-called ‘irrefutable truths’ (the way the Right has) and repeat, repeat, repeat in order to burn these values of social and economic justice into the brains of those who would benefit most from them—the legions who vote against their own self-interests and community interests because they have been indoctrinated by ideologues who seek to only benefit themselves. That’s what is so maddening to progressives—why don’t Joe and Mary Six Pack see that Rush Limbaugh—who has more than enough money to pay for his own retirement, and doesn’t need Social Security the way Joe and Mary do—is attempting to destroy the program that will see them through retirement? But of course, instead of wishing they got what they deserved, we progressives want to see that Joe and Mary don’t end up destitute and bitter at having been misled by power-hungry elitists.
I think the Schiavo case is a perfect example of how the Right made a misstep and thought the specifics of this case fit into the frame of “The Culture of Life”—when the frame it really fit into was “Government Intervention Into the Private Lives of Free Citizens”. No matter how hard they try, the Right will not be able to make their rank and file change how they fit arguments into the pre-established frames—so they obviously cannot predict the outcome of all of their ideological fights. If progressives can identify the frame the Right is attempting to exploit, perhaps we can use other frames to argue against them.
We are now starting to see cracks form in the Right’s structure. But it’s going to take time and lots of gumption to stand up to their bullying, personal attacks and lies.
This is a good start: http://www.alternet.org/story/21584/
March 25th, 2005 at 10:41 am
Obviously, we as progressives are on the ball as to what the real issues are and we’re equally adept at pointing out conservative hypocrisy in the way they fawn over Ms. Schiavo while gutting all the programs that have supported her these 15 years.
So why is this something WE all know and “middle America” as many posters have already commented, seem oblivious. Is it because they can’t get Air America? No.
We’ve missed the issue that looms over the Schiavo case like Dracula: abortion.
When you hear or read “life” in any context from the right, always, always, always think of abortion. I believe that many on the left have been pulling their punches on the egregious acts of DeLay and the Bushes on this issue because they know what lies down the road if travelled too far.
I’m a working journalist. This morning I attended a prayer breakfast in a fair sized Midwest city. I know these people. And I’m here to tell you that their slavish adherence to the GOP starts first with the abortion issue and then trickles down to things like greed, racism, xenophobia, etc.
There is nothing that can be done on the progressive side to convince them to listen to our pleas on how the politicians they support are ripping off their futures and their children’s futures. Going to Hell is a very powerful political motivator that the left cannot overcome with policy wonk discussion. We waste our time trying.
Also, if anyone thinks these folks are going to be fooled by any Democratic politician that starts spouting quasi-pro-life positions (Hillary Clinton) I have some Enron stock to sell you.
I know I sound like its hopeless. It isn’t. The real demographic battle is not over the middle aged Midwesterners - they’re history and you won’t get them back. Its over the 18-23 year olds, especially those who haven’t been sucked into the maw of evangelical Christianity. They were expected to vote in large numbers last year and didn’t. Fire them up, get them to see their future is being stolen from them, and get them to the polls. And for pity sake’s radicalize the high school and junior high school youth! I started working on my son when he was old enough to understand politics.
Progressives are really falling down on this - they are the future voters and they can be influenced if you can reach them where they live.
Why do you think the young voter demographic is the only one the polls show buying into Bush’s Social Security plan? Previous posters are correct - Rove did not get where he is today by being an idiot.
March 25th, 2005 at 7:43 pm
Good for you Keith! You are right about this age group. Unfortunetly, it often takes personal experiences that hits home to motivate voters. And the media and this administration has already put a lid on covering all the body bags coming home from Iraq, and the protests of these soldiers parents around military bases.
Recently, students who protested army sign-ups on campus got arrested and suspended from school (see democracynow.org.) Not one paper or media outlet covered their protest or their arrests.
So how will these kids in the heartland know what is really going on? They think that they are immortal? Doesn’t everyone at that age feel the same way? If they are healthy and educated do they even consider the problem of health insurance, or understand that this administration has successfully limited their options?
It is natural for them to want to hold on to everything in their paycheck. Do they consider that private accounts will send our already balooning deficit into the stratisphere, and take money out of the hands of retiring adults who have paid into the system their entire lives? Right now, they are at the very beginning of their lives and feel that they are smarter than their elders. How do you touch their hearts when they are naturaly predisposed against really getting issues that will effect them decades from now?
They have been raised on the instant fame and richs of American Idol, and have bought into the myth of meritocracy. They believe that they can make it if they are smart and work hard enough. And the flip side of that myth is that those who haven’t “made it” or are poor weren’t smart enough or were just lazy. Thats the beauty of the the meritocracy myth. It’s seductive and empowering. It enables you to believe that you have power over your life, enables you to blame others for their own poverty and motivates you to vote against the American “welfare state” comprised of Social Security, Medicare, Head Start, work to welfare programs and public education. Because, as we all know, really smart and successful people send their kids to private school.
The Republican Party gets this and exploits it. That’s why this age group is signing up en mass at Republican rally’s.
Democrats made a huge effort to educate and motivate this age group, and they still didn’t show up at the polls. Why? Because in the end, they have to have a personal experience that demostrates that what they have been fed is a lie. If you have figured out how to turn out this crew, please tell the Democrats and Progessives, and everyone on this blog so we can all get our respective butts in gear. I am educating my own child, but he is 7 and has a way to go before he starts talking politics with his friends.
Don’t give up on the older age group Keith. I have two childhood friends who were Stalwart Republican supporters and raised huge sums of money for Bush in 2000. Then their parents got really sick and needed lots of medication. When my friends went to use their dear presidents medicare drug entitlement they discovered that their parents would not save a dime, and their medicare co-pay went up. Now their parents are running through their savings paying for drugs and soon they will have nothing but their social security checks.
These ladies campaigned hard against Bush in 2004 and raised lots of cash for Kerry. And, they haven’t given up. The Schiavo debacle has really scared the heck out of them, given their parent’s condition, so they have gottan their bridge and social group involved in raising funds for up-coming congressional campaigns in their districts.
The older age group you have dismissed, all have parents, or grand children who they want the best for. When the hammer starts coming down in their lives, as it inevitably will, they will rise up and change their votes. The question is will it already be too late?
March 26th, 2005 at 12:27 am
I know that we’ve all talked about this already but tonights Scarboro on MSNBC is just so outrageous in its contentions regarding poor Terri that I had to mention it. They are now likening her to an innocent fetus. Forget the fact that her cerebrum has deteriorated into viscous fluid, that she had 4 full years of therapy, and extraordinary brain therapies to no avail and the multiple doctors who examined her throughly over long periods of time All concluded that she was gone. Her parents UNDER OATH admitted that she was in fact in a vegetative state in two of the court battles.
But no one is listening. They only hear as Dave said, that Republicans are trying to “save” her, and Democrats and the Judiciary want to starve her to death.
How can we stop this insanity and these lies when our government controls the media? No one can hear the facts of this case over the constant drumming of death by starvation?
Apparently no one in the media or in politics have ever gone through it themselves with a loved one. It is one of the most important decisions any family member will ever make. And one that they will live with the rest of their lives.
My family is devotely Christian, and has always believed that with death they will become whole in heaven living in everlasting joy with God and all the loved ones who passed before them. Knowing their wishs and keeping them from that spiritual ressurection through the use of a feeding tube, when they were dying and no longer conscience would be an absolute sin.
I have worked in a hospice and I can tell you that no one wants to be hooked up to anything unless its morphine to kill the pain of terminal cancer.
Everybody has their own feelings about how they would want to be treated if something catestrophic happened. Their wishes should be honored. I could not live with myself if I made a person refuse a feeding tube or made a person who didn’t want one get one. How can we let the Right dictate these things? How can we stop them? They have already taken that choice out of the hands of families in Texas and put that decision in hands of the hospital. New York state law now states that ANY person entering a nursing home must accept a feeding tube when they can no longer swallow. And those are the two I know about. Whatever your health directive, it can be rendered meaningless by your state’s law. So get ready, the battle on this front is just beginning!
March 26th, 2005 at 2:05 pm
I think we all know what the right is up to. But I hope you’re not actually suggesting that progressives switch sides on the issue. Not only would that be a spineless move, the kind Democrats have been mocked for (remember that annoying “flip-flop” phrase, may it burn in Hell), but it would go against the grain. I don’t know what polls you’ve been looking at, but a large majority is on our side with this one. I do believe that we should be more aggressive now in pointing out the hypocrisies of the right. But we need to solve a bigger problem. The “liberal media” myth is causing news outlets to become self-conscious and show lop-sided issues like this as more balanced than they are. The media has generally had the effect of conservatizing America and yet it’s considered liberal. As it conservatizes more and more people, these sentiments will grow. This seems to be a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t issue. If we get our message through, the media is attacked as liberal. If we don’t, they get their message through. If we really want to get in touch with the average American, we need to figure out how to come off as honest. You don’t do that by coming off as weak Clinton Republicans.
I could be getting you wrong. If you mean that progs should use tact and quit blatantly insulting good people and acting nitpicking little details like psychotic lawyers, we are in total agreement.
March 26th, 2005 at 9:19 pm
Progressives have to be charismatic, come up with a theme (marketing Tag), that ANYONE can understand, and then state the real facts in a winning way. We live in an era of sound bites, and frankly, very few Americans have the time or inclination to dig through a variety of papers, or for that mater watch more than one news station.
Our problem is not that the facts are not on our side, or that the vast majority, if asked, wouldn’t agree with us, it’s that our leaders don’t appear to have the courage, determination, charisma and media savy they need to compete and win against the Right’s well-tooled media machine.
In all the years since Watergate we still have not mastered the media sound bite, organized outreach, or gone on the offensive like the Right has!
The most forceful Dems and Progressive Congressional Reps, always sound like they are on the defensive. They sound earnest, when they should resound with the confidence that their position is the only logical, ethical and moral position to take. They should not express outrage at the right’s politics and barbs, but dismiss them, and expose their positions in terms the people will understand. A Great example is their position on the Schiavo case. Why didn’t Anyone simply say The people of America do not want this congress determining how and when they should meet their maker. etc. and have the courage to vote according to the TRUTH.
A lot of Dems signed up for that horrific Schiavo bill, and 16 voted against the interests of their own constituancies, AND their party’s core beliefs for the Bankruptcy bill.
What Progressives and Dems lack is Courage, Charisma and Media Savy, not the facts and certainly not the truth.
All of us will continue to organize canvass and get out voters, but without strong leaders we will remain the minority party, until the hammer falls across the mid west and they vote by necessity against the Republicans.