Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Oh The Horror (Geesh)

No sooner had Indiana's Republican candidate for U.S. Senate thrown his head at his opponent than the Dems started throwing it back; he's now become The Devil in other races including various House battles and, most strikingly, the contest over the Governor's office.  At one point, Republican (and, to be fair, very Religious-Right) Mike Pence -- who was quick to speak out against what Mr. Mourdock had said -- faced only genial joshing from Democrat also-ran (and, to be fair, not actually a walrus, despite what you may have heard) John Gregg; now ads for Gregg open with Mourdock's voice intoning, "...even in that horrible situation of rape, it is something God intended to happen..." and then a worried-sounding female voice exhorts voters to "Stop the Tea Party!  Vote for John Gregg!"

     Oh, that's appealing. I have noted with interest partisan efforts to paint the various persons and small groups energized by Rick Santelli's impassioned rant on CNBC as some sort of sweeping, Margaret-Atwoodian-nightmare conspiracy to keep women barefoot and pregnant and minorities just barefoot -- and I have found it fascinating that the very people uttering strident warnings about a movement that is, at its core, economic rather than social are also the first to chide the public about "the politics of fear."  --Except the fear they're selling, that is.

     Rule of thumb: any time any Party, group or individual keeps pushing the "fear these horrid people" button with loaded words urging immediate action, they're trying to stampede the public.  The bunch you're being urged to fear may or may not be "mean, nasty ugly-looking people," but you can be darned sure the group waving the bloody shirt doesn't want you to stop and think things through.

     Social Conservatives and the various and sundry "Tea Party" groups are not the same thing.  They're not even all that uniform among themselves.  Go read up on the candidates; it's fun to just let the PACs and Parties slap tags on 'em, love the ones you've been told are loveable and hate the ones portrayed as loathsome, but you're mere moldable putty in the hands of your would-be masters if you take that easy course.

     Do your darned homework.

     Oh, and Rick Santelli?  You know what else he said?  "I want the new [Obama] administration to win this one," Santelli said. "We are all Americans. ... It's a question whether spending our children's money is going to make us win or not, or is it going to take its own time to heal, like a cold going away?"  What set him ranting him was the policy, not the person.


Sabra said...

The other version of this I have seen quite a bit of is outright guilt trips--"If you vote for Mitt Romney, you hate kids/the elderly/sick people/gays/women." (Who, exactly, I am said to hate varies by the person accusing me, of course.) That it is a way to head off intelligent discussion is painfully obvious, but it is at least a new take on the ad hominem attack.

Mike W. said...

"That it is a way to head off intelligent discussion is painfully obvious, but it is at least a new take on the ad hominem attack."

Yup. It appears that's the guilt trip mode of attack now that they've so thoroughly worn out the race card.