Judith Warner’s “No Laughing Matter” has me reeling — it’s written by a liberal female columnist going to a McCain-Palin rally and coming away with the realization that left-leaning Democrats have failed to develop any empathy for the part of the country that voted for Bush, and thus left themselves vulnerable to a counterattack and charges of “elitism.” What really nails it for me is the many comments that follow, comprising both liberals and conservatives largely sticking to talking points and calling each other names.
I’ve got this kind of queasy feeling in my heart and stomach right now after reading that piece and the “discussion” afterwards. For the past week I have been deeply worried about the upcoming election, and this piece puts my finger exactly on the source of that discomfort.
Barack Obama is fundamentally about listening, empathy, and uniting the country not with conformity but with understanding. It’s how he won the primaries, by building his base outside the Democratic strongholds and attracting Democrats in “Red States” who understood Republicans because they had to, to survive. But it’s his own party — his surrogates, his supporters — who seem to be the ones alienating that vast middle, the America that’s felt overlooked and condescended upon.
The standard liberal response to this is that the rednecks are idiots. This, of course, just confirms both sides’ view of each other, leaving us worse off then if we just ignored each other.
When liberals argue that Republicans are playing “wedge politics,” they fail to understand that the wedge exploits their own partisanship as much as the conservatives’, sometimes even more so. Witness the masterful jujitsu the McCain campaign used to whip the liberal blogosphere into a frenzy over Palin.
Liberal bloggers made a strategic mistake in going after Palin’s family situation. Their charges of “hypocrisy” misjudged Palin’s Christian base, one that can be quite forgiving of personal lapses because all people are sinners. (Bush’s alcoholism and cocaine use are prime examples). Liberals used O’Reilly shock-jock politics as cartoon stand-ins for how the religious right really feels, and thus failed to understand how their attacks were counter-productive, baring the contempt they can feel about “rednecks.”
When Obama called us to rise above partisanship, many of us only heard about Red States joining with Blue States. Blue Staters brushed off the corollary requirement that they also reach out with empathy and listening. If Obama’s own supporters can’t show our ability to empathize and understand, is it any surprise that others perceive the promise of post-partisanship as empty?
We should be somehow point out that the experience issue has mostly been conceeded by McCain. If he feels Palin is a experienced enough to be VP, then it can be argued that Obama is equally or more qualified to be president. Sounds to me like the arguement is over.
What I don’t understand is women going from supporting Hillary to supporting Sarah. It seems this is because they are both women. They certainly don’t have similar perspectives on the issues.
McCain seems to be talking out of both sides of his mouth. Those who speak for him have a very conservative more guns, more Iraq, etc. sound. Then Mc Cain comes along and talks about how he can bring people togther. His convention made him look like he didn’t have the same tone as his party.