Kos comments, post-censors...
Here.
Maybe I'll copy them all over, later, once I'm sure the little old ladies with the big red pens are finished. I thought it humorous, and sad, that one missing is the one where I provide an actual quote that demonstrates 1) Switters was misquoted by someone using "his exact words", and 2) He never said he was me.
My favorite (currently standing - we'll see for how long) comment: "maybe time to go back your textbooks, schoolie?"
The only people who've ever criticized me for being educated, until now, have been ignorant, religious conservatives. This came from one of the only people who voiced any support for my argument (initially, anyway). Clearly, the gang brought him around.
Oh - and the results from my little poll changed significantly after I pointed out the results were supporting my position. Funny, that.
Consider - these are allegedly intelligent, liberal, activist Democrats; who just engaged, in miniature, in behavior worthy of the Bush administration.
The "trusted user" phenomenon is a disaster. Worse, I fear the social dynamics there mirror those at the Democratic National Committee.
Sane people will never re-establish themselves in government until they quit lowering themselves to the level of their opponents. This is insanity at the grass-roots level. No wonder I can't find a national political figure I can feel enthusiastic about supporting - it all starts here.
I do like my Democratic congressman, and my mayor. But Mitt Romney (for God's sake!) would beat any of the main presidential contenders currently in the field, I fear. Think of it as an exercise in collectively attempting to save face. The US public just elected a stupid, ignorant, dangerous (and dangerously corrupt) man to the highest office in the land. Twice! There is more resistance than Democrats are acknowledging to a collective admission they (we) were wrong. Twice! Why do you think the persistance of opinion about WMD's, and Iraqi involvement in 9/11? Nobody wants to be wrong.
If the Democrats put themselves in a position where people have to admit they were wrong while voting for them, the Democrats will lose. Again! But the Democrats also have their own face-saving problems they aren't dealing with - that they (we) also initially supported the war (at best, duped), that they want to "cut and run like we did in Vietnam", not to mention the unenviable task of being the bearer of bad news on issues like global warming, the economy, and the sctual implications of world events. Republicans have been succesful in placing them on the defensive (defining the continuum on which they'll be judged). Not the users at Kos - their attacks had little to do with anything I actually said in my post. Sound familiar? We see it every election cycle - just substitute the political issue of your choice for censorship, and imagine I just posted on a conservative forum.
What I'm afraid will happen is Democrats will not figure out how to allow the American public to save face on Iraq, the economy and environment and still vote for them. Right now, to cross lines in their direction is an admission they were stupid or misguided in the last election. It's a big problem.
At Kos too - people just can't stand admitting they were wrong; particularly in a closed group, where there are significant social repercussions (anonymously imposed?) for nonconformity. We're supposed to be the good guys - the educated, thoughtful, inclusory, understanding folks who can see a broad enough perspective to make better decisions. What happened? We forgot about integrity. Until we remember what that means, we will continue to lose. Until we remember how to gracefully admit our failings, and use our ability to self-correct as evidence of a desirable characteristic, we continue in our failure to model*, for the American public, how to save face in the inevitable circumstance where we were wrong. Just like at Kos.
But I'm afraid I do have something besides my political leanings in common with the members of Daily Kos - damn small consolation being "right", when you're powerless to influence outcome.
*A viable model also has to be someone the public wants to identify with (preferably emulate, on some dimension). Fail to take that into consideration, and the whole process backfires. Bush won, in part, because Americans like to see themselves as tough, folksy etc. Romney, who looks and sounds damn presidential, has got every one of the Democratic candidates currently in the field whipped on this dimension. And, he appears to have values. We're in big trouble, if the best opponent we can muster against him is Hillary Clinton. Think about what identifying with her means, to the stereotypic American.
Maybe I'll copy them all over, later, once I'm sure the little old ladies with the big red pens are finished. I thought it humorous, and sad, that one missing is the one where I provide an actual quote that demonstrates 1) Switters was misquoted by someone using "his exact words", and 2) He never said he was me.
My favorite (currently standing - we'll see for how long) comment: "maybe time to go back your textbooks, schoolie?"
The only people who've ever criticized me for being educated, until now, have been ignorant, religious conservatives. This came from one of the only people who voiced any support for my argument (initially, anyway). Clearly, the gang brought him around.
Oh - and the results from my little poll changed significantly after I pointed out the results were supporting my position. Funny, that.
Consider - these are allegedly intelligent, liberal, activist Democrats; who just engaged, in miniature, in behavior worthy of the Bush administration.
The "trusted user" phenomenon is a disaster. Worse, I fear the social dynamics there mirror those at the Democratic National Committee.
Sane people will never re-establish themselves in government until they quit lowering themselves to the level of their opponents. This is insanity at the grass-roots level. No wonder I can't find a national political figure I can feel enthusiastic about supporting - it all starts here.
I do like my Democratic congressman, and my mayor. But Mitt Romney (for God's sake!) would beat any of the main presidential contenders currently in the field, I fear. Think of it as an exercise in collectively attempting to save face. The US public just elected a stupid, ignorant, dangerous (and dangerously corrupt) man to the highest office in the land. Twice! There is more resistance than Democrats are acknowledging to a collective admission they (we) were wrong. Twice! Why do you think the persistance of opinion about WMD's, and Iraqi involvement in 9/11? Nobody wants to be wrong.
If the Democrats put themselves in a position where people have to admit they were wrong while voting for them, the Democrats will lose. Again! But the Democrats also have their own face-saving problems they aren't dealing with - that they (we) also initially supported the war (at best, duped), that they want to "cut and run like we did in Vietnam", not to mention the unenviable task of being the bearer of bad news on issues like global warming, the economy, and the sctual implications of world events. Republicans have been succesful in placing them on the defensive (defining the continuum on which they'll be judged). Not the users at Kos - their attacks had little to do with anything I actually said in my post. Sound familiar? We see it every election cycle - just substitute the political issue of your choice for censorship, and imagine I just posted on a conservative forum.
What I'm afraid will happen is Democrats will not figure out how to allow the American public to save face on Iraq, the economy and environment and still vote for them. Right now, to cross lines in their direction is an admission they were stupid or misguided in the last election. It's a big problem.
At Kos too - people just can't stand admitting they were wrong; particularly in a closed group, where there are significant social repercussions (anonymously imposed?) for nonconformity. We're supposed to be the good guys - the educated, thoughtful, inclusory, understanding folks who can see a broad enough perspective to make better decisions. What happened? We forgot about integrity. Until we remember what that means, we will continue to lose. Until we remember how to gracefully admit our failings, and use our ability to self-correct as evidence of a desirable characteristic, we continue in our failure to model*, for the American public, how to save face in the inevitable circumstance where we were wrong. Just like at Kos.
But I'm afraid I do have something besides my political leanings in common with the members of Daily Kos - damn small consolation being "right", when you're powerless to influence outcome.
*A viable model also has to be someone the public wants to identify with (preferably emulate, on some dimension). Fail to take that into consideration, and the whole process backfires. Bush won, in part, because Americans like to see themselves as tough, folksy etc. Romney, who looks and sounds damn presidential, has got every one of the Democratic candidates currently in the field whipped on this dimension. And, he appears to have values. We're in big trouble, if the best opponent we can muster against him is Hillary Clinton. Think about what identifying with her means, to the stereotypic American.
posted by TenaciousK at 7:42 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home