Open Letter to the Preachy Obama-supporters
Open Letter to the Preachy Obama-supporters
You know who you are. You are the self-appointed moderators of political speech. You do it for the good of the Democratic party and for unity. However, you are doing it in the wrong place.
At TPM, we do not carry water for bad Democrats. When Rep. William Jefferson (Dem La.) stuffed $90K in his freezer, TPM scorched him. When Sen. Jay Rockefeller stalls investigations on Bush administration pre-war intelligence manipulation, TPM points it out plainly. When Congress drags its feet before confronting the administration or issuing subpoenas, it is discussed. Rep. Jane Harman's complicity with Bush administration abuses have been exposed here more than anywhere else. It can be argued that such coverage hurts Democrats, but nothing disinfects our party better than open discussion does.
All this may seem trivial in light of the election and the stakes involved. However, many longtime readers do not come to TPM as a forum for getting Barack Obama elected with the support of Hillary's base. The cause is noble, but it is misplaced here. TPM is meant for plain dealing in politics. We debate, argue, and share information, so long as it is true information. The preachiness is annoying to supporters of both candidates, who want to debate, not to be evangelized.
Above all, we view each other as political junkies, not as Hillary or Obama supporters. This allows us to keep both candidates well in check. Advocacy is good, but narrative imposing is ultimately unhealthy. Indeed, it changes the subject from the politics and makes it all about us TPMers, which ultimately corrupts the original purpose of this website.
So let us talk about Hillary, Barack, the convention fight, the superdelegates, the war, McCain, and the rules of the game. If there is anger, all the better, because these subjects are important.
Ultimately, if you are true Obama supporters, then you should do as Obama does and trust your fellow Americans to ultimately make the right decisions after all is said and done. For years, TPM has been one of the places where it is all said. May it remain so.
I suppose I'm one of those preachy types occasionally, but I don't see why you have a problem with it. After all, aren't you being equally preachy with your anti-preachy rhetoric? ;)
Right. Because we've been so successful at preventing those discussions (and anger). Just look at the recommended reader posts. Not an angry post in them. No one's talking about Hillary, Barrack, the convention fight, the SDs, etc.
What exactly is the harm in asking our fellow Obama supporters to mind our manners? (Note: I know it's not easy. In fact, I've failed a few times myself.)
May 29, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm all for manners towards each other, especially because they improve the debate. The politicians, however, are fair game. It is our duty to demonize them when they screw up.
May 29, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's our duty to point out when they screw up, but I hardly think it's our duty to demonize them. I realize you're using hyperbole there (something I'm not very talented with parsing at times), and I also do not consider you to be part of the crowd that the preaching is directed at, which is also why I'm slightly confused as to this post.
You do show manners (at least as much as I do, I'd reckon), and I don't think you unfairly demonize Hillary or McCain—don't take that personally! ;)
May 29, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think what he's saying here is that you can't and shouldn't expect TPMers to not say something just because the Republicans might use it against us.
There's always been something of a tension between open, honest argument and wanting to win elections around here.
May 29, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
My point is that the open, honest argument does come first here.
May 29, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. Or, it should anyway.
May 29, 2008 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I also agree, but I think we're looking at an excellent example of Pareto optimality. I.e.., I think we can conduct open, honest arguments in a way that minimizes electoral damage, e.g., by being polite.
Similarly, we don't need 10 posts in one day (or in one hour) on the same blunder that Hillary (or Obama) has just committed. That definitely drives me crazy, even if each one is told from a slightly different perspective (and this is not always the case).
May 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe you would be more successful if you didn't use the neocon troll spelling of "BarRack".
May 29, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're funny. :D
Yes, I misspelled Barack. I'm typing on a new laptop and haven't quite got used to the keys yet, or maybe my spell-check thought I was thinking of the army barracks. I'm sorry if it offended your delicate flower-like sensibilities.
You and specialist should get together and compare notes. He's convinced I'm being paid by the Obama campaign to shell out Obama's talking points.
May 29, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not offended.
I just thought it was part of your doofusness.
May 29, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I get accused of the same thing. Sometimes I am a McCain operative. Funny shit. I wish I could get paid to do this all day. I would sign up for that in a heartbeat.
I would also be way more subtle than I normally am if I were being paid to infiltrate. Not sure some of the bloggers around here understand that someone being paid to spread talking points won't be quite so over-the-top about their choice of candidate.
This place is funny sometimes.
May 30, 2008 8:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good call. Though I do try to convince HRC folks elsewhere.
May 29, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
The most valuable and responsible manner to make your case for the candidate or issue of your choice is to put forth valid facts complete with source. This is true whether it be regarding candidates lies (sniper fire or lack thereof), history of candidate positions(stance on issues - such as NAFTA, war, the FL-MI debacle) and even accepting responsibility for their errors in judgment (ability to apologize for their misstatements- i.e. 'vast right wing conspiracy' and invoking RFK assassination in attempt to justify own actions) and the list goes on.
Just the facts will suffice - without entering into disrespectful remarks aimed at either candidate, their surrogates and supporters.
May 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand your embrace of respect in the debate, but disrespectful caricature is one of the oldest realities in American political discourse, not to mention that it is salt of a political junky's life.
I know the following will sound immoral, but I find the idea of respecting politicians revolting, any politician. The words respect and politician just do not belong in the same sentence.
More assertively, I find the idea of extending reverence to them dangerous.
May 29, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you not respect the candidate you choose to vote for in an election?
Is it fair or accurate to generalize that no politician is worthy of respect? Interested in how broad a stroke you paint with.....Thanks.
May 29, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I admit respect for my candidate of choice, yet I am also quite wary of my own respect for him. I hope that when the moment comes that he disappoints me, as all politicians do, and the mob piles on, I will remember the realities of politics.
In the movie "The People vs Larry Flynt", Flynt says about his Supreme Court cases, "If the First Amendment will protect a scumbag like me, then it will protect all of you. Because I am the worst."
In this forum, my tolerance for excesses is high.
May 29, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I find it hard to respect any anonymous contributors to a political blog. It's revolting, maybe dangerous.
You get respect if you earn it. I think that applies to people of every profession.
So how are we to view someone who is unwilling to let someone earn their respect?
May 29, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sometimes I question your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
May 30, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
AdAb: Please tell me that is a Sonoma varietal in your glass. :-)
May 29, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Alas, it is a French Clairet.
May 29, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
We're discussing my previous avatar.
May 29, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
nice puppy!
May 29, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Evainne,
He is my ten-year-old Rhodesian Ridgeback who patiently accompanies me during my excessive time spent in front of a computer.
May 29, 2008 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude - you changed your avatar midstride.
Oh well....
There's a winery in the Russian River appellation called 'Rabbit Ridge'. I'd wager your pooch would be in heaven there.
ps - I can totally relate re that new laptop/keyboard thingie.
May 30, 2008 12:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
It seems to me the political game is played on a certian emotional level. I would much rather have people posting, my self included, highly charged comments that may or may not seem relevent to the debate than to have violent upheavel every time we change leadership. Also I like the psychology of it all, that within one party we are playing out the division/unity narative of the u.s.. Point taken and I will try and bring information to the debate. :)
May 29, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The candidates evoke passion, albeit sometimes blind passion. As evidenced by your post, it's hard to avoid being preachy when you try to communicate something for which you have strong feelings.
And it's especially hard to remain emotionless after you witness the latest absurdity or read an latest spin job. However, for the most part folks on this site have been civil. I think the site has provided an authentic pulse of the mood of the country, especilly those feelings right of center.
May 29, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Preaching about preachiness did present a conundrum.
May 29, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry I clicked on this. Kinda a waste of time.
May 29, 2008 8:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I couldn't agree more.
May 29, 2008 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
AdAb,
I've had a daily TPM addiction for nearly half a decade.
I read you loud and clear.
May 29, 2008 10:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well-said, Christopher!
Now, let the brawling begin...
May 29, 2008 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Preachiness is annoying, especially as a trait in dogs.
May 29, 2008 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
My dog prefers barking at preachy people who knock at my door.
May 30, 2008 8:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
ARGH!
PREACHY PREACHY POSTERS
TELL US WHAT TO DO
BUT VOTE FOR WENCH HILLARY
OR THIS PIRATE WILL RUN YOU THROUGH!
BATTLE BATTLE POSTERS
BACK AND FORTH WE SEE
ARGUMENTS OF NOTHING
AND NOTHING IS THE KEY
WHINY WHINY POSTERS
ROUND UP SHEEP TO FLOCK
EXPLAIN ABOUT OBAMA
JUST LIKE THAT OL' BEN HOCK
NO PRISONERS! NO SURRENDER!
VIE FOR WENCH HILLARY!
SHE'LL GO DOWN WITH THE SHIP!
ACQUIRE! MERGE! MARAUD! DILUTE! DILUTE!
ARGH!
May 29, 2008 11:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
We love you, Pirate Peet.
May 29, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, frankly, I think you're the only one who does. He irritates the hell out of me.
May 30, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have no problem with "hard ball" politics...even when played just among friends.
BUT
When it comes to using the politics of racial division that is where I draw the line. In my mind the Democratic Party stands for racial equality. And when I see a Democratic candidate divisively use race as a tactic in a campaign I feel they go against everything the party should stand for...
Other than that...I don't care, fight away!!!
May 30, 2008 1:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think this post applies to not just Obama supporters. I am tired of people being flamed when they make legitimate complaints about either candidate.
I'll start by saying that I agree with your point about Obama supporters however I am pointing out that a lot of Clinton supporters here lately are guilty of getting preachy whenever someone says anything about why they don't want Clinton as the nominee.
(And I know I will get the inevitable "she lost, get over it and quite complaining" comments on this, however, she is still fighting and is thus still in it so all comments, complaints, and feelings on the matter are still relevant.)
It has a how dare you question my candidate feel to it. Isn't that what these blogs are supposed to be about? Airing our concerns and discussing them?
And once again because I am just making the antithesis point here I know Obama supporters have been just as guilty here.
Jeez, I hate it that I feel like I have to over clarify so that people won't just jump down my throat over perceived things and just ignore everything else I have said.
May 30, 2008 2:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is kind of a preachy article, wouldn't you agree?
May 30, 2008 8:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Indeedy.
May 30, 2008 8:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
The use of the word preachy in the title of this post is redundant.
May 30, 2008 8:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
We have all sinned.
May 30, 2008 9:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Does that mean Obama will let himself be metaphorically crucified in the General Election to pay for those sins?
May 30, 2008 9:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe we can talk about actually assassinated instead of metaphorically crucified? After all, we've received our instructions:
Did I mention Bill Clinton's prick? (The metaphorical one.)
May 30, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why would you want to assassinate Obama?
It may be true that Christians don't die, but they're sent to Jesus.
Even so.
May 30, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
We'll see who the voters will sacrifice.
May 30, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
This whole thing is a non-story brought up by a bored media.
http://thinmansblog.blogspot.com/
May 30, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
And I say unto you, my brethren, ye who seek to create the Beloved Kingdom on Earth, give not way to temptation! Nay, even if thou passeth a giant Hillary poster on the street -- though her sins be purple and scarlet, take not that magic marker out of thy pocket, thereon to scrawl "Mystery, Babylon the Great, Mother of Harlots"!
Whatev. I've preached enough, and I don't really disagree with the basic point of this post, which is that it's silly to censor our discussion with the idea that we're helping Obama in the fall. When we reason that way, we're taking ourselves way too seriously. And I certainly wouldn't want humor to disappear from TPM.
I will say that Hillary-bashing (and Hillary-fretting) just bores the heck out of me at this point. But rather than preach fiery sermons against it, I have resigned myself to tuning it out. Yea, verily, and so say we all.
May 30, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
So SAYETH we all.:)
May 30, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who is preachy???
May 30, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love you I love you I love you.
And I love this post. And thank you for it.
May 30, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whatever, guy. Talk about preachy.
May 30, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink