?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile My Website Previous Previous Next Next
They and We - Mark Atwood
fallenpegasus
fallenpegasus
They and We
When They do it, it is "the mask slipped" or it is a "Freudian Slip".
When We do it, its a "mistatement" and "allow me to revise my remarks".

When They do it, it is using "code words" and "dogwhistling".
When We do it, it is "speaking to our base".

When We do it, it was a "lighthearted jest".
When They do it, it is Not Funny.

When one of "our" people" join Them, they are class/race/political traitors.
When one of "their" people join Us, they are "seeing the light" and "coming together in unity".

When one of Their people attend services in a church with a "weird" minister, they are a "nutjob".
When one of Our people attend services in a church with a "weird" minister, they are "being part of their community of faith".

When We say "You are wrong", that is "speaking truth to power".
When They say "You are wrong", it is an "ad hominem attack".

When They continue to disagree with us, that is "Getting in our face", and is bad.
When We continue to disagree with them, that is "Getting in their face", and is good.

When one of Them get caught doing something illegal, embarrassing, or hypocritical, it is a demonstration of their moral bankruptcy.
When one of Us get caught doing something illegal, embarrassing, or hypocritical, it is a "momentary lapse" that we should "Move On" from.

When We throw people off the ballot and off the election rolls by using legal technicalities, it is "defending the integrity of the democratic process".
When They throw people off the ballot and off the election rolls by using legal technicalities, it is "attacking the integrity of the democratic process".


I could keep going...

But that would probably be an "ad hominem attack" and "getting in your face" and a demonstration of my "moral bankruptcy".

Tags: , ,

15 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
From: nancylebov Date: September 22nd, 2008 10:40 pm (UTC) (Link)
Yeah, I can remember when being partisan felt like an altered state.
loganb From: loganb Date: September 23rd, 2008 12:47 am (UTC) (Link)
I'm assuming "we" == "Democrats."

Given:

When one of Their people attend services in a church with a "weird" minister, they are a "nutjob".
When one of Our people attend services in a church with a "weird" minister, they are "being part of their community of faith".

Can you honestly say that McCain has gotten more criticism for his association with Hagee than Obama's association with Wright? From my observations of the "liberal" media (I mostly read NYT, CNN, MSNBC, BBC) Obama seems to be taking most of the heat. I didn't even know Hagee's name until I googled "McCain religious extremism" after reading your post.
tcepsa From: tcepsa Date: September 23rd, 2008 01:03 am (UTC) (Link)
I'm assuming "we" == "Democrats."

I kind of thought those statements generally held true regardless of which group was saying them ~wry grin~ (and I'm not limiting this to political parties)
loganb From: loganb Date: September 23rd, 2008 01:13 am (UTC) (Link)
hahaha, good call. Though either way you slice it, an asymmetry exists on the reporting of these issues.
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: September 23rd, 2008 03:34 am (UTC) (Link)
Bad assumption.

Tho I find it interesting that most of the people I've shown this to or have written to be about it have assumed that I wrote it to puncture "them".

You both do it, and are equally bad.
akicif From: akicif Date: September 23rd, 2008 08:44 am (UTC) (Link)
I assumed you were being bipartisan....

One thing I do wonder about: there's a very strong (or so it seems from here) meme of the "the one's as bad as the other: a pox on both their houses" variety going around - is this just something that each side is trying to use to target the other's base (and if so, how do they ensure they're not discouraging their own supporters), or is there a genuinely general loss of trust going on?
tugger From: tugger Date: September 23rd, 2008 01:34 am (UTC) (Link)
It is sad that many of the events of the past decade have been used to divide us, when they could have been used to unify. I don't always understand what others are thinking, but I at least start with the premise that it makes some kind of sense to them...
docorion From: docorion Date: September 23rd, 2008 02:57 am (UTC) (Link)
Actually, I've got to hand it to you on this one. Those are all apropos. Non-partisan, even. I'll own the ones perpetrated by 'my side', because I[m not any fonder of them than those perpetrated by 'their side', truly. I wish that there was more context in all of the debate, and less sound bite. That everyone could embrace the fact that many of the issues which divide us are *hard*, and there may not be a 'right' answer, just an answer which is less wrong than many other answers. That the world, and the issues, are complex, and we'd get further if we debated them like adults, rather than choosing up sides and fighting.

I also wish I had a pony. :-)
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: September 23rd, 2008 03:35 am (UTC) (Link)
All of them are perpetuated by "your side". And by the "other side".


And where would you keep a pony?
rhonan From: rhonan Date: September 23rd, 2008 04:46 am (UTC) (Link)
When we can't remember how many houses we own, that's being a successful leader. When they remember that they only own one house, that's being elitist.
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: September 23rd, 2008 07:53 am (UTC) (Link)
Quick trivia question. Which household made more income last year, McCain or Obama. Which one gave more of their money away, in both absolute and % terms?

McCain would make a terrible President.

Obama would make a HORRIBLE President.

He's a Chicago Machine politican. He is nothing new, he is not special, he is not great. He's just as corrupt as the Chicago Machine has always ever been.
From: nancylebov Date: September 23rd, 2008 09:35 am (UTC) (Link)
He's been consistently opposed to torture. McCain hasn't. What's more, Obama pushed through a law in Illinois that requires videotaping of interrogations and confessions in capital cases.

All I was hoping for is to get back to politics as usual, rather than the amazing wreckage the current administration has been causing. Obama might be a little better than business as usual.
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 11th, 2011 02:52 am (UTC) (Link)
While it's odd to reply to a comment after more than two years...

He doesn't seem to be all that "consistently opposed to torture" NOW, does he? Gitmo is still open, and "extraordinary" rendition is still happening. He keeps spending blood on the war he opposed, and not staffing enough for the war he supported.
rhonan From: rhonan Date: September 24th, 2008 01:37 am (UTC) (Link)
Obama was about my second to last choice amongst the Democratic field, and I have no illusions that he is the breath of fresh air so many assume he is. On the other hand, he has shown a steady competence that promises that he can not possibly do worse than the current resident. On the other hand, given McCain's record of irresponsible deregulation, and his blind insistence that only the fox is qualified to guard the economic chicken coop, I think Obama is the only one of the two we can survive.

Besides, in an economic crisis like this, I watch the smart money. I figure the fact that Warren Buffet prefers Obama is a good sign.
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 11th, 2011 02:54 am (UTC) (Link)
"fox is qualified to guard the economic chicken coop"

ha ha ha. Two years later, Obama is breathtaking in his setting foxes to guard that particular coop.

Y'all in the D party got sold a bill of goods with Obama. Such a pity I have to help pay the tab...
15 comments or Leave a comment