Digby's Hullabaloo Posts

Patriot Police

You know, I had always thought that the secret service was one of the elite police forces — together, professional, the best of the best. And then I read

this story over on Kos today about the Sikh who was harrassed during the convention, apparently because the secret service is too fucking stupid to know the difference between Sikhs and Muslims.

That is on top of this story from last week by Tim Grieve in Salon that made me feel like hurling when I read it:

Inside the Fleet Center, the working press sits at tables that flank the convention stage. Except during major speeches, the reporters — like the delegates themselves — seldom pay much attention to what’s happening on the stage. They talk among themselves, burn through their cell phone batteries and write pieces on their laptops.

That’s what we were doing Thursday afternoon when a Secret Service agent had another idea. “Excuse me sir,” his voice boomed from behind us. “It’s the presentation of the colors, and I think it’s important enough for you to stand up.”

The agent had noticed — we had not — that the American flag was being presented in the still half-empty convention hall. We acknowledged his right to his opinion, then we returned to our work. At that point, the agent ordered us to stand — ostensibly so he could confirm that our press credentials were valid. We complied with the order, then turned on our tape recorder and asked if he was actually ordering us to stand for the flag.

“No sir, I’m not. I’m looking at your deal,” he said. “I’m ordering you because I want to see your credentials, and you’re going to stand here until the flag is over with.”

What’s your name? “I’m Chad Reagan, and I’m checking your credentials, out of the New York field office. I’m checking your credentials.”

Because we’re working during the presentation of the flag?

“No sir, because I’m wondering who you are.”

We told him that we worked for Salon.

“Great,” he said, “I’m checking your credentials.”

Nearby officials from the Congressional Periodical Press Gallery instantly confirmed the validity of our credentials. We asked the agent if he always orders people to stand for the flag, and whether Secret Service policy either authorized or required him to do so.

“I served for six months in the United States Marine Corps overseas, sir, so I like it when people stand. The reason I came over here was to credential you. You can think what you want, but the reason I came over here was to credential you. And I’ll stick to that. I’m allowed to credential anyone I want. That is Secret Service policy.”

But you told us to stand for the flag, right?

“No sir, I didn’t tell you. I said that I think it’s important enough to stand, and then I said, ‘Let me see your credentials.’ There’s a difference.”

Totally unprofessional, totally out of line and totally unamerican. When exactly did the Secret Service become the guardians of patriotism?

This is one of those things that unnerves me about all of our new police forces and homeland security services and domestic intelligence agencies. More cops flexing their muscle and less safety overall. Police states aren’t planned, they evolve. We are in the midst of one of those evolutions.

Character Flaws

Here’s a very interesting interview with journalist Philip Gourevitch of The New Yorker. He has many fine insights into the way the press covers politics and also the way the parties manipulate the press. But, he said one thing in particular that I think is important:

[Another] big mistake I think the press makes: They call anything that isn’t a strict policy issue “character,” when often it’s personality. There’s a big difference. Character has to do with things like honesty and integrity and honor. I don’t think anybody can, for instance, begin to look at both [candidates’] records and say Bush’s character, or let’s say his service during the Vietnam war, or his sobriety, his business record, his way of sort of being really quite indifferent about all sorts of things, that these are character issues where he comes off looking great. He has a winning personality, apparently, with a lot of people. Kerry, on the other had, his character may be conflicted in places but his problem is a personality problem.

Character is a very strong word. It suggests a kind of fundamental quality of the soul, of the sensibility, it’s almost like the stuff somebody’s made of. If you say this guy has a character problem, it doesn’t mean he’s hard to like. I’ve interviewed war criminals and mass murders, and they’re often exceedingly charming … So charm and character or personality and character are separate things, and I think the press probably conflates them in a way that is not useful or is misleading…

Actually, “character” is a patented GOP spin point that is used against Democrats and for Republicans. (As such, it is entirely unsurprising that the press has adopted it wholesale without ever giving it a second thought.) It is a central tenet of the GOP attack machine to disparage Democrats’ tolerance, openness to new ideas and our more complex worldview as showing a lack of character. We are shallow, cowardly, insubstantial, craven, lacking in integrity and morals. That’s what the flip-flop charge is all about. “John Kerry has no principles” — a character flaw.

As Gourevitch says, the idea of character goes to a “fundamental quality of the soul, the stuff’s somebody’s made of.” People take these things very seriously in evaluating others. Those words matter. And, unfortunately, we Democrats have often adopted the same exact language to goad our own politicians into action, which helps to validate their charge against us.

It also leads us astray. Very often what is merely a bad strategic call is seen as cowardice or a failed tactic is regarded as cravenness when, in fact, the politicians who supported them may have been ineffective, not for lack of character but for lack of good ideas or flawed execution. Brave people can fail. And more importantly, if you don’t deal with the actual problem you can’t properly correct it.

It is always fair to criticize our politicians when they make mistakes and when they fail. We aren’t a cult. But the least we can do is not blindly adopt Republican jargon and categorize every political failure as a lack of character when, in fact, the failure may stem from something else entirely.

I will say again for the thousandth time that whenever Democrats find themselves saying something about a fellow Democrat that they can imagine Rush or Hannity saying on their radio shows, they should stop and think again. They are playing on Republican turf and it does us absolutely no good.

Pathetic

I got ten nine of ten on this Campaign Desk trivia quiz. (I didn’t know the real name of Washingtonienne.)

I obviously need to get a life.

Goon Show

I couldn’t help but notice the ages of the “goons” who tried to drown out Kerry with airhorns in Milwaukee yesterday:

About 30 Bush supporters chanted loudly during the speeches by Kerry and his wife, sometimes setting off air horns. The pro-Bush group was on the Kilbourn Ave. sidewalk overlooking Pere Marquette Park, almost a full block from the stage, but it could be heard throughout the park, including on stage.

Tom Lange, 18, of Waukesha said he was setting off an air horn during Kerry’s remarks because “we want them to hear us and not hear what he has to say.”

Lange said it’s “probably not nice, but it’s my beliefs.”

Michael Gaspar, 18, of Waukesha used a bullhorn frequently before and during the rally to welcome Kerry supporters “to Bush-Cheney country” and to spur on the Bush supporters.

Asked why he was leading the Bush volunteers in loud chants while Kerry was speaking, he said, “I’m doing this to show my support for President George W. Bush.”

“I have the right to speak also,” he said. “I’m just attempting to get my voice heard.”

It immediately reminded me of an article recently posted by David Niewert called “Hate Among the Young.”:

One of the most troubling aspects of the recent resurgence of white-supremacist ideology and its attendant hate crimes is the reality that young people — especially young males — are now the primary target of recruitment by hate groups.

Even if they never join such groups (which is most often the case), young men are targeted by white-supremacist ideologues specifically because they know they are likely to act out on the belief system spread by the rhetoric they engender, which is often picked up and used by non-members who are nonetheless sympathetic. Hate groups carefully tailor their messages to appeal to young men’s sensibilities, running the gamut from inflaming urban and suburban racial tensions in high schools to promoting so-called “racist rock.”

I’m not saying that these kids in Milwaukee are white supremecists. But, they are young politically aware right wingers who are using thuggish tactics. The bridge between those two points is shorter than anywhere else on the political spectrum.

This actually validates one of Niewert’s observations about how the tactics of the hate groups and militia’s are being adopted and absorbed into mainstream Republican culture. It stands to reason that young punks like these would be at the forefront.

Goon is exactly the right word for them and I would expect that we are only seeing the beginning. There is now an entire generation raised with Rush Limbaugh shouting in their ears. Eliminationist rhetoric is mother’s milk to these kids.

The Politics Of Image and Derision

White House and Bush campaign officials have long said that the details matter far less than the pictures and sounds of Mr. Bush talking in any way about his campaign against terrorism, which polls show is still his strongest card against Mr. Kerry.

This is the kind of thing that should be ground out by every single Democrat on radio, television and print. The White House believes that the details matter far less than the pictures and sounds of Junior “talking in any way” about terrorism. Pointing this out — and the loyalty oaths demanded of the crowds, the faux backdrops, the refusal to hold press conferences and explain their policies, could go a long way toward educating the public about what phonies they are.

We haven’t done this and as a result, Karl Rove’s dictum about politics being “TV with the sound turned off” remains absolutely true. Unless half the country has ingested so much lead that their IQ’s have been cut in half, there is no other explanation as to why people see this dancing monkey as a great leader. It’s the images.

The other side of this formula, of course, is their rapier attacks against the Democrats. The Bush campaign has said that its convention will use humor and derision to criticize John Kerry. Josh Marshall points out that this propensity for ridicule seems to be built into the right’s DNA.

Republicans are very good at this. And it can be a tool that is deceptively difficult to respond to or combat. Effective mockery is ‘sticky’, hard to shake off, hard to parry. And it appeals to people’s appetite for fun and humor.

Indeed, it’s not just contemporary Republicans who have a knack for this. There seems to be something intrinsic to the reactionary or right-leaning mentality that gravitates toward this method of political combat. Think of the Tory pamphleteers and essayists of the 18th century in Great Britain or others of a more recent vintage in the US.

I think this is because the right is essentially authoritarian

and group derision is one of the most powerful weapons in the bully’s arsenal. Frat boys, Heathers, street gangs, insider cliques of all kinds use it to terrorize the loners and coerce fealty from those who don’t want to be a target. Indeed, forcing others to join in the cruelty is the actual point. I’ve loathed and resisted this dynamic my whole life. It may be the single most important reason I am a Democrat. I just can’t stand those assholes.

But, it is a very powerful social force that asserts itself in various ways from childhood into old age. Right now, we seem to be in one of those periodic cultural eras in which these kinds of adolescent, anti-intellectual social types come to the fore. (There is no greater example than the president himself — “Fuck Saddam, we’re takin’ ‘im out.”) It’s hard to fight in this environment and while I am all for ridiculing them right back, I’m afraid that most liberals are never going to have quite the flair for it that they do. We have way more genuinely funny guys and gals deflating the hypocricies of our times, but the bullies have that nasty coercive streak that really gives this stuff its punch. “Laugh, you pussies, unless you want a piece of this.”

I spent a lot of time interacting with activist Republicans in years gone by and you’d be surprised at how lame we leftys generally are at this game. The bullies have spent their entire lives eating reasoned arguments and pleas for civility for breakfast. Still, I think it’s a good idea for us to keep at it. They really hate being made fun of. Even if most of us can’t strike that perfect, snarly bitchy tone in our mockery we can still bother them with it.

Unfortunately, however, in the long run the Democratic party really can’t indulge very much in these high school games because the fate of the world depends upon somebody rising above this immaturity. For all of our fractiousness and various feints left, right and center, we are the grown up party. Gawdhelpus.

Update: Sommerby has more on this topic in today’s column. And for the record, I agree with him about Garofolo on Hannity. I love her, but she was unprepared. The “biggest liberal in the senate” line is entirely predictable and she should have had the facts at hand, a ready diversionary feint or some kind of a snarky takedown. This isn’t really a complaint just about her. The Democrats often don’t seem as armed for combat as the Republicans even when they know very well what the RNC talking points are going to be. Garofolo is a very sharp cookie but she needs some help. Gawd knows the GOP helps its talking heads with staff and oppo researchers and clip services up to here. If Janeane and others are going to be voices for the Democrats in the media they need some back-up.

Downhome With The Family

Tristero says that the American delegation to the Olympics, headed by Bush Sr, Barbara and the twins, will be staying on the family yacht — “all 300 feet of it.”

Yep, that “Heart and Soul” of America, good ole boy Texas shit-kicker preznit of ours ain’t no Frenchman.

Whoops

Angry Bear catches me being much too generous to the Bush administraton. (I’m as shocked as you are.)

In my post below I said that Bush hadn’t technically lied when he claimed that “some must think that you can negotiate with them, you can talk sense with them, you can hope that they change.” I said he could claim that he was referring to Phillippine president Arroyo or the Egyptians or even Reagan.

It turns out that he was responding to a specific question about Kerry:

Q Mr. President, thank you. All of this as you know is coming in the context of the presidential election campaign. Your opponent has made a couple of charges that I would like your response to. One, essentially saying that three years after the 9/11 attacks, to go about the business of rehauling the intelligence community is too long. Second, there’s been a suggestion from the Kerry camp today that this administration is actually responsible for fueling the recruitment of al Qaeda through some of its policies, particularly — they didn’t say this directly — but the war in Iraq. Your response?

So, the president was referring directly to Kerry, who has never said anything about negotiating or appeasing terrorists, quite the opposite.

The president of the United States is a lying sack of shit. I knew that. My bad.

All Hail The King

Once again, my friends, thank your deity of choice for Paul Krugman.

He’s the one mainstream columnist who gets the zeitgeist of the blogpsphere. We owe him a great deal. He inhabits a very important piece of journalistic real estate and he’s singing our song.

Following Orders

This is a depressing story. I grew up in a Navy family and this sounds about right. Takes me back to 1972 it does:

“The problem is, a lot of the chiefs don’t make any secret of the fact that Bush is their man,” said Wendy Layton, program director at the USO center just outside the Mayport Naval Station here. “A lot of these young people feel pressured to register a certain way and vote a certain way.”

The officers may not say so while on registration duty, she added, but enlistees say they usually don’t have to.

“I knew they wanted me to register Republican, and when I came out of the NEX, I just sort of avoided the [registration] table,” said Navy Seaman Charles Gillis, 22, who was invited by officers to register a few weeks ago but declined. He is undecided and still not registered.

[…]

In the Navy’s part of this town, it is fair to say that no non-Republican would feel welcome. Walk into American Legion Post 316 any night and it is crowded with retired Navy enlistees and their wives who for the most part revere Bush. They not only revere him, they take umbrage at any perceived suggestion of disloyalty, a standard met in the eyes of the group one recent night by the mere presence of a reporter.

“Out! Take your notebook and get out of here!” said a battery of voices when I entered, though they relented when others at the bar spoke up for the rights of the free press – a value held as dearly, apparently, as fealty.

Their general rap on Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, a decorated Navy veteran of Vietnam, was that Kerry didn’t deserve his Silver Star, or his Bronze Star, or his three Purple Hearts; that these decorations were somehow obtained by political calculation. “He was just planning to run for president, right from the beginning, that’s what I think,” said Margaret Leonie Dent, the wife of a Navy retiree. “They say his wounds were paper cuts. Just look at the man. He looks French for God’s sake.”

Tell it to Mark Racicot and Tom DeLay, you pathetic ignoramus.

I’m getting awfully tired of the Borg.

Glad You Brought That Up

Here’s what the paper of record has on its front page right now:

Polls Show Some Gains for Kerry, but Race Is Tight

By ADAM NAGOURNEY 11:58 PM ET

Polls showed the smallest postconvention bounce for a challenger since George McGovern was nominated in 1972.

Frank Luntz himself couldn’t have spun it better.