Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 21 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Rage is all the rage out there in Politicsland
Published Saturday, September 26, 2009
The president has declined to talk about racism in connection with the carpet-chewers of the right who are suffering road rage over his existence, and he’s wise to turn that one down. The country doesn’t need a sermon on race or civility right now. What it needs is to believe that our leaders are trying to do the right thing, no matter how inconvenient, and if they forge ahead and fix health insurance, then the ragemeisters of the right will find other hobbies.
Mr. Obama is a Chicago guy, and he doesn’t wilt if some gin-crazed cracker from South Carolina calls him a liar, so don’t trouble your pretty head about civility.
It was women’s suffrage that tamed politics. All through the 19th century, going back to Jefferson vs. Adams in 1800, politics was a blood sport. Hecklers followed a candidate like fleas on a dog. Newspapers were rip-snorting partisan and tore into the opposition with gay abandon. The English language is rich in invective and it all got used. When you went after your opponent, you got warmed up by calling him a horse thief, drunkard, agnostic, wife-beater, agent of Satan and tool of Wall Street, and then you got to the serious stuff. But once women appeared, in their little pinafores and corsages, we became, temporarily, a quieter gentler people than we actually are and sat still at League of Women Voters forums on world federalism and perused the editorial page, written by silver-haired gents with distinguished jowls who penned judicious columns of On The One Hand This, On The Other Hand That, and nobody ever yelled at them except their wives.
Garrison Keillor, The Old Scout
That’s sort of gone now. Now a column appears online and then the anonymous reader comments and the reader says, AW SHUT YER TRAP YA BIG FAT NOBODY, WHAT DO YOU KNOW? NUTTIN, THAT’S WHAT. GO BACK TO RUSSIA WHERE YA COME FROM. It’s a loud raspy voice that was familiar to Lincoln and Mark Twain and now it’s back, thanks to the cranky right, which feels disenfranchised by the election of Obama. And to their delight they’ve found that it drives the center-left right up the wall.
The old union guys who built the Democratic Party enjoyed public face-offs and knew how to deal with hecklers — you get up close to them and snap their underwear — but the party’s been taken over by academics who come from a medieval world where your insignia grants you a worshipful hearing. As Shakespeare wrote, ‘I am Sir Oracle, and when I ope my lips, let no dog bark.” But that ain’t going to happen in politics.
The right believes that if you throw enough mud, some will stick, and if you characterize health care reform as an evil plot by one-eyed space aliens, you can defeat the thing. The fact is that there are 40 million uninsured Americans and soon, if nothing is done, there will be more. This is a moral dilemma, the same as if habeas corpus only applied east of the Mississippi or that green-eyed children will only be educated through the sixth grade. Not acceptable in the country I live in. And it’s up to people who care about the common good not to be scared off.
The right is operating in the grand old irreverent American middle-finger spirit of contrarianism. The car full of kids who drive country roads busting mailboxes with baseball bats are expressing the same freewheeling spirit and the computer hackers and graffiti artists and every conscientious rock ‘n’ roll band for the past 50 years.
But the price of being an angry jerk is that nobody wants to invite you over for supper except your mother, and even she feels a little uneasy. It’s very simple: The anonymous bums in the bleachers can abuse the umpire, but the players can’t because they have numbers on their backs. Bold contrarians get thrown out of the game. The American people, by and large, don’t admire wackos. A few wacko congressmen can’t do much harm, but you wouldn’t want them on the county board. You want sober people who can add and subtract. And you don’t want one to marry your sister. The angry guy in a lather about Mr. Obama to the exclusion of rational thought will have to go to the weenie roast alone and nobody is going to dance with him except out of pure pity and I’m not sure he’s going to enjoy that.
Garrison Keillor is the author of “77 Love Sonnets,” published by Common Good Books.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by trifid (anonymous) on September 26, 2009 at 6:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Incorrect, Garrison. This guy will have to buy a cow, a pig, and a flock of chickens to feed the many rednecks joining him around the campfire.
This country is not as sweet as you imagine.
Posted by amauer (anonymous) on September 26, 2009 at 8:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Back in the saddle! Good for you! "Gin crazed Cracker" Love it! The thing that is really getting to everyone is the lack of respect people give anyone for simply disagreeing with them. No one should allow that someone yell "Liar" during a presidential address, no matter who that president is. Funny to see Al Qaeda using the same term. Ironic...
Posted by Culture_Warrior (anonymous) on September 26, 2009 at 8:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Garrison, so I guess we all just bow down to Obamacare and his loonie czars. Forty million uninsured? What happened to the 47 million? When Obama made his speech the other night, the number miraculously dropped to 30 million! Gee, we must have done something right to take 17 million off the rolls in just a few months. This is all such a crock I can't believe any rational person would buy the lies this administration is spewing. Earth to Garrison: The messiah he is not. The magic is gone. Reality has set in.
Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on September 26, 2009 at 10:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Gin crazed Cracker", for those who don't know, the term "Cracker" is a very derogatory word directed at white people by black people. But I guess it's OK when you have a far left loon like Old Garrison running his mouth. BTW "Old" Garrison, your buddy Obama is a liar.
Posted by trifid (anonymous) on September 27, 2009 at 1:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
See, I told ya, Garrison.
Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on September 27, 2009 at 12:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
A stroke is defined as "rapidly developing loss of brain function(s) due to disturbance in the blood supply to the brain" This is sure evidence that Keillor is not fully recovered.
The column is about "Rage" --the incivility of politics--yet look at Keillor's rage in JUST THIS ARTICLE. Item after item of rage. Stunning hypocrisy!
Go back to just last year and check Keillor's own columns hurling invective against President Bush. Keillor is guilty of his own charges--unless you would guess that his rantings were a precursor and warning of his impending stroke.
Keillor used to be a comedian. He stopped being funny decades ago. Having Keillor comment on politics would make about as much sense as buying a humor column from Karl Rove. What is his experience in governance that makes him an expert on it?
You have to wonder why the Tribune buys his column. There are far better columnists out there.
Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on September 27, 2009 at 4:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Mr. Obama is a Chicago guy, and he doesn’t wilt if some gin-crazed cracker from South Carolina calls him a liar".
That statement alone should stop the Tribune from using his column, after using the "C" word.
Posted by trifid (anonymous) on September 27, 2009 at 11:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ever heard of Mark Twain? Now he was a pundit, unlike all these corporatized puppets we hear and see on media these days.
Posted by BabyGotBack (anonymous) on September 28, 2009 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wouldn't hold my breath bornFree. It took the Tribune awhile before they removed a derogatory comment about our President that referred to his race(s).
As far as the "C" word, Garrison is Caucasian so my question to those of you who are white is this: Do you find it offensive coming from a white person?
This isn't unlike when a black person refers to another using the "N" word. Now to me, it is offensive no matter who says it, but to some it is not as offensive when a black person calls another black person that name versus if a white person said it.
Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on September 28, 2009 at 1:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BGB--I don't think racism is a matter of degree. Either you are or you aren't--no "special" rules.
Trifid--"Ever heard of Mark Twain?" Are you SERIOUSLY comparing that old hack Keillor with Samuel Clemens?
LOOK at the RAGE--the VERY RAGE THAT KEILLOR is decrying in the column. The man is deranged. Is there ANYBODY that can defend his actions?
Posted by BabyGotBack (anonymous) on September 28, 2009 at 1:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hi Ernie.
I agree usually people are or they aren't but bornFree is offended by the term "cracker" which s/he says is a derogatory term against white people used by black people. But since Garrison is white, is the term less offensive or "racist" per se?
When a black person calls another black person the "N" word, it is typically not seen as offensive as if a white person used it. But it is a matter of perception because I don't like that word, period. I don't care if you are white, black, purple or have polka dots. It would be offensive to me no matter who said it.
About Garrison. Tribune - if you want to get a little more hip, get some younger readers (no offense seniors), etc. try getting someone who seems more in touch with today's world. He just seems like he is stuck in another decade/century to me.
Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on September 28, 2009 at 7:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I find it offensive no matter who uses the term "cracker", I'm not a cracker, Keillor should be taken off this web site because of what he said. The Tribune has stated on numerous times for posters not to use offensive language, I ask the Tribune, is there a double standard with Keillors column?
Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on September 28, 2009 at 7:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BTW, if Keillors column is on this web site next week I will then have my answer about the double standard at the Tribune, it will only give posters the go ahead to use offensive language and not be challenged.
Posted by BabyGotBack (anonymous) on September 28, 2009 at 7:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well they let someone refer to Obama as "blue lips" for awhile so I am not sure I would hold your breath.
I was actually disappointed in a way that they took that down because it called attention to potential racism. I don't know whether or not the person who posted was actually racist or if he meant it as a racist comment. I tried asking, but never did get a straight response....and in an odd way I miss him (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE). :)
But if you find "cracker" offensive, then nothing wrong with expressing that and wanting it to be addressed.
Posted by jcorey2 (Jeremy Corey-Gruenes) on September 28, 2009 at 8:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Is it possible some are making too much of the "cracker" comment? The term has never been comparable to the "n" word, nor has the term ever been used as a blanket-like insult for all whites.
The term was used by upper class Anglos to describe southern whites of Celtic stock over two hundred years ago. These "crackers" were typically of lower social class. Since then it's been used to describe poor, uneducated, southern whites, typically in a derogatory manner, often in response to ignorant and uncivilized behavior. It's been used as much--probably more--by whites than by blacks.
I'm not much for name calling, but Mr. Wilson's outburst during the President's address sort of begged for it. To interrupt a presidential address like that was indeed uncivilized. It didn't exactly make him look too wise or well informed either.
Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on September 28, 2009 at 8:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mr. Gruenes, because I'm a person of average to lower intelligence and a "cracker". I will not respond to your comment, nor could I.
Posted by BabyGotBack (anonymous) on September 28, 2009 at 9:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It must be a term used more in the South because I hadn't heard it myself up here. I have also never heard a black person use it but that isn't to say they don't in other parts of the country.
Posted by realchange (anonymous) on September 29, 2009 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
my, my, aren't we a bunch of whiners, I just consider the souce, Garrison Keillor, an we all just know he is a left wing extremist and nobody really cares what he has to say, because its always a bunch of lies and gibberish. So don't give the lefty's what they want. Who cares, let him drone on and on. Your best bet is just not to read his column, we will all see him fade away......
Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on September 29, 2009 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"we will all see him fade away......"
No we won't, because the Tribune, like most newspapers, is lefty. Keillor is a lefty hero--ergo--he will always have a home.
I would like to see the Tribune have a balance in columnists, but I don't know of any popular columnists that are as far right as Keillor is far left.
A much more interesting solution would be to have something like USA Today--that have columnists on both sides of the issue appearing side by side.
Posted by realchange (anonymous) on September 29, 2009 at 1:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
you are probably right, but considering his age and health, he will be fading. Fair and balance reporting just isn't in the main stream media's agenda, it is all slanted way to the left. People do need both side to get all the information and make educated choices, but unfortunately most people don't want to make the effort needed to get both sides, so their thinking is also slanted.......too bad. Our country is what suffers.
Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on September 29, 2009 at 9:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Garrison Keillor is the author of “77 Love Sonnets,” published by Common Good Books."
I'll be sure to go out and buy a copy of all 77 tomorrow because I know "Old" Garrison is just full of love.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)