My esteemed Keloland colleague and NSU colleague emeritus, David Newquist, draws our attention to a Huffington Post by Senator Gary Hart. I agree with Professor Newquist on this much: Hart’s post is worth a read, if only for a textbook example of the pot calling the kettle black.
Hart complains that a lot of elected officials are resigning because “it just isn’t fun anymore.” He concedes that fun isn’t exactly the point, but goes on:
[H]aving held office in the 1970s and 1980s, I can testify to the fact that politics used to be more civilized, more collegial, and more, well, enjoyable. It certainly was more honorable.
He has a point, though it is a historically narrow one. Public culture today is more course than it was a few decades ago, and political culture has followed suit. But for most of our nation’s history, politics was a much rougher game than it is today.
He has a better point here:
For the tea-baggers and government-haters, this [decline in public discourse] is all to the good. They claim to love our country even while hating its government. So, the worse the government performance, the more it proves their point. And the less thoughtful, intelligent, and wise the elected officials, the worse the government.
That’s a fair criticism, even it goes a step too far. It is one thing to dislike or even hate the people in office and another to hate the Constitution. To confuse the two, as Hart does here, is to question the patriotism of dissenters. But he is surely right that someone who is distrustful of government may be gratified to have his or her opinions confirmed by the worst elected officials. That is a problem with dissent in particular and pessimism in general.
Consider, however, Hart’s own use of the term “tea-bagger” to describe the Tea Party activists. Is Hart aware of the sexual innuendo in the term? From Wikipedia:
Teabagging is a slang term for the act of a man placing his scrotum in the mouth or on or around the face (including the top of the head) of another person, often in a repeated in-and-out motion as in irrumatio. The practice resembles dipping a tea bag into a cup of tea.
If you are going to complain about a decline in civility, maybe it were best not to use a sexually derogatory term to describe the people you are criticizing. But Hart is just warming up:
The cynics and trolls who scream like banshees at town hall meetings and scan the blogosphere to post cynical put-downs of their country’s government are hurting no one but themselves. Not one of these people has the courage to stand for public office.
“Cynics” is fair enough. But trolls and banshees? Is this what Hart means by “civilized” and “congenial” and “honorable” politics? Is this kind of language likely to encourage “thoughtful, intelligent, and wise” people to enter government if they happen to disagree with Senator Hart on the issues? I am guessing that he would not use such words to describe the women in the image above. Hart is not opposed to uncivil discourse; he practices it. He is only opposed to it when it comes from the other side.
He is also careless with the truth to the point of telling a lie. Consider the last line in that last passage. Richard Behney is a Tea Party activist running for Senate in Indiana. Adam Kinzinger is running with Tea Party backing for the 11th Congressional District of Illinois. I am guessing that the Tea Party movement will field a lot of candidates, and support those who seem to share their concerns. That’s how politics is supposed to work.
Gary Hart claims to be defending civility. What he really wants is to demonize dissent.
Tags: Adam Kinzinger, banshees, civility, demonizing, dissent, Gary Hart, Richard Behney, Tea Party, tea-bagger, trolls
