Sunday, May 14, 2006

“Angry Democrats” and other projections.

It’s really an interesting phenomena. Republicans routinely attribute Democrats, liberals, and anyone else they don’t particularly like (i.e., anyone other than themselves) with motives, actions, and thoughts for which they, themselves, are particularly well known. And no one in the mainstream pretends to notice. Amazing what people can ignore these days.

Take for example, how “angry” Democrats seem to be. How unseemly that all is. Boy, you sure wouldn’t want to elect someone to office as angry as that, would you? And no one ever points out to those involved The Mighty Wurlitzer that anger is what makes the Red State world go round. Jeez, of COURSE we are angry. After getting beat up for the last 15 years, starting in high doses during the Newt Gingrich-inspired “Contract With America” years, liberals have been accused of being every dirty thing imaginable. Listen to any of the talk radio out there on the airwaves, with the exception of Air America, and you will see that the entire concept depends solely on how upset Limbaugh, Savage, etc. can make their audience. Anger, bordering on hatred, is what fuels their passion. So, what do they accuse the Democrats of? Being too angry, of course.

How about “stealing elections”? I have gotten a laugh out of this one, although it isn’t really funny in any sense of the word except for maybe “tragically ironic”. After the debacle of Florida of 2000 (where I am sure I don’t need to remind anyone of Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, the Supremes voting along party lines, massive voter “manipulation, etc.) and Ohio 2004, any close election now sparks cries of “Democrats are trying to steal the election!” The race for governor in Washington State in 2004 was the closest gubernatorial race in the history or the U.S. It resulted in three recounts, each “winning margin” was closer than the last. The Republican candidate was originally declared the winner, but a mandatory recount was required because of the small margin. The Republican also won the first recount. At this point, again because of the very small winning percentage, the law states that the losing party may ask for another recount, as long as they pay for it. Which was done. At this point, the Democrat candidate won. All very legal. Except for cries of fraud from the other side. Not to say there weren’t irregularities on both sides. There were. But after what happened in Florida, you would think that Republicans would be very hesitant to raise any awareness of possible stolen elections. Nope, it never occurred to them. Because, given the circumstances, stealing an election would be exactly what they would do! Therefore, if they lost on the second recount, it was obviously because the Democrats stole it.

It seems to me that anything the current crop of Republicans can imagine themselves doing, no doubt their opponents would do. And since Democrats are obviously much less truthful and trustworthy, they must have done it (whatever “it” is for that particular situation) FIRST. I just don’t think that they have a concept that people might actually play by the rules. Rules other than “do whatever it takes to win, at all costs”, that is.

Projection, it is, then. Whatever the Republican talking points for that day are regarding of how to smear your opponent, you can most likely be assured that they have engaged in the very same activity at some point in time, or at least thought that it was a pretty neat idea.

No comments: