Political Animal
Blog
Rick Santorum argued earlier this week, with a straight face, that President Obama has “sided with our enemies.” The same day, Santorum also accused the president of engaging in “absolutely un-American activities.”
The New Yorker’s George Packer raised an excellent observation about the way in which these allegations were covered. (thanks to D.K. for the tip)
[T]his kind of gutter rhetoric is so routine in the Republican campaign that it’s not worth a political journalist’s time to point it out. In 2008, when Michele Bachmann suggested that Barack Obama and an unknown number of her colleagues in Congress were anti-American, there was a flurry of criticism; three years later, when a surging Presidential candidate states it flatly about a sitting President, there’s no response at all.
Certain forms of deterioration … become acceptable by attrition, because critics lose the energy to call them out. Eventually, people even stop remembering that they’re wrong…. How many times and ways can you say that the Republican Party has descended into unreality and extremism before you lose your viewers and readers?
There was a point not too long ago when the standards of our discourse included more meaningful norms. Accusing the president of the United States, leading during a time of war and crisis, of “siding with our enemies” and engaging in “un-American activities” was just about the most extreme accusation imaginable.
Indeed, the phrases themselves suggest that the accuser believes the president is literally a traitor, guilty of treason.
The idea that a leading major-party presidential candidate would throw around such rhetoric without proof was, up until very recently, madness. The idea that such a candidate would face no pushback whatsoever, with journalists barely finding it worth mentioning at all, was unthinkable.
But as the Republican Party has become radicalized, such rhetoric has become routine. GOP officials and their allies have no qualms about using labels like “socialist,” “communist,” and even “fascist” — without any regard for what those words actually mean — and after a while, we just roll our eyes. There they go again, accusing Americans they don’t like of sedition, disloyalty, and national betrayal for no apparent reason. It must be a day that ends with “y.”
But here’s hoping that the tide will eventually turn, that ridiculous accusations will stop being acceptable by attrition, and that Americans will start remembering that they’re wrong.
Facebook
Twitter
kevo on January 07, 2012 10:50 AM:
Feral and Grotesque Rhetoric seems to be the only horse in the Republican stable these days. They've been riding that old nag for the past three years. In the mean time, the rest of us have been working toward high-speed rail!
The old bigoted world of yesteryear is scratching the walls as it is being asked to leave the building, and since it has sensed it cannot stay, it seems willing to demolish the entire edifice!
I can only hope the Republican rhetoric can be seen for what it is - these guys (our loved ones to the far Right) are betting against America! -Kevo
David on January 07, 2012 10:58 AM:
IOKIYAR. If a Democrat were using rhetoric like that the reaction would be far more severe.
Ron Byers on January 07, 2012 11:01 AM:
When you look at Romney's lies through the prism of the Right Wing Media filter, he appears to be entirely mainstream. It is when you step outside the media bubble that you realize his comments are outrageous. The lying Mitt Romney might be a problem, but the right wing media filter is worse.
The media trotted out Ann Coulter the other day. She has nothing relevant to say these days. Of course she was one of the Republican activists who cheapened our political discourse. Why does the media keep going back to that old hag? Because they want her to throw a bomb. It is good for ratings.
Anonymous on January 07, 2012 11:02 AM:
You say you hope the tide will turn. Hope won't do it. Letters to the editors, confrontation in person, calling in to TV and radio stations to protest,opinion pieces where ever they can be published, and so on.. Confront the media for being so lazy, don't let FOX rule.
Jilli on January 07, 2012 11:05 AM:
Remember the flag pin broo-ha-ha leading to President Obama's election? The right was apoplectic over that but insinuated charges of treason go without comment.
Pathetic.
Ron Byers on January 07, 2012 11:06 AM:
By the way, my comments apply to Santorum as well. When viewed though the Right Wing Media filter his comments are entirely mainstream.
My brother the Republican activist told me the other day that I have to agree that Obama is a socialist. I said, no I don't have to agree, because he isn't. I asked him for proof and he pointed to some piece on Fox News and another in the Wall Street Journal. I asked him exactly what Obama had done that promoted the socialist agenda. He said that he was being stealthy until reelected. Crap, all crap all the time.
Hedda Peraz on January 07, 2012 11:07 AM:
Santorum is precisely correct in saying Obama is, "siding with our enemies."
OUR enemies being Democrats, the poor, and the 99%.
adolphus on January 07, 2012 11:08 AM:
1. And does Politifact and Factcheck.org even care? These aren't differences of opinion. One can check whether there is any evidence to back this up, but then haggling over what constitutes Medicare or calling Jon Stewart a liar for quoting the History Channel gets more page hits.
2. There might actually be precedent for this to a point, even in our modern era. Eisenhower was accused of being a Commie and siding with our enemies by Birchers and sympathetic politicians. I just don't know how high up the political hierarchy of the highest person who claimed this. Representative I know. Senator? Presidential candidate? I don't think so.
SteveT on January 07, 2012 11:10 AM:
But here's hoping that the tide will eventually turn, that ridiculous accusations will stop being acceptable by attrition, and that Americans will start remembering that theyre wrong.
That will only happen if Democrats start calling out both the Republicans who make these kinds of ridiculous statements and the "journalists" who act as their stenographers.
At his next press briefing, Jay Carney needs to repeat Santorum's comments and demand that Santorum apologize or offer proof of his assertions.
In the next breath, Carney needs to ask the "journalists" in the room why no one from their news organizations is willing to act like a professional journalist and challenge such comments.
Why are Democrats such effing wimps?
SecularAnimist on January 07, 2012 11:10 AM:
I'd also point out that accusations that thousands of climate scientists from all over the world are perpetrating a massive "global warming hoax" for money, and/or as part of a "liberal" conspiracy to destroy the US economy or even "end industrial civilization", have become acceptable public discourse, as illustrated by George Will's recent piece in The Washington Post that was discussed on this site last week.
And not only that -- harassment and even death threats against climate scientists have become acceptable.
Indeed, the language widely used in public forums to attack climate scientists is virtually indistinguishable from the violence-inciting hate speech used by mid-1930s brownshirts to attack "Jews".
k l m on January 07, 2012 11:12 AM:
Failure to recognize the President elected by a majority of the people and supporting him (i.e. America) on the national and world stage is absolutely UnAmerican.
adolphus on January 07, 2012 11:13 AM:
@Ron Beyers: The first step is to ask someone like that to define Socialism. You can even substitute words like Communist, Fascist, even Anarchist. Quite often the people who such claims don't even know what these words mean. To them it's just another epithet for "someone I don't like." Like when I was a little kid we used to call people we didn't like "faggot" with absolutely no understanding of what we were really saying. I had an excuse. I was 10.
Anonymous on January 07, 2012 11:15 AM:
"How many times and ways can you say that the Republican Party has descended into unreality and extremism before you lose your viewers and readers?"
How many times? As often as it takes. The big republican lies work because the repeat them so often and there is so little push back.
Steve Benen remarked in an article a few days ago about Nora O'Donnell's surprise that Gingrich called Romney a liar. He is and it was well chronicled by a Krugman article just a few days prior. No political commentator should have been surprised. What O'Donnell should have been doing is saying the same thing about Romney and every other lie told by the conservatives. But they don't. They need to be called on it repeatedly here and in every other forum possible.
Countme In on January 07, 2012 11:19 AM:
"But here�s hoping that the tide will eventually turn, that ridiculous accusations will stop being acceptable by attrition, and that Americans will start remembering that they�re wrong."
Bullshit.
Too late.
The vermin genocidal filth in the Republican Party have strung out the hateful rhetoric as far as it can go -- they'll begin killing next, with their God's and Ayn Rand's sexy blessing.
T-Rex on January 07, 2012 11:19 AM:
kevo: Three years? More like two decades. Remember Newt Gingrich's list of handy buzz-words to use against your opponent, like "sick," "bizarre," "failed," "traitor," "past," "backward," etc.? He's still using them, btw, against anyone who suggests that he's using "food stamps" as a racist dog whistle, even when he explicitly says that he's going to explain to the NAACP why jobs are better than food stamps (something the poor benighted dark folks obviously can't figure out on their own?) And the justification for this is always the same -- "we Republicans are too nice, we're gentlemen but THEY aren't, so we need to fight dirty." James Kirkpatrick used this argument back in 1988 to explain why George H.W. Bush displayed distaste about the filthy campaign that Lee Atwater ran against Michael Dukakis (while the poor powerless candidate sat by unable to rein in the evil Atwater, I suppose).
Abijah L on January 07, 2012 11:34 AM:
I am a middle aged, blond woman who drives a elderly, compact car with a "2012" bumper sticker. I was driving on a relatively congested surface street one weekend morning recently, when an Orange County yahoo in a really big pick-up decided to straighten me out. He was actually swerving in and out in front of me while screaming at me about Obama. Since my job causes me to spend all day talking to elderly FNC viewers, I understand where his anger comes from, but still I don't understand why those people think that this level of vitriol is acceptable.
Josef K on January 07, 2012 11:34 AM:
Let's not kid ourselves. This isn't going to change until some self-styled "patriots" start arresting, trying and executing some of these "traitors". At which point Romney's will disavow such talk and blame the liberal media for sensationalizing it all.
Of course by then it'll be too late and we may well see a genuine Reign of Terror take hold. I rather doubt Willard, Rick and the rest will survive such an event.
Hedda Peraz on January 07, 2012 11:50 AM:
@Abijah L:
That would have been my husband! We a good chuckle over a glass of sherry about you.
sparky on January 07, 2012 12:00 PM:
I have to believe that the real basis for the absurd rhetoric that flows from the right wing is based in AM talk radio. There is no place in this country that you can drive and not find an AM station that blares this crap 24 hours a day. For those of you who can stomach it i encourage you to tune one of your radio presets to a local Fox radio station and listen to it from time to time as you drive. It is constant right wing propaganda around the clock. The day starts with Beck followed by Limbaugh and Hannity and then some local yokel who tries to out right wing the national big liars. There is no left wing alternative to challenge these charalitins and for far too many people, especially in rural areas where the only station that comes in loud and clear is the local AM station, what they say is viewed not as political propaganda, but rather as actual news and unbiased commentary. There is no fair; There is no balanced; and as right wing extremists learned long ago if you tell a lie long enough and often enough, it becomes the truth.
Countme In on January 07, 2012 12:12 PM:
Radio Belgrade and Radio Rwanda broadcast absurd rhetoric, too.
It was so silly, ridiculous, and preposterous.
Nothing came if it.
chi res on January 07, 2012 12:27 PM:
You're hot today, Hedda!
Daniel Buck on January 07, 2012 12:52 PM:
The idea that such a candidate would face no pushback whatsoever, with journalists barely finding it worth mentioning at all, was unthinkable.
===================
Steve,
Journalists don't push back, that's not their job. Journalists hall monitors. The candidate accused of the perfidy pushes back. Those are the rules. (Pundits, of course, push back, mock, ruminate, and anguish, but who pays attention to pundits?)
Consider also that in any given contest one has to consider if the craziness of the charge doesn't damage the accuser more -- exhibit A: Newt Gingrich, who if given enough rhetorical rope, will hang himself with no assistance from others -- and so the best approach is to let the accuser froth at the mouth & otherwise act in a deranged manner, while occasionally mocking him. It all depends.
Dan
Daniel Buck on January 07, 2012 12:54 PM:
Second sentence should be: Journalists are not hall monitors.
Dan
jjm on January 07, 2012 12:59 PM:
To @Abijah L: Orange County is aberrant; it was the home of the Orange Coast Mafia -- from Nixon and his crew on down to the people who backed Reagan with big bucks, etc. When I lived there I was absolutely afraid to wear a pin backing a Democratic candidate... I was literally afraid for my life. Guys like your guy in the truck paraded down the street proudly labeling their camo-painted vans as "Panzer Wagens".
But OC is outside the mainstream of public opinion--it was then and in this instance, still is. I cannot bring myself to believe that the GOP honestly believes that it can win wide public support with such unreal vitriol and exaggerated ludicrous charges. How, for example, do they think they can win nationwide elections without any black votes, or many Hispanic ones? What they are saying and doing now is not a carefully planned strategy, it's simply an effort to win by repeating tired old tricks.
I find it hard to believe that mainstream Americans have the same unthought gut reaction against black 'welfare queens' and 'deviants' as they did in the 70s when the Nixons and Reagans decided to exploit the economic malaise that their policies created by pinning the blame on black people's being coddled and cared for by government. (By the way, Charles Blow today in the NYT points out that blacks are, by a huge proportion, NOT the biggest group of welfare and food stamp recipients, whites and Hispanics are.)
In Nixon's day, this attack on blacks was a cold blooded political strategy; later Lee Atwater figured out 'talking points' that framed the long term GOP slogan 'no new taxes' as code for 'no more money to fund welfare for black people,' something he admitted on his death bed.
The throwbacks now running in the GOP still want to rely on this crap? Really! How quaint.
schtick on January 07, 2012 1:11 PM:
As long as repubs/tealibans exist, even one, this shit will be thrown into the wind and some will catch it and hold onto it like it is gold.
rrk1 on January 07, 2012 1:27 PM:
At this late point in time is there any doubt that had Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Reid, or Ted Kennedy, among many others, even vaguely suggested that W's policy of torture, rendition, and unlawful detention were 'un-American', never mind un-Constitutional, that the media would have struck back with vitrolic force? The right-wing propaganda machine would have churned out condemnations 24/7 and the corporate media flacks in the echo chamber would have had a field day.
This sort of rhetoric is acceptable only if you're a Rethug. Democrats have no spine, no cajones, and no message. You can't beat something with nothing. The Dems have nothing.
As for AM all-hate-all-the-time radio you can blame Ronald Reagan for ending the Fairness Doctrine, and Bill Clinton for the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which set in motion the consolidation of media outlets.
exlibra on January 07, 2012 3:34 PM:
How, for example, do they think they can win nationwide elections without any black votes, or many Hispanic ones? -- jjm, @12:59
Disenfranchisement has many faces; GOP has many ruses in its bag of tricks. And, if all else -- caging, names struck, "accidentally", off the voting rolls, very high walls put in front of registering new voters etc - fails... There are always those wonderful voting machines, for which the software is written by the best friends of GOP and which is so proprietary and secret. You push A, your screen shows A (to reassure you), but the little ticker tape with the vote count registers B. Simple. And unprovable.
JEA on January 07, 2012 4:14 PM:
Keep in mind it works both ways - if people have stopped criticizing it, a lot of people have also stopped listening to it.
MNRD on January 07, 2012 4:21 PM:
Santorum has made himself unelectable with his out-of-control rhetoric. Remember, he isn't just accusing President Obama of treason - he is also accusing Ron Paul and Ron Paul's supporters of treason! That means that Ron Paul's supporters would not vote for Santorum in a general election, and that makes Santorum unelectable. Santorum has hoisted himself on his own petard.
Kathryn on January 07, 2012 5:32 PM:
The unnerving possibilities for 2012 that worry me is that these sociopaths have been planning since Barack Obama was elected how to steal the next one with the help of Citizens United, voter suppression, voting machine tricks, etc. Wish Santorum would become the nominee as he is indeed unelectable, he's spent too much time campaigning at those Christian pizza joints in Iowa. There is little appetite in this country for bombing Iran, banning contraception, annulling gay marriages (Pope Rick) and the rest of his nonsense. I think he's nuts.
Lariokie on January 08, 2012 3:33 AM:
Rick Santorum is the Anti-Christ. Want proof? Would Jesus bomb Iran?