Skip to main content

View Diary: Harry Reid, Obama, Warren and Grayson have it right: Six Points on How Democrats must fight to win. (29 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  "Bitch-slap" is so 1950s (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Evoculture, ichibon

    As in those old movies where the leading man had to deliver a slap to bring a hysterical woman to her senses.  

    Violence was allowed to be delivered in the other direction, when the woman slapped the man for being "fresh".  

    But violence solves nothing, although maybe punching the bully in the nose gets him to re-evaluate his actions.  Democrats do have to be the "adult in the room", especially since the typical Republican modus operandi is to whine, cry, threaten, call names, lie, and ignore facts.  Democrats have to be adult enough to see a tantrum for what it is worth and ignore it.  Just put the Republicans on "time out" and continue with the business of the country.

    Alan Grayson has this figured out.  So does Elizabeth Warren.  If more Democrats were like them, the fight wouldn't be near as difficult.

    •  When I used "bitch-slap", I'm thinking of... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ahumbleopinion, ichibon, quill

      70's movies where a pimp slaps his prostitutes around, to demonstrate who's boss.

      Pretty misogynistic, but perfectly illustrates what the GOP keeps trying to do.

      It's a demonstration of power. Throw the slap, then show that the target can't hit back.

      That's what happened to John Kerry in 2004 - the right-wing threw out those swift-boat allegations, and Kerry tried being the adult in the room, saying "those are so ridiculous I won't dignify them with a response".

      Well, like I said, that's when the hyenas pounced, and why we have "swiftboating" as a political term today.

      Lesson to learn: Avenge insults.

      •  dem reps, lib ideals get slapped all day (0+ / 0-)

        from 1200 radio stations- the great swiftboating machine and invisible advantage they have. and you point out the problem of letting that happen very well. letting them do that unchallenged for 25 years has been a total disaster.

        part of the problem with kerry was his supporters had no idea what was happening on the radio all over the country for months before it even became enough. i was listening to it. i don't think it was on him to defend himself much more than he did and the vets on stage at the convention should have been enough. the real problem was the pounding he was taking and kept taking from those 1200 radio stations that his supporters were stupidly ignoring. the limbaughs are getting more deserved attention the last few years but there is still no organized effort to get directly in the face of that massive RW bully pulpit except for the specifically targeted limbaugh boycotts.

        This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and GOP lies by broadcasting sports on over 170 Limbaugh radio stations.

        by certainot on Tue Nov 26, 2013 at 07:34:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Bitch-slap (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ApostleOfCarlin, quill

      I think this is a reference to something Josh Marshall wrote a few years ago (now removed from his site, apparently).

      The money quote, referring to candidate Kerry:

      Consider for a moment what the big game is here. This is a battle between two candidates to demonstrate toughness on national security. Toughness is a unitary quality, really -- a personal, characterological quality rather than one rooted in policy or divisible in any real way. So both sides are trying to prove to undecided voters either that they're tougher than the other guy or at least tough enough for the job.

      In a post-9/11 environment, obviously, this question of strength, toughness or resolve is particularly salient. That, of course, is why so much of this debate is about war and military service in the first place.

      One way -- perhaps the best way -- to demonstrate someone's lack of toughness or strength is to attack them and show they are either unwilling or unable to defend themselves -- thus the rough slang I used above. And that I think is a big part of what is happening here. Someone who can't or won't defend themselves certainly isn't someone you can depend upon to defend you.

      Demonstrating Kerry's unwillingness to defend himself (if Bush can do that) is a far more tangible sign of what he's made of than wartime experiences of thirty years ago.

      Hitting someone and not having them hit back hurts the morale of that person's supporters, buoys the confidence of your own backers (particularly if many tend toward an authoritarian mindset) and tends to make the person who's receiving the hits into an object of contempt (even if also possibly also one of sympathy) in the eyes of the uncommitted.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site