Anger is here to stay. It's natural and healthy. I've always heard it defined as friction: energy which builds up as a product of daily life while bumping into things, being crowded by others, being startled, being unappreciated, being delayed, being made to feel unimportant or unappreciated or finding a lump in the mattress or a fly in the soup. Add to this our other unfulfilled expectations.
We have to face it: life is unreasonable; there is no guaranteed happiness. There's no rose garden or bowl of cherries. A warm gun perhaps (but only if you're a Beatle fan).
And, for us, that was while Clinton was in office.
We Democrats have a considerable and well-managed foe and we must be attuned to it and its members' dynamics. Even though they have elected their choices, the unthinking Republican masses remain very powerful as a voter base and very angry on a personal level. In fact, I think anger is their political
raison d'etre.
Limbaugh, O'Reilly and others reinforce this anger in every broadcast. They infuse it with fear by teaching their listeners that they are victims and that liberals, USA-haters all, are out to steal their very way of life and only chance at happiness. It is made so plain to them that they don't have to think. In fact, they are indoctrinated not to think as this fear and anger is presented to them like air for their tires. With no confusion or responsibility, they fall into line easily, readily and dependably.
These are people who have never gotten a contradictory message elsewhere. They don't seek radio stations to hear opposing views, read newspapers looking for knowledge on controversial subjects or search the Internet for insight. They are determined in their anger, (and thus) their sense of judgment and retribution. As Democrats, this is a significant hurdle in our efforts to win votes and offices, establish nationally-beneficial goals and salvage what's left of our union.
Just to prove my point, I want to explain my understanding of "Liberal Elitism." Frankly, the term has never made sense to me. (Of course, Ted Kennedy is always labeled so.) In everyday life, Liberals (and Democrats) might possibly be wealthy and live to the level of their financial ability without implying a sense of privilege. Consider Eleanor Roosevelt or Bobby Kennedy.
Mega-wealthy Republicans, like Ken Lay, live like or better lives openly (until September, anyway). But we are "Elitists" because we stand with the poor who lack money and rights while we may have significant resources ourselves. In those teensy Republican brains, this juxtaposition stands out as hypocritical.
But, I see a clearer paradox: the outrageously-wealthy Republicans who will have nothing to do with the poor or their plight while disparaging their rights and stifling their benefits, will hound their representatives for additional tax breaks just so they can add another zero to their wealth. It was once enough for them to be millionaires. Now, to have any bragging rights at all, they must increase that by 1,000 times. It's truly sickening but angry entitlement pushes them toward their isolationist goals.
The real enmity between the parties began over a nomination to the Supreme Court (Robert Bork) and still seethes today. More than anything else (in my opinion), the ability of the party-in-power to appoint judges, especially to the Supreme Court, affects our future. These appointments will have the most lasting effect on the country and recent confirmation contention might always define the tenor of all other national debate.
As yet, we don't know the long-term outlook of either of Bush's recent appointments but I'm forever an optimist: once elected for life, judges seem to grow philosophical wings with no sense of rapprochement, professional scrutiny or politics. Somehow, the members have always found a sense of reasonability as well as centered-thinking on their own, in my humble opinion. Of course, there are exceptions like Antonin Scalia and his toady, Clarence "Me too, Nino!" Thomas. But their hypocrisy outshines their flawed and obvious thinking. Unfortunately, there are many 5-4 votes that will have to be retaken.
Healthful anger is correctly focused and expressed. It does no good to scream at Democratic politicians for their sloth and indecision when Republican counterparts are carping themselves while being in total control and the President is destroying himself and his party (albeit along with the country).
I listen to Limbaugh every so often and I watch O'Reilly or Hannity from time to time in a personal attempt to understand the enemy. There's no doubt that they purposefully distort the truth in an attempt to inflame their listeners. And this is a considerable hate-addiction to be overcome when the users are angry drones. These same people are making these broadcasters rich due to their listenership and the sponsorship by those same, Conservative-benefited corporations.
But a recent documentary prepared and shown by People for the American Way, highlighted attempts in 2004 to overturn an anti-gay ordinance (Article XII) passed in Cincinnati, an ultra-red city. The volunteers went door-do-door and met people face-to-face to explain the initiative and answer questions. It was a highly laborious effort but, in the end, the repeal of the homophobic law passed handily even while President Bush won the city in a landslide.
There's a lesson to be learned here: angry bigotry can be defused and the mind reopened and reinvigorated with a personal, non-threatening effort. The "no-think" message of the right-wing foaming-mouthpieces can be overcome. But it's not Air America who can do it. It's going to take a significant effort (and shoe leather) on the part of reasonable thinkers to reach the hinterlands of hate, bigotry and misunderstanding.
With understanding (if not love) in our hearts.