I watched the Stephanopolous special the other night, America Divided. He made some good points, I admit, particularly his warning that like-minded people tend to group together (and thus polarize even more radically).
But of course the discussion was gerrymandered for neutrality, and as one might expect from George, he spent most of his time sitting on a fence in his version of the "reasonable middle."
We're polarized, and it comes form both sides - equally.
Well, not quite. Sorry, George.
Three things Stephanopolis failed to mention in his report about America Divided:
Follow me over the flap.
1. Amzingly, the show never really discussed Newt Gingrich. Gingrich came on the cable scene in the late 80's-early 90's and began making comments about "Democrats" the likes of which I had never seen or heard before. He even made the commandment that the Republicans wouldn't deal with Democrats, wouldn't reason with Democrats. Democrats were the enemy in Gingrich's world. I remember cringing in disbelief after watching him, then House Minority Whip railing against Democrats as if he was talking about Satan's minions.
I had been moving firmly into the Republican camp at this time, having seen the failures of Democratic "good intentions." Up here in Massachusetts, the Dukakis Miracle was paying pain and Bill Weld was making some very important
adjustments. I still like Weld.
But Gingrich's venom shocked me, and when he won his revolution in 1994 based in no small part on this "us" and "them" mentality, I saw the handwriting on the wall. At that point, however, I never realized how devastating the guy's philosophy would become TO THE CONGRESS.
Any discussion of "America Divided" that leaves out this 1990-1994 tidal wave of hatred is incomplete, particularly since the Republican Party then spent the next 6 years eviscerating a duly-elected President for no rational reason other than pure, unadulterated partisanship.
2. As I stated above, Stephanopolous played his classic fence-straddling on this issue. He failed to mention a purposeful and pointed creation by one party to demonize half of America. The Rush phenomenon did not arise out of populist demand, although Rush was popular. It came about through specific financing, manipulation of media laws (THE MOST important element in today's disaster), and a concerted effort by a single group of individuals hell-bent on gaining and holding power. David Brock's "The Republican Noise Machine" details this to the nth degree - and it is astounding how so few determined and well-financed mena nd women have so shaped discourse in America.
3. Stephanopolous failed to mention the changes in Congressional proceedure. The Hastert Rule, for example, that I find an atrocious abuse by the majority. Nothing gets to the floor of hte house UNLESS THE MAJORITY OF THE MAJORITY AGREE. Think about that for a bit and you might see a root of war.
So yeah, America is divided. I travel all over the country, and love the folks in every place I go - but I know where to keep my political mouth shut.
I would also like to mention a specific diference between the camps, left and right: the Ann Coulters and Bill O'Reillys go after individual Democrats, sure, in the same way that Michael Moore and others go after President Bush and Dick Cheney. Until recently, though, the public discourse on the left was after individuals alone, while "libruls" and "secular humanists" and "aetheists" suffered the blanket attacks and errant premises of said conservative pundits like Coulter and O'Reilly. Compare the books written in the last 10 years if you don't believe me.
Alterman and Brock go after the people who constructed the Republican media.
Conason goes after Bush.
Thomas Franks looks for a reason that so many people are voting against their interests - but he treats Kansans with respect and reminds us that Kansas for many years led the way in America.
Al Franken goes after O'Reilly and Hannity and the right-wing bloviators.
Michael Moore goes after George Bush.
Craig Unger (who really doesn't strike me as particularly left-wing) goes after George Bush.
Now, on the right.....
Ann Coulter goes after the "Treaon"ous, "Godless" and "Slander"ous LIBERALS.
Michael SAvage goes after "liberals" and "sissy gays."
Bill O'Reilly rants about some mysterious "secular humanist" movement that wars against Christmas.
Hannity, check. Barbara Olsen (in her day), check. Melanie Morgan, check. For more than a decade, the spearheads of the right have waged a war of venom on anything and everyone with whom they disagree.
You want to know why I HATE Bill O'Reilly? Because for years, Bill O'Reilly and his ilk have been on TV and radio telling the world that I'm scum, that because I'm liberal or "gasp" a "secular humanist," I'm the enemy of America, an effette French-loving, latte-drinking panty-waste.
All of these conservative attack poodles (to steal a phrase), every one, ridicule and demean half of America for a living. That half - apparently the gay, liberal, secular humanistic, illegal "crimalien," god-hating, bible-burning, flag-burning, traitors just aren't going to take it anymore.
When Stephanopolous wants to have a real discussion of what happened in Washington and what happened in the media, then I'll listen more closely. I ain't holding my breath.