The Virtue of (Selective) Outrage

For all their supposed differences, it's the inane similarities of both the far Left and far Right that have recently been coming into high relief. Grand displays of outrage gilded with the selective memory of their own partisan minds.

MoveOn had their Petraeus/Betray Us ad which contained all the wit and insight of graffiti scrawled on a bathroom stall at a grade school for disadvantaged youths (and considering the level of competence that went into the decision to place the ad, it might as well have been exhibited in a toilet).

In response, the shy and demurring pundits from far right acted like bleeding wounds unable to understand why anyone would dare - DARE - impugn the integrity of someone who serves our country.

Swift Boating, after all, is so '04.

Apparently this lack of respect of a man in uniform was so egregious that Congress had no choice but to save the Union by approving a resolution condemning the ad.

They get paid to do this. Then they wonder why Americans cheat on their taxes.

But the good news is the Congress now has practice in fending our men and women in uniform from snark just in time to defend fake soldiers from being called phony soldiers by the likes of Rush Limbaugh. A high crime so . . . high that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had to be dragged from a bed of tears to announce to the world that Limbaugh's comment was "so beyond the pale of decency that it cannot be left alone."

It's not alone. It's got the Petraeus/Betray Us ad to double date with. But apparently Petraeus/Betray Us happened in some alt universe 'cause Reid went on to cogitate as to "how my Republican colleagues would have reacted if the tables were turned -- if a well-known Democratic radio personality had used the same insulting line of attack against troops who support the war."

As opposed to a well-known Democratic agitprop org, I guess. But we'll never know for sure. There are no well-known Democratic radio personalities.

Of course, no discussion of selective outrage would be complete without mentioning Bill O'Reilly's recent discovery of the secret tribe of civilized black folk who eat at restaurants in Harlem, attend Anita Baker concerts and in their downtime run the world's largest media company.

The man's ig'nant, as my father would say. I had no problem saying it, either. But the far left would not accept the non-apology they never got from Mr. Bill. His blatant Righty racism was Rightfully hectored at every turn.

However, the blatant Lefty racism of Syracuse University professor Boyce Watkins seems to get a pass. On CNN Watkins called NPR contributor Juan Williams a "Happy Negro" over Juan's defense of O'Reilly's statements.

Now, that's just high-minded discourse cleverly disguised as blatant Lefty racist anti-black intellectualism.

Nothing wrong with disagreeing with Juan's interpretation of Bill's remarks - I do, even though Juan's the one O'Reilly was having the original conversation with - but there's plenty wrong with the Left's dead silence over the same kind of disgusting race baiting for which they attack the Right. Racism, hatred, stupidity, the poisoning of the culture... It's all the same no matter where it comes from.

But we really shouldn't be surprised at either the vitriol or the chicanes of pathos manufactured by the opposite ends of the Left and the Right. Go far enough along the political sphere and the extremes always meet somewhere.

Usually at the intersections of hypocrisy and false piety.

Comments

[DaisyZimmerly]

The Republicans are the ones that have made politics a dirty blood sport. They've been getting away with it for a long time too. Now that the left has decided to start taking the gloves off the right and their apologists whine like a bunch of little girls. The right has been picking this fight for a long time. Their about to get their wish. The MoveOn ad was just the warm up act. Stay tuned NeoCons. You ain't seen nuthin yet.

[realitytrumpsbull]

Hey now, hundreds of billions of promissory
tax dollars at stake here, can't we just
parley this out for another 10 years or so?
Half-trillion a year that the public has NO
choice about spending...let the good times roll!
Right? Hello? Hello? Is this thing on? Hello?
Anybody there? Hello? Hello? 9 trillion, and
counting...

[Canaan]

"the left is unbelievably amateurish at smear tactics; whereas the right has it down to such an art that it even fools people who should know better."

That's the point. The MoveOn Ad was ineffective tactics, even if it was the truth. Who was MoveOn trying to convince--Daily Kos? Or voters who supported the war in 2003, no longer support the war, but are still worried about an American 'defeat'?

Back in January, the Repubs started the advance hype on Petraeus before anyone knew what he looked like. It's a trick pop master George Lucas uses in his movies (we hear about Yoda before we ever see him). It was pure showmanship and MoveOn fell for it. The better strategy would have been: "It's not about Petraeus, it's about Bush". Instead, MoveOn aided Bush's agenda--to hold onto his 30% and keep Republicans from jumping ship.

MoveOn doesn't deserve to be compared to Limbaugh. But we should try to learn from this mistake.

[parryisle]

My best rememnbance of the ABSENCE of selective outrage in congress was when Ann Coulter and the GOP in Georgia smeared triple Vietnam War amputee, Max Cleland,

[ContentBlackWoman]

Hey John:

I've got to go with Richard729 on this one. As a Black man, you know good and well you cannot oversimplify the context of Dr. Watkins comments. I give my take and complete analysis at http://whyblackwomenareangry.blogspot.com/2007/09/bill-oreilly-juan-williams-fox-news-my.html and Dr. Watkins responds to Juan's Time Magazine piece at http://whyblackwomenareangry.blogspot.com/2007/09/dr-boyce-watkins-explains-his-happy.html

[frank67]

Taboo about attacks on Generals? Think of George McClellan, Hooker, Lee, Sherman, Grant, Haig, George Patton, Erwin Rommel, Douglas MacArthur, Walker, Singlaub, Westmoreland. Even Dwight Eisenhower was attacked by the John Birch Society. Shinseki. Petraeus.

[TomR]

Outrage (false or selective) is used to manipulate. Manipulation is a form of emotional abuse.

There are numerous manipulation tactics to be aware of such as lying (including by omission), denial, minimization, selective inattention, rationalization, diversion, evasion, covert intimidation, guilt-tripping, toxic shaming, playing the victim role, vilifying the victim, playing the servant role, seduction (charm offensive), projecting the blame, feigning innocence, feigning confusion, and brandishing anger (false outrage). To learn about these tactics in depth, you can order a book on Amazon called "In Sheep's Clothing: Understanding and Dealing With Manipulative People" by Dr. George K. Simon.

- Tom

[deminmo]

The height of hypocrisy is absolute belief that its your way or the highway. If you want to take your comments into everyday language:
I throw something at you
You get mad and throw something nasty back
I cry, then get mad because I really didn't mean to hit you. But now I have to get you.
Now you pick up a few friends and meet me at high noon.

Well, it can go on until we either kill each other or simply come to a stalemate. Are we acting like adults?

[mimiow]

No, my way or the highway is the height of mindless arrogance. The height of hypocrisy is a gay-bashing senator who is gay, a family first senator who shows up on a Madam"s list, many times; a congressman who authors bills against pedophilia and gays but is a gay pedophile, or an awol neocon dim cowboy who crows about his patriotism, religion and love of the USA starting a war, based on complete lies, to enrich his and 5-deferments, Darth Vader's, friends.
This is HYPOCRISY!

[jswan]

Ridely completely misses the whole point. The right has a powerful porpaganda machine than can be called upon anytime when there is an issue with which it can make hay (such as the "betray us" ad). So much so, they even get the opposition to go along.
However, when someone on the right does and equally agregious thing, as Limbaugh did, the left cannot get the story together or turn up the heat enough to even get all dems to go along.
What this proves, is the right has media superiority and the left cannot make headway. As a result, right-wing mouth pieces can say whatever they want with impunity as long as it achieves its ultimate goal which is to create antagonism between people (and improve their ratings).
That's where the double standard is. I wish the progressive camp would just stop playing the game and start taking the lead on the issues that actually matter. Something the right has not done for at least 20 years.

[StudentofLife]

The behaviors mentioned are not characteristic of only the extreme right or the extreme left, but of contemporary American politics. Playing the outraged victim and blowing your opponent"s missteps out of proportion can only work in a media-saturated culture. Given the enormous influence appearance has in our political system (thanks to our media-intense environment) it is no wonder that you find people as divergent as the far right or far left adopting such tactics. To think that these are only the tactics of extremists is a mistake. Playing the victim is endemic in our political system, and implying that it is a hypocrisy limited to the fringes helps to give credence to it when it manifests elsewhere.

Rhetoric and grandstanding substitute for rational deliberation. This is a regrettable fact true across the board - left, right, and, despite what Mr. Ridley may believe, center. It is perceptive of him to notice the rank hypocrisy, but believing it limited to political extremes unfortunately says more about the bias toward the center so prevalent in American politics than any actual moral superiority found at the center.

[arnauld]

Criticizing Petraeus is important because he's a hack for the Bush Administration who's been portrayed as a truth-telling hero. Criticizing Limbaugh is important because every time he's exposed as a lying propagandist another 2 or 3 of his lemmings will fall out of line. It's about fighting back against the propaganda machine. Why are you ambivalent?

[JimR]

I am OUTRAGED at all this outrage! It is an APPALLING and SHOCKING betrayal of trust. I think I'm going to faint.

[Booky]

John, are you the same person that played the part of the "Happy Negro" on Joe Scarborough after he took over for Imus? Everyone knows the only people of color that are allowed on Cable News are those that say what white folks are thinking and wish they could say. It's the job of Rush and other right wing talking heads to keep the right wing bigots in line. The right wing listens to right wing radio by day and Fox News by night. That is why most of them believe Iraq had something to do with 911.

[laocoon]

I feel encouraged that congress is finally making some progress in protecting the troops. It may have done nothing to protect the soldiers from sticks and stones and IED's but it has found a way to protect the top general from taunting words. And liberals try to claim we are not making any progress in the war!!!!

[dwillisno1]

I like Jaun Williams although I don't know why he allows himself to be a part of what Fox points to whenever they say fair and balanced. I am struck by the outrage from Bill O and others about the "happy negro" comment about Jaun(perhaps just the modern day equivalent of uncle Tom) yet no mention of our old buddy Rush singing more than once about Barack Obama calling him the "Magic Negro"
What all Republicans know is that Rush will attack anyone who disagrees with him like McCain or Arnold Schwartzenegger. Or even anyone who dares to cross the line. he operates on fear fear of our enemies and fear of him.
The problem with selective outrage is not that it is selective but that it pretends to be outrage. We should criticize what they say because its wrong not because it supposedly outrages us. We could be outraged by the truth. Outrage selective or not is not the standard.