Stop Being So Offended, Democrats

Come on, Democrats. Let's cut it out with the self-righteous political correctness, please. I'm tired of reading about every little slip-up or awkward phraseology by anyone on the other side being blown out of proportion and having to hear Keith Olbermann hector us as if he were our era's Edward R. Murrow. I'm speaking of course about Hillary Clinton's RFK comments and Liz Trotta's off-color joke about Obama on FOX News. Both comments were insanely dumb and apologies were issued. Let's leave it at that (I realize it was a slow news weekend).

I would prefer to live in an America where not everyone is so damn straight-jacketed and afraid to say anything off-the-cuff that all we get are canned, predictable, meaningless and devoid-of-content statements, like the crap that the Bush administration has served up for the past seven years. To wit: Washington has a way of purging those who speak their mind (see O'Neill, Paul). That cuts both ways. When Democrats express shock over an impromptu joke made by Mike Huckabee at an NRA convention, it means Huckabee has to put up that mental filter that will expunge all future traces of spontaneity and honesty. Same goes for Geraldine Ferraro. Are we better off for that?

This is not an endorsement of the jokes or comments made by these people. But I'm not going to storm the barricades over them. Nor do I think Ferraro is a racist or Huckabee is pro-assassination or that McCain wants to keep U.S. troops in Iraq for 100 years. I think their statements were blown out of proportion. Plus, this kind of shock and awe from the media only dumbs down the political debate (if that is possible at this point in the campaign) when there are so many more pressing issues. What angers me, as a white male in his 30s living in New York City in 2008, is that fact I have no health insurance; that I live in a country whose public transportation system is a joke; that oil execs, all of them white males, made record profits last year; that our department of Homeland Security actually thinks Iraqi-style IED explosives may wrack the streets of Boston (!!) -- the list goes on.

I don't care about the trivialities of whose pastor said what or what FOX pundit said what -- in the larger scheme of things, this kind of stuff doesn't mean squat. Plus, we don't need to distort the opposition or take umbrage at their every comment to win this election. If we just debate them upright on the issues, we will win. Let's not allow the political debate be hijacked by the politically correct wing of the Democratic Party.

Comments

[CitizenE]

The real issue is the ability to acknowledge fallibility under pressure and a willingness to step back and rethink in collaboration with others a better, more effective, at least less catastrophic approach to wielding political power. It would have been no big deal, had Clinton realized that the most authentic response would have been to grasp the tenderness in the national psyche her comments were pressing against, get off the campaign mode, and react humanely.
Scott McClellan wrote the biggest gaffe of the Bush adminstration was its unwillingness to ever get out of campaign mode and into the nuanced business of effective governance in a democracy.

Yes, this election has a number of significant issues--the environment, Iraq, foreign policy, true national security and emergency preparedness, the health of our military forces, the courts, the justice system, the power of the Presidency vis a vis other branches of government; the economy, meaning energy, debt, deficits; health care. I agree in a certain spirit with this poster, even though I wish Clinton and her followers had come to their senses, and rather than getting incredulously tone deaf, again threatening to scuttle his candidacy, started showing Obama followers the good points they had to contribute to defeat Mc Cain, whoever is the candidate. It's time to forget Hillary Clinton's failing campaign, get over it, and to campaign on the issues that face us, albeit remembering that Obama's strongest suit is the intention toward inclusiveness in the discourse.

[cheykutuo]

I have to agree with dknightpost on this one, and emphatically. And, frankly, with Keith Olberman, whom he mentioned. A faux pas is one thing, said only once (this has been said several times) and heartily apologized for, but this is clearly something else and, I am a woman. One who wanted very much to support Senator Clinton in the beginning.

Listen to her comment in context and it is unbelievable. If it is not purposeful, then it is an absolutely goulish and horrible statement. So, she was tired. If Obama was tired and said something similar? Or are we going to play the"gender" card? And if we are then, is this woman really fit to be President of the U.S.? I don't think so.

To imagine that racism doesn't exist, that there aren't thousands of people who are horrified at the prospect of a "black" man becoming President, is just ignorant and blind. In our recent history black people were still being dragged behind trucks, and lynching is still being discussed.

This is low class and thoughtless politics. The only decent thing about it is the response from the Obama campaign. More than generous...and pretty smart. We lost Robert F. Kennedy in a "calamity" and we can only pray we never have to witness another one.

[globalcitizenlinda]

There is nothing funny about assassinating a leader so please STOP triviallizing the collective outrage of Americans who take candidates' safety very seriously.

HRC may never get a vote from the African American community

[RichLiberal]

Don't you realize this is the core Obama strategy? i.e. distort everything your opponent says and go along blithly oblivious to the tactics and how they are trumpeted in the press.

Obama uses this strategy to demonize his opponents to capture constituencies such as he did with Hillary's MLK/LBJ comments.

Might as well get used to it. This is what Obama is all about.

[harriscrl3]

You mean sort of like the BITTER comment lets be fair here. The bitter comment was blown out of proportion more than any other gaffes and who do we have to thank for that. That comment affected him in the polls who do we have for that. The bitter comment was mild compared to this yet you wouldnt know that the way the media has basically ignored this story .

Thats the problem with Hilary supporters they think that Obama has been doing some grand conspiracy with the media to undermine Hilary. Bill Clinton is the one that made that comment. You think AA need Obama to tell them they should be offended by that remark. CLinton say Oh this politics its dirty if Obama can't take it he shouldnt be in Politics. Hilary said if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen weeks later she is WHINING about how the media treats her unfairly. Imagine if Obama had been whining and complaining at the media like her.

Despite her whining and complaining she got off easy. She hasnt been vetted during this primary. The republicans basically ignored her once Obama took over. He's had to deal with her, Her husband, McCain the GOP, the media, and who does she have to deal hardly anyone only her lies that came to the surface.

Carol

[wiseapple]

Obama and his camp only take sloppy comments and highlight their implications. This is not distortion; it is critiquing.

Leadership on the world level requires metticulous forethought before statements are made. Not to show political correctness but to show genuine clarity of thought. I've noticed how he gathers his thoughts before answering questions- not to regurgitate spin but to provide clarity and understanding.

He will be a great leader for our country.

[TRex86]

Kindly elucidate what the "distortion" was. She said it. She owns it. That simple statement can't be distorted. It has been rebroadcast thousands of times. The problem is that it discloses too much truth about Hillary, including her pathologic inability to admit error. Moreover, the interpretation of her statement is different matter, but again lacks evidence of "distortion."
The meaning ranges from her truly making a Freudian slip and disclosing her deepest wish to her using an artless and tasteless benchmark to show that other campaigns have lasted into June. In the latter case, besides its tastelessness it was disingenuous. RFK's example is complicated since his assassination threw the Democrats into chaos and led to the Chicago Summer 1968 nightmare. Furthermore, her citation of Bill's campaign running into June was less than honest since he states in his biography that he had it won in April.

[lincheryl]

Obama was gracious in his personal reply and said to let it go, so don't blame him.

I can let slips of the tongue go by, even Huckabee's "joke," because it wasn't indicative of his campaign or personality as a whole. It was dumb, but not malicious, and he said it was and sincerely apologized.

Clinton, on the other hand, has mentioned this three times, seemed serious and so devoid of humanity that she didn't even realize how wrong it is to talk of staying in because someone was murdered (let's face it--that's what assassination is) before, and then gave a "kind of" apology to the Kennedys without mentioning the Obamas. Also, it WAS in keeping with her harsh, negative, selfish demeanor she has shown frequently in her campaign.

That is the difference.

Even Trotta, who horrified me with LAUGHING about it, gave a better apology (although I am not sure it was voluntary or sincere) than Clinton.

Clinton honestly scares me with the intensity of her obsession with power and the fact that there doesn't seem to be that "line" that she won't cross to get it.

[bygollymissmolly]

Would you like to give us one instance where Obama has done what you are saying he does? I can't think of any, perhaps you can inform us.

Obama has been extremely gracious towards Hillary. In my opinion he has been more gracious than she deserves. You didn't see him attacking her on her Bosnia lies, you didn't see him attacking her on her racist "hard-working WHITE Americans" statement. And you did not see her attacking her for bringing up the idea of assassination even when he knows this is his wife's greatest fear. He also hasn't blown her out of the race by releasing all the supers he has on his side. He's still trying to give her a graceful way to exit the race.

So, please, tell us what Obama has done to distort what Hillary has said.

[dknightpost]

Lionel,

Though I heartily agree that making people accountable for every word is a sad practice, someone with your résumé and background knows better than to paint with so wide a brush.

Senator Clinton's RFK comment must be looked upon in the context of her campaign publicly affirming that "anything can happen in politics" includes calamity (McAuliffe with Russert). Moreover the type of negativity she has employed in this campaign has felt malevolent to more than a few of us.

Had Liz Trotta uttered those same words against the President I have a hunch she'd be persona non grata non with the Secret Service. As it is you painted her remarks with the quote of "off color" rather than with the far more suitable word "vicious."

Describing Keith Olbermann (who very well might prove to be the Edward R. Murrow of our generation) as hectoring us - when his remarks were clearly intended for Senator Clinton - leads me to wonder who exactly you mean by "us"?

Comments that can potentially "green light" the John Hinkley Jr.'s and Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme's of this world should never be uttered by those seriously contending for the Presidency nor by anyone who purports to be a true journalist or commentator of the news.

The perfect world we long for does not yet exist to protect Senator Obama - a black Presidential candidate - from the ignorant and intolerant.

[Bill3rdterm]

The Edward R. Murrow or our generation??? LOFL, you can't be serious. I doubt ERM, would have a sick obsession with O'Riely and Rush. It would be beneath him to have a segment a day about another TV show.

[99hockeyman]

No, during his day he did not have two fools like BillO and Rush to deal with. He went after Senator Joe. Somebody needs to bring out the truth about these liars, but I guess you love to hear their spew.

[draftgore23]

I somewhat agree with what you are saying. True the RFK comment was indeed blown out of proportion, but the Trotta comment about an assasination is nothing to sneeze at. When you begin to intertwine humor with someone's life, that's when it is no longer alright. And even the RFK comment, like I said, I do believe it was blown out of proportion, but again RFK lost his life fighting for what he believed in. Now Clinton was not joking around when she made the comment which makes her comment much less offensive then Trotta's, but the loss of Robert Kennedy was a tragic (and even tragic seems like an understatement) event in United States history. Why is there a need to bring up such an event?
All in all, I can see what you are saying about the Democrats being to touchy about certain comments, and all in all we are just digging ourselves into a deeper hole the more we let petty comments such as Huckabee's to get in the way of the positives of this year's campaign, but in the end, when someone is putting their life on the line to fight for what they believe in, then anyone with any sort of power should do everything they can to refrain from remarks about their possible demise, or in Bobby Kennedy's case, the already losing of their lives.

[KMKY]

Thank you, Mr. Beehner, for this reasonable request to return to the issues. The media has been responsible for hideously blowing things out of proportion: from Obama's mistake about his great-uncle's role in WWII to Clinton's retelling of the young woman's death after a hospital refused to treat her (which, of course, she heard from a public official). I hope your request for proportionality (as John F. Harris terms it) is the first in a long line of such requests. I have terrible heartburn after just reading the cannibalistic comments toward fellow Democrats that have characterized much of this site over the last week. We need not only to return to issues-centered discourse but also to civil discourse.

[Manx]

John Kerry didn't assertively to the "trivial" swiftboat attacks and look what happened to him.
One man's "trivial" is another man's "outrageous."

[Manx]

I omitted the word, "respond." I said "John Kerry didn't assertively respond to the "trivial" swiftboat attacks and look what happened to him.

[okayigive]

Yes we should be talking about issues that matter to us as a society and this is one. We cannot ignore or condone said statements for the sake of our society. We are adults, but what do you think went through the minds of our young people? Do you think they conceptualized the meaning as being in relation to a timeline? I think not.

Also to trivialize the feelings of others is insensitive and for some to suggest this as being laughable outrage is ridiculous. To me you are so blinded by your obsession over your candidate that you refuse to see or accept the feelings of others without finding blame. To use the words "if I offended" lacks responsibility, and showed a disconnect to the impact of the statement regardless of the referrence to a timeline.

Finally, the constant threats of voting for Mccain, staying at home, write-ins is not helping. I've always felt that those who are threatening are ones who are financially secure to withstand four more year as status quo or they wouldn't vote for Sen. Obama regardless, otherwise it wouldn't matter which candidate won nomination.

[Bill3rdterm]

The problem is that people mis-interpret or spin certain comments into what they want to hear, so they can get that false sense of being offended. Instead of just taking a step back and trying to interpret them in there context.

[bygollymissmolly]

I interpreted Hillary's words in context and I was offended. If the context was "campaigns in June" then she would have said "RFK's campaign", not "assassination".

[tbone99]

Obama at the MLK Monument-

"We have not yet arrived at this longed for place. For all the progress we have made, there are times when the land of our dreams recedes from us - when we are lost, wandering spirits, content with our suspicions and our angers, our long-held grudges and petty disputes, our frantic diversions and tribal allegiances.

And yet, by erecting this monument, we are reminded that this different, better place beckons us, and that we will find it not across distant hills or within some hidden valley, but rather we will find it somewhere in our hearts."

[Sneakerface]

Never quote more than one sentence of Obama at a time. Sean Hannity will cut it up and take the parts he wants, and present this as Obama's views. He would probably the quote you provided and report that Obama said his official campaign position is that

"....we are lost, wandering spirits, content with our suspicions and angers, our long-held grudges and petty disputes...."

Then he'll say - "ya SEE ?? Obama says Americans are "lost spirits" who only worry about " grudges and petty disputes." This PROVES that Obama hates America....

[flatus]

I guess a lot of us trying to get over the nasty discovery in 2004 that roughly half of our countrymen have zero common sense.

[catfood]

You seem to be implying that everyone who voted for Kerry did so only after careful deliberation, as opposed to, "He's running against Bush, that's good enough for me."

Not to suggest that wasn't a compelling enough reason.

FYI, the commonness of sense has been greatly overstated.

[TRex86]

The Repugs in 04 sold equal measures of fear and cynicism. In addition, they did their thing in Ohio, nuking enough votes to win by a margin Kerry wouldn't challenge. They haven't really won an election since Daddy Bush in 88--even that required Willie Horton race-baiting. They will haul out their own kitchen sink strategy from which McSame will stand aloof, wringing his hands, tut-tutting. I think Obama knows it and is better prepared than Hillary. He will campaign hard without her dirty tricks, maintaining his tone. He will not be baited, but he will counter every slimy, filthy attack. That, more than his policy initiatives, will win the election.

[S1m0n]

"Nor do I think Ferraro is a racist ..."

Whether she is or isn't isn't really the issue, and that's a matter for her & her confessor, in any case. What matters is "was she making an appeal to racists?"

If you *did* think that Ferraro was making an appeal to racial resentment on behalf of the Clinton campaign, would that change your view about whether it matters, or not?

I won't answer for you, but my answer is "yes, it matters",

[ScandalousCandice]

I can't wait for the debates. Hagee and Wright cancel each other out so no one wants to go there. All there is left is pure and raw politics. Policies. McCain is borderline retarded when it comes economics and the war on Iraq. All he wants to do is say we won't lose this war. Obama is going to destroy him and it will be glorious.

[jazmatician]

Since Hillary has a six-point plan for putting on her damn shoes in the morning, I say this was as spontaneous a comment as her sniper fire story. Fabricated in Mexico under NAFTA and poll-tested within an inch of its life.
Oh, and she didn't apologize for SAYING it. That would be admitting fault. She is sorry if WE took offense.

[Thunderbeach]

If nobody ever says assassination again, I am certain that should put a stop to the whole problem.

[LouisPWu]

There is nothing funny or amusing about assassination. There is no excuse for anyone making a joke about it. That's not being Politically Correct. That's being CIVILIZED.