It’s the bullying, stupid

The Senate locked horns over the filibuster; TV’s talking heads lectured on the filibuster; op-ed pages, talk-radio asylums and political Web sites parsed every parliamentary aspect of the filibuster -- and the debates were mostly an irrelevance. More on that in a minute.

First things first, and the very first, of course, is that the issue isn’t dead. It’s just under warming lamps. The Christian right -- these days virtually the entire Republican Party during primary season -- will pressure the leadership to make it all better, and soon. Neither gives up this easily and neither suffers compromise for long. They’re just regrouping. They’ll be back, which makes the filibuster “agreement” irrelevant.

And compared to the real issue at hand, the pro-and-con arguments employed were just as irrelevant. The most amusing irrelevance was the right’s teary-eyed crocodile warning that should the filibuster be defended successfully, well, boy, the left would regret it. Some day the right will be the minority again and it will flip and apply the parliamentary scourge with renewed vigor. Imagine that. Republicans -- Republicans, mind you -- hypocritically filibustering this and filibustering that after all those principled, anti-filibuster arguments. Say it could never be so, Shane.

The debate was at its oddest, though, when the anti-filibustering’s very origins went unexamined; origins that have little to do with judicial nominees and nothing to do with the filibuster itself. And those deepest origins, to put it with fair economy, are the right’s tiresome bullying.

True, power-grabbing played a part -- ensuring that the judiciary marches in ideological step and stays in step long after the right’s electoral demise -- but the power-grabbing at issue here involved forcing one set of social mores on a whole lot of individuals and groups with different social mores: in short, bullying.

That’s what the filibuster exercise came down to: The most blatant and potentially most self-defeating display of obscene bullying in America’s recent political history. The heart of the matter did come up from time to time, but largely got buried by endless debates on the filibuster’s propriety as a parliamentary tool.

Perhaps the right’s bullying has become so routine it’s barely noticed any longer. Or perhaps the media’s attention to what’s news-relevant has now surpassed mere deficit-disorder levels. After all, everyone knows that these days at least the networks’ news coverage starts and ends with Michael Jackson’s rating-grabbing crotch-grabbing.

But however inadequately covered, it remains that the filibuster circus was brought to town chiefly by right-wing bullies, and that’s the fundamental aspect the Dems should push harder politically than any other. Nobody likes bullies but bullies themselves, who account for maybe 25 percent of the electorate (hard-right evangelicals, Heritage Foundation donors and the John Bolton Fan Club).

There’s far more history to this bullying business than the filibuster, yet the larger electorate has failed to appreciate Republican history for what it is, mainly due to the opposition’s repeatedly botched message delivery.

We had the 1995 government shutdown, the first sign of the finest in contemporary political bullying to come. We had the perennial Clinton investigations, but outside the (then) scandal-obsessed Washington Post and New York Times, who cared? We had an unconstitutional impeachment, which the perpetrators then managed to twist into a character issue and carry into a stolen election -- a bit of bullying there, I’d say. We had mammoth bullying leading up to the Iraq invasion. We’ve had regularly served bullying on the dangers of free speech from totalitarian spooks like Ashcroft and Fleischer and Rumsfeld….

One could go on. So let’s just agree that the history is clear enough.

What doesn’t seem to be clear to Democrats -- now there’s a surprise -- is how to capitalize on what Republicans have handed them on a platter: the longest, most clear-cut record of political bullying in modern history. Why? Because they can’t seem to keep the basics in mind very long.

And the basics are what Clinton singularly got right and what the right has always gotten right -- a simple, single message, over and over and over till cranial numbness sets in.

It’s the bullying, stupid.

Comments

[wintersnowman]

But the question then is... how do you call out a bully without opening yourself up to being called a "sissy?" I completely agree with your analysis.. the Republicans truly are bullies... down to their core. Machismo to the max is how I would describe these people. Everyone who has dealt with people like this know that they inevitably have underlying insecurities and weaknesses. So what are these weaknesses that they are covering for? And how do the Dem's exploit them?

[Carl Stensel]

It is only a day since the "compromise" and I have already seen several Republican trial balloons relating to the notion of taking the nominations that the Democrats agreed to and then breaking the agreeement. Obviously, if the Republicans think they can get away with breaking their word without significant political cost, they will do it.

Surprised?

[Bonnie M.]

And, wasn't it boring! I tried to avoid it. I wanted them to shut up and vote. As stated above, there was little of substance in any of the speeches. Maybe Congress should have their debates only in sign language. Can you imagine the peace and quiet.

[Banjobailey]

Bullies know what they are doing. They long ago abdicated any sense of responsibility to anyone except themselves. They enjoy the power of winning and are incorrigable. Democrats must hold them responsible with questions such as: why do you (my Republican neighbor) support refusing veterans' medical benefits? They will answer: I do not! We must be prepared with the facts. They will continue to refuse the information because it is not in their interest to hear the actual facts. They are only interested in their own status. Facts are only used to insure their own position. If we perservere with the facts, they will collapse because most people in this country are actually moral.

[Banjobailey]

Bullies know what they are doing. They long ago abdicated any sense of responsibility to anyone except themselves. They enjoy the power of winning and are incorrigable. Democrats must hold them responsible with questions such as: why do you (my Republican neighbor) support refusing veterans' medical benefits? They will answer: I do not! We must be prepared with the facts. They will continue to refuse the information because it is not in their interest to hear the actual facts. They are only interested in their own status. Facts are only used to insure their own position. If we perservere with the facts, they will collapse because most people in this country are actually moral.

[J Soul]

The only way to handle a bully, is to go right up and smash him in the face. Not literally of course, but with sharp words. Say something like this on the Senate floor " the Republican party is turning America into a one party fascist dictatorship and I will not stand here and condone it "! When they repugs cry foul... now you get your opportunity to expound on what you said and refuse to apologize. That's what the Rethuglican party does and it's been working great for them. It's time the Democrats stand up for principal no matter what the cost. When this happens, the American people will see the repugs for what they are and what they are doing to our country.

To all the Democratic Senators and Congressmen... Get in the fight or go home!!!

J. Soul

[moonsha]

Great comments to you all. I agree with J. Soul 100%. Stand up and call a spade a spade. A great example of calling out the Repugs would be the testimony Galloway recently gave on the Oil for Food scandal. Norm Coleman left that room with his tail between his legs! Barbara Boxer has been doing an outstanding job of exposing the Repugs by using their own statements against them. Also, how can Democrats think they can compromise with the Repugs? Democrats only lose credibility when they agree to compromise with people that have shown they cannot be trusted.