I am about to lose the last vestiges of my reputation as a Chicago-bred political street fighter: I think that the Lofty Donkey post on Kos is over the line.
Yeah, I know, TDP put up the link to Graf’s take-down on Comedy Central but the photo-shopped pic of Graf in KKK regalia seems of an entirely different order. Even admitted to, it’s dishonest; and it accuses Graf, through innuendo and implication, of racism and anti-Semitism of the nastiest possible kind.
I have no use for Duke, and I think Graf’s guns-in-bars trip was loony, but I think that implying that because Duke likes his stance on immigration Graf is somehow cut from the same racist bolt of cloth is wretched.
Who has endorsed whom? When I go to Duke’s web site I find a lot of anti-Semitic nastiness, but I don’t find any explicit endorsement. (If I’ve missed it I’m sure someone will point it out to me.) What I do find is a two page US News and World Report piece by Angie C Marek all about Graf, his elevation of border security to a major campaign theme, and a nod in the direction of Gabrielle Giffords.
Does this amount to an endorsement by the KKK? Is such an endorsement to be found? It’s all bull-pucky.
Lest I’m misunderstood let me assure you that I have every intention criticizing Graf and his political platform. Oh, yeah, I might also treat him as an object of chirping mirth from time to time—but only in the most loving way possible.
8 comments:
Frankly, I think it is rather cheap although I suppose standard political fare for the AZ democratic party to make a big deal out of the Duke link and imply it means something about Graf.
Which, of course, it doesn't.
It's a safe bet republicans would do the same thing if some nut linked to Giffords site. People are probably googling as we speak to see what they can find.
Regarding the photoshop image, I'm disgusted. This is the kind of crap I was hoping we could avoid.
I remember the 2000 presidential election when the internet was still somewhat new and people were posting all sorts of ridiculous images like bobbing heads and dancing candidates, etc..
A skilled person today with the right software can produce ANY image. I hope we can get to 11/7 without having to see.........
Dogma,
These are to be anticipated, and I predicted them at "ESD" (not sure if I like the acronym, but, hey, I'm a work in progress in every other aspect of life, so why not here too?).
Those truly supporting Graf and wanting him to win would be wise to leave abortion alone. Still, there will be those like Chris here.
This type of campaigning is why people have given up on voting any more. Links aren't official enorsements and photoshopped photos are just cheap shots.
While this post didn't start off as a thread on abortion, it is turning into one.
Gabby should stand up for a woman's right to control her body and she should stand up for the rights of those that are born into America. The US has one of the worst records in the developed world when it comes to infant mortality. We could do much to improve prenatal health and to assure ourselves that all children in American live beyond the age of 2.
People who are pro-life need to consider that life continues after the fetus is born.
We need to focus on the issues that are important in this country and rise above these contemptible political tactics.
Sotto,
Concur with your remarks about the disgusting photoshop piece and silliness about the link, and yes it is a turn off. If you surf around, you’ll find widespread agreement. Elements of the democratic party just gave Graf more ammunition regarding cheap tactics, and he wasted no time posting them at his website.
Not sure what you are suggesting Giffords do that she has not done regarding a woman’s right to choose. Her credentials are solid and earned her the Emily’s list endorsement.
And absolutely, yes: We need to focus on the issues that are important in this country and rise above these contemptible political tactics.
If the primary is an indication, these blogs will be where the most volatile exchanges occur. Note, Sotto, that it was Chris who injected abortion into this thread. Now that we are into the general election, this was anticipated.
Frankly, I think the abortion conversation is a greater risk for Graf than Giffords.
Hello...
Let me shoulder in for a moment. I suspect that Dogma is right, that the debate is probably unresolvable.
Let me take it a step further and suggest that it is systematically unresovable because there is not really one argument going on here, but two. We tend to conflate them.
One argument is about whether a woman has the ultimate right over control of her body. Another argument is about whether life begins at conception and wehether abortion is immoral.
These are two different arguments, not two branches of the same argument. How we settle one probably has no force in the settlement of the other.
The one thing we could argue about and decide would be the question of the social utility of banning abortion.Socio-political consequences, costs, effects of family structure, effect on children who were allowed to come to term unwanted, and so forth.
This is rushed because I have to get to work. Possibly more later.
To those for whom it is appropriate,
Happy New Year.
Art
Abortion seems to be the issue that most people do not want to discuss unless they have strong opinions either for or against it. So, you never resolve anything with these discussions because the moderates opt out.
Chris, I would just say that a great many people think that abortion is tragic, but would not go so far as to agree that it should be against the law. No one wants to go back to the times when women died or nearly died from botched, illegal abortions, and that is exactly what would happen.
Part of this tragedy, Chris, is that abortion could become very close to a non-issue in the United States if we allowed children to be properly educated about the consequences of extramarital sex and also, if EVERYONE HAD GUARANTEED ACCESS TO PREVENTATIVE HEALTHCARE.
Those are the issues, my friend. Most people do not use abortion as their preferred method of birth control. Wouldn't it be better, Chris, if we worked together to minimize the tragedy of abortion and to create the educational, social, and healthcare systems needed to prevent unwanted pregnancies? This is possible, this can be done if we are willing to be realistic about human behaviour.
This thread really set me off, but rather than rant here, I used my own blog.
For the CD 8 election, this issue only helps Giffords because Graf's position is so severe.
FWIW, there is no issue to debate here regarding abortion. The Supreme Court removed the issue from debate in finding heretofore undiscovered "rights" in the Consitution in the Roe v Wade ruling.
If this case were to be overturned, does that mean abortion would become illegal leading to all the dreaded 'back-alley' abortions? No. The reversal of Roe v Wade would simply send the issue back to the States - where it rightly belongs - to set their own policies.
The Supreme Court had no business in removing this volatile issue from the hands and votes of millions of Americans with their over-reaching power grab.
Tad
Post a Comment