Stop Blue on Blue Violence

Who can forget the sordid tale of the great Ortiz-Shurelds bout of late February? Well, surrogates for the Obama and Clinton campaigns over the past few weeks have stopped just short of reenacting the fight between Lang and Balboa in Rocky III. Finally, the candidates have agreed to simmer down their surrogates in a better-late-than-never attempt to let the healing begin.

Sort of.

Nevertheless, this is welcome news considering the revelations of recent polling data registering the degree to which animosity between the operatives of the Clinton and Obama camps has negatively impacted the unity of the Democratic Party as we slide toward Denver. If you think the half-dozen or so incidents of race-baiting, “monsterizing,” fear-mongering, and reverse discrimination coming out of the primary campaigns are choking the pipeline of the mainstream media, lean in a little closer to your computer and listen to the din of aggressive typing, the blitzkreig of mean-spirited comment dropping, and the shock-and-awe of “gotcha” politics riffling through most sectors of the blogging community, but none so surprising as the vitriol circulating through a patchwork of progressive and liberal blogs. Supporters of either candidate are not immune to the infection of these sites, which deftly lure the angry, the lost, the undereducated into anonymous online conversations plump with bile and vinegar. Today’s brief meeting between the candidates is long overdue, but will it be enough to restore the cohesion of the progressive-moderate-independent alliance essential to Democratic success in November? Pundits differ. But what they agree upon is particularly telling: the twin evils of sexism and racism, most observers acknowledge, might make this cycle potentially the most contentious (barring, perhaps, the ’68 Convention) primary election in the last one hundred years of party history.

The Democratic Party is not as static, bland and as prone to inertia as its Republican rival. It is the dynamism of the Democratic Party that serves as both a blessing and a curse. Democrats, unlike Republicans, recoil at the notion of a party line. Democrats are not afraid to tell each other what they think and feel about the collective issues we face. Dissenting Democrats must not and should not be silenced.

For three or four minutes yesterday, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama agreed to disagree. Ostensibly, they also agreed to issue a blanket disavowal of anything inappropriate or vitriolic their surrogates might intentionally or unintentionally say (or post) during the next six weeks or so.

It may be time for some members of the progressive blogging community to take notice of the actions of our (whether either side can admit it or not) party co-leaders and practice some of that lock-step approach which brought the Republicans success in 2004. Although their consequences are compounded by an additional four years of federal incompetence and ineptitude, the issues facing the country were just about the same in 2004 as they are now.

Arguably, Senator Clinton and Senator Obama have been the victims of the worst smear tactics in the history of political campaigns, primary or otherwise. Okay, the Swift Boat commercial was rough, but it simply wasn’t the same as what we are witnessing. Unfortunately, this is due in large part to the contributions of progressive and liberal bloggers.

The other side certainly hasn’t tread lightly either. Take for instance Senator Clinton. She has been accused of murder. There are multiple allegations of a lesbian affair and a website dedicated to charting her alleged financial crimes. And, yeah, she will trample your rights and destroy America.

Christianity Today, of all things, even published an essay about the caustic attitude toward Hillary Clinton growing exponentially within the Evangelical community, including the slim percentage of those Evangelicals identifying themselves as liberal or progressive. It’s worth a read

Most surprisingly, though, is the way Senator Clinton has been vilified by those who profess to be left-leaning, progressive or liberal bloggers. Consider a site like Washington State’s The Progressive Review. PR purports to support the progressive agenda but the site is slathered with links or posts containing claims about Hillary Clinton that are so offensive it reads like an aggregator of Rove’s honorable mentions. Senator Obama’s camp has rightly accused some Clinton supporters of exacerbating the racial divisions growing within the Party, but take this guy at Politik Ditto and his post “Maggie Williams: Driving Mrs. Clinton.” It appears the images and language of racism can come from any direction. Not surprising, even MySpace is filled with the most obnoxious anti-Clinton sites boasting thousands of friends, many who spread the same baseless lies perpetrated by the right-wing sites listed above.

By now, most readers understand the charges against Senator Obama from various corners of the conserva-sphere: he’s a terrorist, no I’m sorry, a terrorist who (hearts) sex offenders, and a covert Muslim extremist.

What twists my melon is this guy at No Quarter, Larry Johnson. Good ole LJ basically plagiarizes Foxnews, Jews Against Obama, and Bill Cunningham at the same time he links to, and is linked from, many blogs claiming a liberal bent and professing allegiance to the Democratic cause. Curious.

Similarly, bloggers like Anglachel; the so-called Answer to Right-Wing Talk at Taylor Marsh; the self-proclaimed political diva Heather, even James Wolcott at Vanity Fair, all make brilliant arguments against the conservative agenda, the continuation of Bush policy inherent in a McCain Administration, and remind us of the importance of this election. But when they turn their attention to Senator Obama they descend into the most sophomoric regurgitation of the same-old, same-old about the Senator and parrot the outlandish claims of the likes of Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity.

Perhaps some progressive prognosticators should consider the implications of the images, metaphors, and analogies they use to fuel the snark their readers crave, especially those that impact the lives and self-esteem of members of our Party.

Senator Clinton, Senator Obama, the millions who have already voted and the millions yet to vote, all deserve the chance to participate in the difficult conversation that lies ahead, but they should be encouraged to join the discussion in a thoughtful, civil way. Many will say such an expectation is naive or no-fun. Perhaps.

Maybe we should heed the advice of our matronly MOMocrats before they ground every last one of us.

Democrats ’08