Spot on analysis of calls for the “new civility” in the political landscape in the wake of the Arizona shootings.
It’s what they say, not how they say it | SocialistWorker.org http://bit.ly/frmpqh
The central point is important:
Obama didn’t refer directly to Palin or the controversy about the extent to which the right wing’s hate-filled rhetoric should be held responsible for what happened. He didn’t have to–most people who heard Obama’s call for ” a more civil and honest public discourse” would have filled in that blank for themselves.
But what he did say directly was telling – that Americans should rise above their differences and unite around “all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together.”
That begs the question: How are Sarah Palin’s “hopes and dreams” for the world bound together with those of the targets of her bigotry? Why should people whose lives are being ruined by the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression “rise above their differences” with Republicans like Palin – or with Democrats like Obama?
This is the whole issue. Civility is nice, but not if it’s an excuse for inaction. Bipartisanship, the administration’s mantra-like refrain, is a tool for getting policy done, not a goal of being in office.
babble 