Like everything else, reaction to Beto O’Rourke’s crashing of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s post Uvalde press conference immediately split into two separate camps. Tribe A was indignant that anyone, much less Abbott’s rival, would “exploit a tragedy” for “political gain”. Tapes of the incident include voices from the stage around Abbott calling O’Rourke a “son of a bitch” and ordering him thrown out of the building.
The other camp, of which I’m a part, applauded O’Rourke for having the chutzpah, the cojones, the level of proportionate moral indignation to get in the face of a cynically self-serving cast of gun-slaughter enablers, right then and there with all cameras rolling. And this was before we learned how much of what Abbott and other “leaders” of Texas’ law enforcement community was saying at that presser was pretty much utter bullshit.
The O’Rourke Incident instantly recalled an interview with Atlantic writer, Anne Applebaum, that I was listening to driving back from up north this past Tuesday, almost simultaneous with the murder of 19 kids and two adults at yet another America school. Applebaum was the guest on New York Times columnist Ezra Klein’s podcast and the topic was her new introduction to the classic book by Hannah Arendt, “The Origins of Totalitarianism.”
Klein is an interviewer with an exemplary talent for drilling down to the most salient issues of whatever topic he’s covering. And soon the discussion was moving into the “why” of people’s response to often crude, authoritarian leaders and their flagrantly obvious perfidies. I encourage you to listen to the entire episode for all that Klein and Applebaum get in to.
But at one point Applebaum used the phrase “muscular bravado” to explain the appeal of characters like Donald Trump.
Rogues like Trump present themselves as unfettered-by-common-rules-of-decorum warriors defending what large masses of people want defended. Or at least as “fighters” antagonizing the same people large masses want antagonized. The responses are not entirely rational. But it often translates to “heroic” in the eyes of people, as Applebaum and Arendt say, isolated by their ignorance and fearful of what they don’t understand.
A salient point here being that in 2022 USA this kind of bravado is entirely in the possession of Trumpist Republicans, and this explains much of the imbalance of energy and enthusiasm between Republicans and Democrats.
The takeaway is that politics/leadership is a profoundly emotional game. Barack Obama swung millions his way in 2008 through charisma and the belief that he had the strength and bravery/star-power to make change happen. More to the point, liberals, Democrats and the millions rightfully repulsed and horrified by the complicity of Republicans in America’s gun slaughter, erosion of Constitutional rights, degradation of our court system, indifference to climate change, wildly out of balance tax system, etc. have no real choice but to accept the power and importance of “muscular bravado” in rallying voters.
Liberals may accept this in theory, but are often embarrassed by it in reality. Bravado of a sort that appeals to largely non-ideological, non-partisan voters strikes the average policy-intense liberal as corny and suspicious, and beneath the dignity of a serious leader.
The dilemma for liberals, is that bravado works, on swing voters if not them. And in our current moment, as we reel from yet another grade school slaughter, genuinely indignant bravado could be a very effective emotional trigger for voters.
O’Rourke isn’t a newby to gun reform. He’s favored a flat-out ban on assault rifles for a while now. So I’m accepting his indignation as genuine. He’s demonstrated he’ll take the political risk that comes with his position on the issue. Just as with his “stunt” at Abbott’s press conference he’s demonstrated he’s prepared to take the blowback for getting right up in the grilles of the ghouls (Ted Cruz was standing behind Abbott) and accuse them for their complicity.
Liberals are notoriously not single-issue voters. Get a Democrat or a Democratic politician going on what needs to be done to set the country right and you invariably get a list longer than a Cheesecake Factory menu.
But 19 more dead fourth-graders presents as unequivocal a single-minded life-or-death issue as any imaginable, and O’Rourke is correctly calculating that no matter how short our attention spans, the outrage over gun-mutilated grade schoolers is something that carries deep, long-lasting moral outrage. Horror-struck outrage of a kind that can — and should — be resurrected repeatedly, with muscular bravado, for months until November and years beyond that until the cynics are driven back under their rocks.
The final point being, Republicans have no good faith response to their role in our gun insanity. With an unabashed siege on their corruption and reckless disregard for … children! … Democrats have an issue that like Joe Pesci in some Marty Scorsese mob movie they can hold Republicans’ faces to the burner with.
They need to do it.
Agreed. Muscular bravado or not, we need to do something different this time. I think that Beto’s instincts are good. He hurt their feelings? Too bad……
Maybe not kosher for your blog protocol, but I want to submit this statement by Haroun McClellan, abridged from a letter sent to Rochester Post-Bulletin:
The horror of an 18 year old kid killing a room full of children at their school cannot be put into words. As a parent, I grieve for the families affected and and am enraged both by the insanity of this act and the callousness of our politicians’ responses.
Republicans will inevitably blame mental health issues – yet they have been and continue to be the first to vote against expanding any kind of mental healthcare assistance to Americans who need it. Then they fight relentlessly against any initiative that may restrict one’s access to guns. This begs the question – are they actively trying to get us killed, or simply ok with it happening so long as it doesn’t affect them personally?
Democrats will be upset, as any human being rightfully should be. But Democrats were also upset after the murder of George Floyd, and they called for action, and then no comprehensive police reform occurred. I fear that Democrats have fallen into a pattern of using words to placate our collective conscience in the aftermath of any outrageous event that shakes our national well-being, but ultimately accomplishing nothing to prevent the next tragedy.
The issue of gun violence in the U.S. does not have a single solution. Common sense requirements for purchasing and waiting to receive a gun could have bought us time to see the signs this shooter was providing of his motives. Accessible health care could have prevented his mental health crisis that led down this path. Stronger investments in education could have steered his life in a productive direction. I refuse to accept the “good guys with guns” theory – in Uvalde, these “good guys” either failed to stop the shooter or showed up far too late. I’m not comfortable relying on them for my child’s safety.
None of our constitutional rights are without restriction, and gun ownership is the single most stupid right to choose as an exception to that. Republicans want the people to fear that our Second Amendment rights are at risk only to distract us from the First and Fourth Amendment rights that the GOP is actively and purposefully destroying. At this rate, we’ll soon have no remaining rights to voting or privacy, but by God we’ll still have all the guns we damn well please that any idiot or sociopath can just walk out of a store with.
–Mr. McClellan is the Grassroots Party’s candidate in the CD1 special election.
And now we have DeSantis, devout protector of life, pissing on the Rays for having the gall to donate money to a gun-regulation organization.
So much for corporate free speech….
Yeah, I mean didn’t the SCOTUS conservatives declare corporations people?