August 30, 2023
by Martin Davis
FOUNDER AND EDITOR
Welcome to the new Senate District 27, where the run to November’s election is shaping up like a first-rate horror movie, thanks to the ads.
Consider the one that ran in the online edition of the Washington Post this week. It showed Joel Griffin standing against a background lit with an ominous blue hue, straight from a scene in The Ring movie series (and we aren’t talking about the Hobbit.)
Below him in all-cap letters that are white and red is this caption:
STOP JOEL GRIFFIN’S EXTREME AGENDA FOR OUR SCHOOLS
It goes on to suggest that Griffin would unleash a nightmare on unsuspecting children should he defeat Tara Durant (R) for the seat.
Griffin wants parents kept in the dark on what is happening in their children’s schools.
Griffin sides with union bosses over parents
One can almost hear the voiceover from the remake of The Fly – “Be afraid. Be very afraid.”
Here’s the thing, however.
The ad hardly shocks. So use to the over-the-top hyperbole we’ve become that we hardly even stop to think about what these ads are conveying, and how they’re shaping our public discourse. Let’s explore.
(Editor’s note: We’ve not seen similar ads aimed at Tara Durant – yet. Based on the ads flying around during the race for the 7th Congressional seat in 2022, however, we’re sure those ads are just around the corner.)
Not Trying to Hide It
There are certainly people who will disagree with Griffin’s policy positions – even Democrats who will support him will surely quibble with details of his platform.
But is he really this frightening? Does he really want to to keep parents “in the dark” and will he side with “union bosses over parents”?
The makers of this ad source their claims. According to the ad, it’s all in the responses to a Blue Virginia questionnaire that Griffin answered.
Spend a few moments reading that questionnaire and Griffin’s answers, however, and it becomes apparent there’s little, if any, real evidence to support the ad’s claims.
On the charge of keeping parents in the dark, there is no place in his responses where Griffin says that. The closest he comes is this line:
… I will do everything within my power to ensure that LGBTQ+ students feel safe and protected in public school environments. No-one in the commonwealth deserves to feel any less dignity than anyone else.
This is a far cry from keeping parents in the dark. It’s rather a response to the Youngkin Administration’s new “model policies” that would force teachers to out students before they themselves are ready to speak with their families about their sexual orientation or gender identity.
The epidemic of families that turn out young adults wrestling with such issues makes clear that these students often have a right to be concerned and uncomfortable with telling their families.
In an ideal world, parents and children could easily talk about these issues and the youth would feel safe. This simply isn’t reality for too many students, however. (For more on this, see research out of the University of Chicago’s Chapin Hall.)
How the schools should handle this tricky situation is certainly worthy of robust public debate. But there’s a yawning gap between Youngkin’s position on outing any student who says something to a teacher about their sexual identity, and keeping parents totally in the dark on such issues.
Nothing in Griffin’s position would suggest that he would advocate keeping parents uninformed. Rather, he is advocating that schools be safe-havens for students who need one, and that these same students deserve the same level of respect as every other student. These are hardly radical ideas.
This ad, however, makes a mockery of the ground between the two extremes, and the need for more-serious debate about this complex topic.
Now for the second charge that Griffin favors union bosses over parents. There are only two other places where Griffin discusses education in this questionnaire. Let’s look at what he said:
Third, I will fight to strengthen and invest in our schools. Our children are the future of our community, and we need to ensure that they have access to the best possible education. That means investing in our schools, our teachers, and our students. And as someone who grew up spending my weekends and summers in libraries because my parents couldn’t afford childcare, I will fight to protect our libraries from attacks from extremist Republicans.
As the husband of a public school teacher, and the father of two girls who attended public schools, I know firsthand that our teachers, schools, and students are all under attack by a false flag culture war being perpetuated by Governor Youngkin and his MAGA Republican cronies to scare voters and score political points. As the next State Senator from District 27, I will be a fervent advocate for fully funding and increasing funding to our public schools and work with labor such as the NEA to ensure that our teachers have all the resources they need to succeed. Moreover, we need to empower teachers to set standards so that we can quell the manufactured crisis that is Critical Race Theory.
Griffin covers a lot of ground here, and his language gets inflammatory at times. “False flag culture war” and “cronies” aren’t exactly terms that will make debate in the public square any easier.
But nothing here suggests he would favor “union bosses” over parents.
To begin, teacher organizations in Spotsylvania, Stafford, and Fredericksburg, which are in the 27th, don’t have collective bargaining power. They’re not true unions.
Then there’s the reality that Griffin himself never once juxtaposes unions and parents. Rather, he talks about partnering with the NEA to ensure that schools, teachers, and students have what the need to be successful.
If we were using the Washington Post’s Pinocchio scale to rate the veracity of this ad’s claims, we’d probably award the ad 4 Pinocchios or the dreaded Geppetto Checkmark.
We’ll give the ad credit, however, for at least pointing to a source – even if they mangled it. At least they’re not hiding what they’re trying to do.
Don’t Blame Durant
The other thing to notice about this ad is who produced it.
Paid for by Virginia Federation for Children PAC. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
Trying to learn who this PAC is made up of, and where the money they have to fund such attack ads comes from, is no easy task.
A trip to VFCPAC’s website yields a graphic and nothing else.
Transparency USA has a bit more info, including cash on hand, top funders, and top payees.
The top donor is American Federation for Children Federal which, according to SourceWatch, is:
a conservative 501(c)(4) dark money group that promotes the school privatization agenda via the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and other avenues. It is the 501(c)(4) arm of the 501(c)(3) non-profit group the Alliance for School Choice.[1] The group was organized and is funded by the billionaire DeVos family, who are the heirs to the Amway fortune.[2] Former Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Scott Jensen, who was charged with multiple crimes stemming from abuse of his office, is on staff at AFC as Senior Advisor to its Government Affairs Team.
Why does any of this matter?
Because it is one of many dark-money groups pushing a national agenda by spending lavishly in races like the 27th in Virginia, where Youngkin has made establishing charter schools and dismantling public schools as we know them a priority of his administration.
The point of this ad is not to inform voters about the candidates. Or educate voters about the issues. It’s to twist anything the makers can find to paint a candidate negatively so that the funder can advance an agenda.
As the campaign heats up, expect to see many, many more of these ads.
Griffin’s campaign manager Jeremy Levinson tells the Advance via email:
It’s unfortunate that Durant and her allies have to resort to falsities to attempt to paint a negative portrait of Joel Griffin.
The problem is, however, that Durant – in all likelihood – had nothing to do with this ad. No more than Griffin will have anything to do with the attack ads sure to be coming that unfairly criticize Durant. (The Advance will be watching for these.)
How to Handle Dark-money-funded Attack Ads
The pervasiveness of these type of attack ads leads one to ask – do they really work?
A 2013 article in Scientific American suggests that that question is very much up for debate.
A comprehensive literature analysis published in 2007 in the Journal of Politics examined the effects of political ads. The authors reported that negative ads tended to be more memorable than positive ones but that they did not affect voter choice. People were no less likely to turn out to the polls or to decide against voting for a candidate who was attacked in an ad.
More recently, a report published in YaleNews supports these findings.
“There’s an idea that a really good ad, or one delivered in just the right context to a targeted audience, can influence voters, but we found that political ads have consistently small persuasive effects across a range of characteristics,” said Coppock, an assistant professor of political science in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. “Positive ads work no better than attack ads. Republicans, Democrats, and independents respond to ads similarly. Ads aired in battleground states aren’t substantially more effective than those broadcast in non-swing states.”
Whether such ads work will continue to be debated in academia. But on the ground, it does seem clear that these ads go a long way toward framing how we talk about issues.
The success of Younkin’s intellectually flaccid “parents rights” argument, for example, shows the power of a phrase to shape elections.
In Spotsylvania, the parents’ right mantra has been used by the conservative majority on the school board to shut down any dissent to any thought or idea that contradicts what they are promoting. This despite the obvious contradictions in what they’re doing.
What about the rights of parents who want their children to read books that Jen Peterson wants banned? Are ok with their children feeling safe talking to their teachers before they talk to them about a sensitive matter? Want their children exposed to ideas that will make them uncomfortable?
Repeatedly, the answer implied by the Spotsy School Board majority in their refusing to address the issue is, “We don’t care about those parents’ rights.”
When simple memes cooked up to promote an agenda take hold, deep thought and critical public-square debate suffers.
How can we handle this? Two ideas.
When candidates become aware of these ads, they should publicly repudiate them. To be effective, both candidates much agree to do this. It may hurt them with the red-meat bases, but it would go a long way toward softening our public discourse. Will Durant and Griffin agree to do this?
Voters should stop allowing blatantly false campaign ads to define the public debate. Even if ads don’t ultimately affect votes, they almost certainly affect the public discourse. And in no wise is this influence a good one for the body politic.
Two simple ideas that, executed properly, would greatly slow the excess money spent on these campaigns.
How much? Though hard estimates are difficult to come by, the Advance has been told by people who track such matters that this race will cost between $3 million and $7 million to win.
That’s a mindnumbing sum for a state senate seat.
That dark money will be accounting for a significant portion of that spending should cause voters alarm.
And it should cause both them and candidates to take responsibility for slowing this money’s influence.
Allowing such ads to continue influencing local elections will only lead to one thing – a horror show worse than the one we’ve been watching in Spotsylvania for the past two years.
Support Local Journalism
The FXBG Advance is off and running, but we can’t do this without your help. You can support local journalism here in Fredericksburg by donating $8 a month. Your dollars will go toward hiring journalists so that we can broaden our reach and strengthen our coverage.
The content is now, and will continue to be, free.
Help us bring aboard the journalists who will elevate our coverage and strengthen the community we all share.
Consider joining for $8 monthly, $80 yearly, or becoming a supporting member for $200 or a Founding Member for $500.
Thank you for reading and supporting FXBG Advance.
-Martin Davis, Editor
Nice to see where the hidden money is coming from and why, but still not a fan of the equivalency rationalization.
Where Durant gets a pass. With her actual ads showing her as the fawning acolyte of Youngkin, aka Tammy Wynette standing by her man; and Youngkin spending such a large part of his “governorship” once he realized the 2024 cycle wasn’t going to be his shot (unless the 14th Amendment opens up the Republican cult’s national nomination process) – in courting those millions of national hyper-partisan dollars to define state races on national partisanship – it’s hard to act like her hands are clean.
The same classy vision that gave us Amway Cadillacs and marginal products in the 60s and 70s now gets to define education in 21st century Virginia?
Pass, thanks.
I understand why Ms Durant and Youngkin would want to see so much dust kicked up, and so much distraction. Because the question in my mind is why those in Falmouth who are now set to begin suffering a methadone clinic next to a preexisting daycare due to her negligence and inattentiveness as their representative on the Board of Supervisors, would want to reward her by kicking her up to the Senate?
Mr Griffin seems like a plain-speaking straight shooter rather than anyone’s yes-man (or woman). I’d say we can use more like him and hope you will join me in voting for him this November. No matter what Betsy Davos or some billionaire from Texas’s money says.
Thank you for a thoughtful comment. My focus here in this piece is dark money, and how it’s being used in this particular piece. How candidates frame themselves (Durant you describe quite well; Griffin focusing on his military service and business experience) is another topic for another day. Thanks for reading the Advance!
“Dark money” has always scared me, no matter where it’s from or who receives it.
Though it was your main topic, something else you wrote attracted my attention. You said that the attitude of Jen Peterson, her supporters and the spotsy school board majority is “We don’t care about those parents’ rights.” My experience with them has been much simpler: “You’re wrong.” A great knee-jerk response to everything.
Of course, that’s not what equivalency or rationalization mean in practice. Equivalency is the comparison of like things; equivocation (which I think is what you are trying to express) is the attempt to use ambiguity to make unlike things similar. Rationalization is a means of excusing bad behavior.
Unfortunately, most people rationalize to excuse their bad behavior by pointing to the bad behavior of others. Much of what you have written here achieves precisely this. That’s how “our guys” become plain speaking straight shooters and “their guys” become negligent and inattentive (sic).
Comparing Durant to a beaten wife is lurid in the extreme. Blaming Durant for the opioid crisis in toto seems rather extreme (one heck of a hobby). Hating Youngkin so much you are willing to not only punch through Tara Durant in order to get to him? That’s depressing…
This mentality is what contributes to the way politics is broken today. Far easier to hate your opposition than to actually discuss issues in a competent way. Far easier to allow dark money to trigger your amygdala and get you to believe an emotional response as true rather than work based off getting to the heart of a matter. Political consultants use this trick all the time on low-IQ and low-EQ voters — Democrats and Republicans alike. If I can get you to have an emotional response, then I don’t have to worry about a reasonable one — you’ll defend your emotional response to the hypothetical as true regardless as to the facts of the case being rearranged to explain how things really are.
That’s how and why negative campaigning works.
Case in point? I have just explained how political advertising works to trigger an emotional response by arranging facts just-so rather than driving towards solutions. I have corrected what rationalization is and shown how you have engaged in it yourself (politely, I hope). What’s more, I have corrected your definition of equivalency and demonstrated how equivocation works. I doubt it will be persuasive in the slightest; in fact, I suspect that, now seeing the psychology behind negative attack ads, it will simply be fuel for you (and others) to engage in like-minded attacks against other people… not because it is right or wrong, but because most people’s idea of the highest good is “I want what I want” and to hell with truth, solutions, facts, ideas, opinions, other human beings, etc.
I’d love to be wrong.
Naw, think I meant what I said.
In that the piece was trying to make Durant and Griffin seem equivalent, when in fact – the one you’re judging by what has occurred, and the other – you’re judging by what might occur.
Specifically, this comment from the original article:
“The problem is, however, that Durant – in all likelihood – had nothing to do with this ad. No more than Griffin will have anything to do with the attack ads sure to be coming that unfairly criticize Durant. (The Advance will be watching for these.)”
I dunno. You want to parse semantics to win a debate and then fill the air with chaff to hide the wheat – have at it.
But Joe Biden or AOC or George Soros ain’t holding hootenannies in Cville, traveling to Texas, or getting money from billionaire dilletantes in Michigan to throw into state Senate races in Virginia.
Youngkin is.
Durant is not only benefiting from that money – to what extent it is a benefit, she does seem to have made that association with him a central part of her campaign – hence the signs with them together – throughout the district. Yet Mr Davis seems to want to paint them with the same brush. One for what has occurred, the other for what may occur. Reminds me more of Minority Report than an impartial judgement based upon facts.
Now I’m not sure what tactic one would use to describe a comment that such advertising reminds me of a Tammy Wynette song means I am calling her a beaten wife (does Youngkin beat her? Do tell.)
Would it be a strawman argument, perhaps?
Is that the only thing you think of when you hear the title of a Tammy Wynette song? I’m wondering more about what that says about you, if that is the case, rather than what it says about me, Tammy, or Tara. But anyhoo.
Or what you would call it when someone challenging a factual occurrence – that a methadone clinic is likely going to be allowed to open next to an already existing daycare because either
a: The sitting Board of Supervisors member for that district (Ms Durant) wanted it to occur
b: The sitting Board of Supervisors member for that district (Ms Durant) was not aware of it occurring though it is a valid question if she should have been.
Which brings up valid questions of which is the case. And if she was not aware, why not?
Was it because of being so focused on her next job that she didn’t spend sufficient time doing the one she had? (You know, sorta like Youngkin?)
And if that’s the case, and now Falmouth residents will suffer as a result – why she should be rewarded for such inattentiveness – no matter how much 1% money is flooding the air waves?
Now how asking those hard, but important, questions regarding an issue that is directly impacting people in the community she already represents – as well as those she would represent can be conflated into an unjust attack on a poor innocent waif that can only be due to a hatred of Youngkin, rather than it being an issue of expecting a public official to be accountable for their actions and/or inactions – well – I’m sure a learned person can find a term for that – but it still won’t change what is happening on the ground.
No one is accusing her of being a member of the Sackler family. But the families who have children at Bright Beginnings Daycare are going to have to make some hard choices regarding what they do with their children as a result of her actions, not the Sackler’s.
At a time when funding for childcare is about to run out, but that’s got more due to with all of the Republican party’s indifference to investing in children rather than billionaires, not just Ms. Durant’s.
And BTW – I noted in all of the words and offense you provided, you still didn’t answer the questions regarding her actions. Indeed, I can see why the publication you write for is named the Republican Standards.
FWIW, you opine that I am excusing my own bad behavior (?) by blaming her. And that is what’s wrong with politics today.
I’d say it’s more due to an atmosphere where corporations are people while children in cages are not, money is free speech, and slightly less than 1/2 of the electorate believes that morality is limited by only what can be proven against you in a court of law, as they blindly support a man with almost 100 felony charges with probable cause found in 4 different venues, both state and federal – without question or limit rather than looking for people who hold themselves to a higher standard.
Which again, is why I tend to support those who do speak plainly and stand up for principles rather than those who seem more suit than substance. How’d the kids used to get taught?
Character counts. Not characters. And I suspect you’re wrong more often than you realize. Good day to you as well.
Oh, sorry.
Sir.
I too want to be polite…..
Your side good. Their side bad.
Got it.
What can I say?
Facts matter.
Trying to pretend everyone is the same and we should never make a judgement based upon facts – believe it or not, used to be something conservatives were against.
Really, they still are; as in I consider myself one of the most conservative people I know. It’s one of many positions which I admittedly find myself surprised to have to defend now days.
Never thought there would be a time when I would have to explain why as an American, I am against torturing children as a government policy to control their parents. Or as a Christian, or really, as a human being.
Yet here we are.
With folks like Ken Cuccinelli or Jeff Sessions explaining that it’s just good, clean fun – while I look on in disgust.
That running up debt on my children and grandchildren to give billionaires welfare was and is obscene.
Now don’t get me wrong, I totally get reducing the corporate rate so we could compete with folks like Ireland. It was one of the few things Trump did that I agree with.
And I think Biden should get commended for pushing to get so many of the OECD countries to meet that target. But even folks like Jaime Dimon, who also agreed with the reduction – expected there to be a concurrent raise in revenue elsewhere rather than placing it on a credit card in a time of plenty.
And yes, as someone who spent years dealing with criminals, and supervising people who wore a badge, as someone who swore an oath to uphold the law, and who buried good friends and mentors who died while serving; like Joel Griffin, I got a problem not only with someone who betrays that trust for his own gain – resulting in over 140 good men and women being beaten within an inch of their lives – and also the 1st violence tinged transfer of power in the history of this country –
I also got a big problem with the people who continue to this day to look the other way and either pretend like it didn’t happen, pretend it wasn’t your party that did it, pretend it was justified, or that it wasn’t that bad and we should all just move on, because there are good people on both sides of a fascist, oligarchal, personality cult dictatorship. You know, as long as Wall Street’s happy.
Again, never thought being against beating law enforcement to death or upholding the United States Constitution were “leftist”, “Communist”, or wrong things. Or that any American would consider otherwise. That was a shock. But I’ll still stand for those things, even if you don’t. Same as I’ve done before. Right’s right, wrong’s, wrong. Sometimes…the important times, it really is that’s simple.
Now I’ll admit I am a simple man. Certainly and obviously not as learned as yourself. I got as much of my education from reading Louis L’Amour novels, watching John Wayne films, or being around both men and women to whom principles and their word mattered – more than anything else.
So when I see a party built upon a cult of lies, no amount of book learning nor semantics is going to make me ignore that. Again, facts matter. Truth matters.
Sometimes, it really is that simple.
You’re a party without a platform, because the party is your platform.
You may not believe this, but I used to respect the Republican party. To give you an idea, I’ve voted in every election since 1980, and my choice for President won every time until 2016.
My views on immigration aligned with those expressed by Ronald Reagan and HW Bush in their 1980 debate regarding the subject. They still do. And yet now I am considered a leftist for holding such views. I ain’t moved an inch. So who did?
And my most difficult decision for President was the race in 2008 between McCain and Obama. I admired McCain’s principles and experience, yet was concerned about his age.
The factor I decided would make up my mind was whether McCain reached across the aisle to Liebermann, or choose Palin. I’m sorry, if you’re so dumb you don’t realize that Africa is a continent and not a country, you can’t have my nuclear codes if an old guy like McCain dies.
Joke was on all of us 8 years later, right?
But I did find it telling that McCain himself later recognized his choice of Palin as a moral failure. He should have trusted his heart rather than the pundits.
On and on.
Wealth inequality is worse than the time of the robber barons. China now out does us on longevity. We have an existential crisis regarding climate which we ignore at our children’s peril. We are at best middle of the road vs OECD regarding most metrics – healthcare, civil liberties, education.
But hey, we got more guns per capita than anybody. More of our children and citizens incarcerated than anybody. We shoot more of each other than anybody. And yet more of our populace believe in angels than science.
Etc.
So, based upon facts, results, return on investment, observable actions, body of work – things which again – used to be conservative metrics (and still are for me) – yeah – Dems good – Reps bad.
Really wish it weren’t so.
But you’re currently looking to nominate someone whom the Constitution forbids to be President due to his earlier actions – which if it was good enough to keep Robert E Lee off of the ballot, is certainly good enough to keep a perv, grifting, slumlord from Queens off of the same, who again – has had probable cause for over 90 felony charges in 4 different venues, has been found liable for sexual assault, bragged on tape to sexual assault regularly, has had to settle with porn stars, ripped off customers, had over 30000 public lies in 4 year period, etc. – and you want to act like none of that matters.
At the same time you present yourselves as the defenders of truth, justice, and the American way.
Now, am I happy that is what’s happening today?
No, not really.
But I’d say a lot of it has to do with the power that the rich have gained thru stacking courts with theocrats who promise one thing to get there, then do another when they do. With the same judges telling us that they are lords and will do as they please. As we suffer thru things like Heller, Citizen’s United, etc.
So yeah, when I see gadfly Youngkin taking advantage of that system and then Ms Durant riding his coattails – presenting themselves as zealot light as compared to the likes of Matt Strickland – which means their basic principle is not pro-life or pro-business or pro-ignorance – but only enough of those things as they can be as still stay in power, then I have concerns.
If the only principle you have is to tell people what they want to hear, and don’t dare expect a hard answer or plain speaking – then I’m not a fan. Didn’t like it with Hillary, don’t care for it with Youngkin, looks like more of the same with Durant. I see very little substance beyond a Tammy Wynette photo op.
Based on all that, far as I can tell – the desire for power is the only remaining principle the Republican party will not forswear. And why I do not see myself voting for it, ever again.
Doubt I’ll live long enough to see it change, and know I won’t support anyone who didn’t have the guts to stand up when it mattered. When Liz Cheney comes back to power or Hutchinson or Kemp becomes a real choice, give me a call.
But even then, the core rot of the Republican ethos will still remain. You are a party of grasshoppers, living only for today.
Like I said, facts matter.
Seems like Mr Griffin gets that. While Ms Durant just provides more of the same old, same old. All hat, no cattle.
So he gets my vote. Y’all a long way from being the party of Linwood Holton or John Warner. You want to cover your ears and yell “lalalalala..” over and over when somebody mentions it?
That’s your right. I believe in freedom of religion. Even for cults.
Just don’t expect me to do it with you. I’m not good at pretend.
Seems like the majority of Americans feel the seem way, when they think about it. That’s why we have a President Biden, rather than Trump – even with the edge yall get with the Electoral College.
But honestly, if I were the only one left in this country who believed in those things – I’d still believe in them. Win, lose, or draw.
Like I said, Mr Griffin seems to feel the same way. So yeah, as a grown man, I feel comfortable making a value judgement based upon that.
Like I said, I’m a conservative, and facts matter.
Now you got it?
Sir.
Moving on.
And voting for Griffin. As I hope all reading will join me. I think he can do better. To all those who might, for whatever reason, still be reading this thread, and who can do so with open minds, check out the facts and make your own decision on whether things like principle, character, oaths, and service mean anything to you.
Voting for him might not save the world, but its something we can do in our part of the world. Take care.
Glad you could get all of that off of your chest. Whew!!!
Yeah, it did feel good to remind folks that not everyone has forgotten that y’all attempted to overthrow the government.
And you’ve never either accepted responsibility for it, as a party – nor given any indication that you won’t do it again. This time with more experience to work with.
The other day, I watched your second string meekly look across the room to decide which way the wind was blowing on the debate floor, then 6 out of 8 of them raised their hands to say they would let it all happen again if it will keep them relevant.
While you try to pretend the most important thing we’ve got to worry about is which books you can ban so Timmy doesn’t learn before college why Johnny has two Daddies.
I realize that there will always be folks like Mr Davis that again – can rationalize such things. Minimize it. “Move on” for the sake of consensus. Act like everybody does it.
I’ve read Dwayne Yancey for years. Trust me, I’m familiar with the concept.
Or pretend there’s no there, there. Right up until the blood starts flowing, then they act all surprised about it. When what all y’all are doing is exactly what you said you would do.
When I read such stuff, I always feel like Charles Durning’s character in Oh Brother, Where Art Thou – while listening to his “brain trust” going on about his electoral chances. I think the term for the feeling is incredulous, but please tell me if I’ve gotten it wrong.
Please, always feel ready to rep-splain to me what I really meant when I write something. I find it enlightening to the highest degree.
But it still doesn’t change the fact that right is right, and wrong is wrong.
No matter how much Amway money Betsy Davos spends to keep us from thinking about it.
Why do you hate us so much? Serious question.
My, you are a slippery one, aren’t you?
The alternative question.
Hadn’t seen that one in a while. Had to look it up. In that no matter how you answer the question, you are conceding a given.
Sorta like when Groucho Marx raises his eyebrows and asks the man on TV, “So, have you stopped beating your wife?!?”
To clarify – without conceding, I no more hate you than I hate high voltage power lines. I’m merely being realistic and acknowledging dangers and listing results and facts.
One of the sadder things I’ve had to realize in recent years, is that if I have to explain to you why torturing children to coerce their parents is wrong, I can’t.
Not because it isn’t wrong, on every level -but if you do not have the capability to recognize that it is a given – no matter how poor the parents, no matter whether someone on Fox told you to hate them, no matter how much someone like Trump or Tucker Carlson tells you it’s for their own good as well as ours – then there is no amount of explanation from me that will get you to deny the rationalization that you’ve made to accept such actions.
Because admitting it would mean lowering your own estimation of yourself. It’s that unwillingness to admit error that grifters and manipulators depend upon.
I know it’s a tired meme, but I honestly don’t know of one more apt – but I suppose it is the same process that allowed Germans to rationalize sending Jews to the gas chambers, eugenics, slavery, and a whole lot of the nasty things that have happened in history. Different targets, same process.
There’s no biological difference between the Germans born in 1946 and those committing mass murder in the 1940’s, so there must have been a difference in their belief system that made the ones at the least – willing to accept such atrocities rather than stand against them. And for others, made them active participants.
Hitler was an ethical man. More so than Donald Trump. Hitler was a brave man. Winning the Iron Cross twice, not getting Daddy to write him a doctor’s note to get out of serving.
But Hitler and a lot more folks believed themselves the Übermensch.
So it had to be some “other” that was the cause of their downfall.
All it takes is that one faulty rationalization – for individuals, for societys – and you really DO feel like you are totally within your rights to demand an election do over – in this case, because you don’t want to quit being a minority that rules. How much of that is built upon pent up racism after 8 years with a President many of you considered beneath you, will leave for the historians to figure out. But I didn’t notice the klan planning parades when Obama or Biden won…
And yes, I am aware that the left is just as capable of creating demagogues – but Huey Long ain’t the problem now days – Donald Trump is.
So it don’t make a lot of sense to spend so much time worrying that somehow 80 y/o Joe Biden is going to suddenly get the gift of gab, become rich and famous, and then create a cult of personality that will wreak cruelty and havoc across the nation and the world – when y’all got a perfectly good one that is truly the elephant in the room – in more ways than one.
You’re uncomfortable talking about such things? Yeah, I expect you would be. But it don’t change the reality of it existing.
So while you try to explain it away with either scholarly semantics, and if that doesn’t work – as being due to emotional misunderstanding of what great folk you really are – I’m just listing facts.
Because I think they matter.
Republicans who have the guts to say that they are more loyal to the Constitution than someone who was and is looking to overthrow it? I can work with them. I’ll still have hard questions about their ethos, because, honestly – its not working and there are too many people being left behind and by most objective measurements regarding quality of life, return on investment – etc. – the math simply isn’t working. Again, facts matter. And stasis just for the sake of fear, or to protect special interest groups rather than having honest accounting and capitalism – does our society no good in the long run.
So a Mitt Romney, Brian Kemp, someone like that? I can work with them. I may not agree with them, but their 1st loyalty appears to be to the country and all of it’s people, not just your cult.
So if they want to have a conversation and engage in a good faith effort for resolution of problems – I can work with that.
But when I see the same megalomaniac that suffered us through 4 years of terror, cruelty, and ignorance wanting to rev up for the final curtain like Gaius Marius preparing for the 7th Consulship – while again – no one else in your party is going to get nominated as long as he’s there – and any Republican who stands against him can write off any loyalty from the portion of your party that is his cult – which is why 6 out of 8 of your candidates to lead the free world raised their hand and bent their knee the other night – hardly a profile in courage – but we know that doesn’t get it done in klanland, does it?
It was a smart move, just not a moral move. But when I see that, I do see a danger as ominous as a live 220 volt line exposed and arcing on a playground full of children in a rainstorm.
So FWIW, it’s not hatred. But it is reality. You almost succeeded the 1st time. If one of those cops who was getting beaten down had fired back – that would have given Trump the justification to use the Insurrection Act. With folks like Flynn in charge – no telling how that would have worked out. But I think we came a lot closer to yall succeeding than any of us want to admit.
So while you want to pretend the biggest problems we got is who’s coming across the border – when next week they’ll be working in your factory or on your construction site – child or adult. Or whether a teacher dares to let all of his students know that they are welcome (you know, like Jesus would do) – I’d say we got a bigger problem.
And until yall are willing to make it clear that your loyalty is more to our country than your cult and its leader who remains your leader despite the overwhelming evidence of his unfitness – I’d say that is the biggest problem we got. I will be glad when it isn’t, though I’m not sure when that will be.
I didn’t believe it in 2016. Nothing has happened in the 7 years since to make me believe anything has changed.
And in this case – Youngkin has shown no more backbone than DeSantis, and seems more than happy to maintain the status quo as he takes endorsements from the rich in return for undue influence in the minute affairs of the state of Virginia – while Durant seems to be more of the same – all fluff and no substance.
With folks like you coming her rescue like a knight in shining armor when anyone dare expect her to answer a question about her actions or inactions that would be the normal expectation and fair game for a politician.
Sounds to me like YOU don’t feel that she is capable of answering for herself or giving an adequate accounting for her actions and/or inactions in that you feel there is a need for you to talk of anything else – to make any dismissive comments or clever questions rather than again – explaining the issue.
In that, from what I’ve seen both from her and from your efforts – I suspect we are in more agreement than you care to admit. Why that is so, I’ll leave to you.
Good day. Time for football.
I wish we could get back to the days of good strong, healthy debates. Where you got to vote for a candidate, you believed in Not for the candidate that scared to the least. Party lines are changing yet again the GOP is not the GOP it once was and the same goes for the Democratic Party. Neither side has a true local voice who stands up against the cowardly behaviors. Run real campaign ads, not one candidate has stated any policies or how they will go about achieving their objectives. It’s a sad time for Virginia voters to not have much to be excited for in November.