I have a confession: until yesterday, I didn’t know who Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) was. In fact, if you’d mentioned Alan Grayson to me before yesterday, I might have thought you’d said “Ari Graynor,” and would have responded by saying that she was good in the otherwise disappointing Nick and Nora’s Infinite Playlist.
Today, however, I know who Alan Grayson is for one reason only: he is the latest obscure politician to garner national attention for an intemperate remark. Indeed, on Tuesday night, Grayson outrageously declared from the House floor that, “Republicans want you to die quickly if you get sick.” Then, when the anticipated firestorm followed on cue, Grayson fanned the flames: rather than apologizing to his Republican colleagues, he apologized to “the dead and their families,” calling the death of those who lack health insurance a “holocaust in America.”
The rise to national fame/infamy soon assumed Palinesque proportions. Within hours, Alan Grayson’s outburst had made him the far left’s favorite son, Republicans’ sworn enemy, Arianna Huffington’s latest raison d’talk, and – most importantly – well-known. The next chapter of this strangely familiar saga seems similarly predictable: Grayson will soon be submerged in a weighty wad of online campaign contributions. And, most fortuitously for Grayson, these contributions will come at just the right time: he doesn’t have a Republican opponent yet for the 2010 elections, so his forthcoming war chest could deter a challenge.
It almost seems like Grayson had it all planned. Almost.
Of course, Grayson would hardly be the first politician to recognize that, simply put, there is no such thing as bad publicity. The problem, however, is that the Age of Hypermedia has magnified the incentives for crude political behavior substantially. Indeed, desperate politicians – particularly those expecting stiff competition in the next election – know that outrageous statements are more likely to get broadcast/blogged/tweeted/posted/forwarded than well-reasoned ones. They further know that these statements will mostly alienate those who wouldn’t have voted for them anyway, while the die-hards will back them more strongly than ever – and often with cash. Just ask Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN), whose receipts rose substantially after she suggested that then-presidential candidate Barack Obama held “anti-American views”; or Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), who reaped $1.8 million in contributions barely a week after he shouted “you lie” at President Obama during a joint-session of Congress.
The power to change this trend lies mostly with party leaders. When House Democrats pass a resolution censuring Joe Wilson – or when House Republicans attempt to do the same regarding Alan Grayson – they give outrageous behavior far more credit than it deserves, and counterproductively rally the die-hards to defend the indefensible. In turn, party leaders might be best served by letting outrageous statements from members of the opposing party speak for themselves. Most Americans don’t need an act of Congress to recognize that shouting at the President is wrong, and forgoing that act of Congress denies the die-hards their battle cry.
Moreover, party leaders need to discipline their own candidates for uncivil behavior. This isn’t just a moral issue, but a strategic one. After all, the more money that flows to a party’s most blustering candidates, the less money available for moderate ones – and the more quickly a party becomes identified by its most controversial members on account of their fundraising prowess.
21 responses so far
1 oldgal // Oct 1, 2009 at 9:40 am
I do note, however, that the outrageous statements generally get covered in this blog. I generally ignore them, but this time the irony was just too tempting.
2 EscapeVelocity // Oct 1, 2009 at 9:50 am
The New Left has pushed this type of behavior mainstream. Yet the backlash against this type of behavior seems to be aimed at the reactionary Right and not the Left who introduced this behavior into the political and cultural realm. As if the equal and opposite reaction is worse than the original purposeful action.
Instead of lamenting the Right adopting the successful tactics and the mores of the New Establishment….you should have been discouraging the New Left from delving the depths in their quest for power….which they now have….having marched through the institutions and holding all the cards in Congress and the White House these days.
Reap the wind, sow the whirlwind.
3 EscapeVelocity // Oct 1, 2009 at 9:51 am
Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
LOL!
4 sinz54 // Oct 1, 2009 at 9:53 am
If you look back on American history, you will find that past American politics were NEVER as genteel as Mr. Trager is suggesting.
I can supply numerous examples. One of the most famous being the duel between Burr and Hamilton.
5 balconesfault // Oct 1, 2009 at 9:58 am
I think that Grayson oversimplified the argument from the right.
Seems to me that I keep hearing arguments as to why we can’t move forward with providing healthcare for the 40-50 million currently who are not covered by insurance … because there are not enough physicians in our society, and that as a result providing primary care to that 40+ million will inevitably result in longer waits for the rest of us.
In other words … don’t get sick.
And if they do get sick, well, they’re headed to the emergency room, right? Our highest cost care. Yet we all know that at best the emergency rooms are just going to stabilize a patient, and they’re not going to provide long term treatments and drugs for people whose problems are going to take more than the length of a House episode to fix. So for those who get sick, and can’t be cured completely by a short hospital stay?
Well, you figure it out.
But Grayson does misunderstand the conflict here. The real message from the right is “work hard, and be talented enough, and lucky enough (eg – don’t have kids with serious congenital diseases, or come down with lukemia or melanoma, etc), and make whatever sacrifices it takes (including longer working hours away from the family, or moving to a worse neighborhood, or driving longer and longer commutes to live in a decent neighborhood, etc) to be able to work for a company which provides health insurance or to be able to carry personal health insurance – because we as a society really don’t have any common interest or responsibility in providing for healthcare. So if you do these things, and you or your family gets sick, it’s all your fault so don’t come crying for Government to fix it for you.”
And that is a coherent ideological message. But it won’t fit as well on a poster board, so Grayson went with the shortened version, that was admittedly oversimplified
6 forgetn // Oct 1, 2009 at 9:59 am
Real problem; the louder they get… on both sides, the fewer listen. Its like the Apollo missions to the moon, after the second trip nobody cared anymore, they wanted to watch sitcom re-runs. This latest Bozo will get not 15 minutes of fame but 15 seconds.
By the way in the “Age of Video” as the Daily Show keeps on reminding us, the hypocrisy of both side are too easily revealed, that the republican introduced a motion of censure against this latest idiot while bemoaning the Democrats for doing the same to Wilson is just plain amusing. It continues to destroy the institution. In fact, both the Republicans and Democrats bring shame to the institution. Pelosie and Reid should take this douche bag behind the shed and giving a solid quick in the ass!
7 EscapeVelocity // Oct 1, 2009 at 10:03 am
Pelosi let him speak.
As if Pelosi is going to stop that sort of thing. She fully endorses it. LOL!
8 balconesfault // Oct 1, 2009 at 10:21 am
By the way in the “Age of Video” as the Daily Show keeps on reminding us, the hypocrisy of both side are too easily revealed, that the republican introduced a motion of censure against this latest idiot while bemoaning the Democrats for doing the same to Wilson is just plain amusing.
For what it’s worth, the censure was seriously devalued a few years ago when Congress voted to censure MoveOn for running the Petraeus-Betray Us advertisement.
Say what you will about Move On (I support them on some things, but felt they were well past acceptable dialogue in that instance) – Congress introducing moves to censure an act of free speech by a private party is a pretty damn serious action. Perhaps in response to free speech calling for a military coup against the US government (wonder if John Perry and Barker are friends?), or for an assassination of the POTUS – but for impugning the motives of a government employee? Fine for Congressmen to criticize such speech, but with that standard we’d be having censure resolutions on a daily basis.
FWIW, the Democrats looked like they were pretty much going through the motions with the Wilson censure. Only Pelosi and Hoyer spoke, and a lot of Dem Congressmen barely paid attention during the proceeding. I think that was a necessary censure – because Wilson had broken through a previous barrier that I think everyone would agree we would like to keep in place, lest Presidential addresses turn into public shout-down spectacles … but really, can anyone argue that Grayson’s grandstanding is past normal for dialogue we’ve seen in Congress in the last decade?
I’ve seen Dems being accused of wanting America to lose the war on terror, I’ve seen Dems called baby killers for supporting abortion rights, I’ve seen in the past Republicans, and now Democrats, called out for wanting to kill old people each time they talk of limiting Medicare – and suddenly this is deserving of censure? Please.
9 EscapeVelocity // Oct 1, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Pelosi: Moron who accused GOP of wanting people to die quickly shouldn’t apologize
posted at 3:03 pm on October 1, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
A communique from the conscience of our nation, who was so troubled by Joe Wilson’s outburst that she not only made sure he was censured — after he apologized to Obama — but then proceeded to tear up publicly over the state of political discourse in America, just to let you know how much she cares.
How much? This much:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says there’s no reason for Rep. Alan Grayson to apologize for his “Die quickly” remark, since Republicans have made statements just as outrageous as his.
“If anybody’s going apologize, everybody should apologize,” Pelosi told reporters at her weekly press conference. “We are holding Democrats to a higher standard than their own members.”
She deemed the flap over Grayson’s remarks a distraction from the healthcare debate.
“Typically, Republicans would like to use this as distraction because they have no plan,” Pelosi said.
I’d call her a hypocrite and a disgrace but, let’s face it, those ships sailed long ago. Meanwhile, here’s a snippet of Teacups on CNN last night, clearly relishing his new role as lunkheaded lightning rod. He’s all about working together, don’t you know, even though (a) according to Cantor, the GOP leadership hasn’t been invited to the White House to talk health care since May and (b) calling your opponents “neanderthals” is, at best, a mighty roundabout way of getting to the road to bipartisanship. Exit schadenfreude: As of today, his House seat’s been downgraded from “leans Democratic” to “toss up.” Keep talking, Grayson.
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/01/pelosi-moron-who-accused-gop-of-wanting-people-to-die-quickly-shouldnt-apologize/
10 EscapeVelocity // Oct 1, 2009 at 3:29 pm
balconesfault, it may surprise you, but their are actually Leftwingers that want to see the US lose the War in Iraq and Afghanistan, with all their hearts.
11 balconesfault // Oct 1, 2009 at 3:53 pm
I’d call her a hypocrite and a disgrace but, let’s face it, those ships sailed long ago.
Pelosi is right. There is no reason to censure Grayson, unless we’re going to redefine Congressional etiquette to state that anyone who accuses the opposition of wanting people to die vis a vis some particular proposal will hereafter be censured. That’s a damn broad sword you’re going to be wielding – for example, does every Republican who has used the term “death panel” now get a censure?
The censure for Wilson was for doing something outside the normal bounds of behavior in Congress. Censuring Grayson would be like giving someone a ticket for driving 60 in a 55 mph zone.
balconesfault, it may surprise you, but their are actually Leftwingers that want to see the US lose the War in Iraq and Afghanistan, with all their hearts.
Yeah, you’re an idiot. That said, there are a number of people on the left who believe that Iraq and Afghanistan are unwinnable, and thus that we should quit wasting money and lives over there. But that’s kind of a fiscally conservative position, when you think of it. Maybe they really aren’t on the left, but in the center, which just looks like the left from where you sit.
12 EscapeVelocity // Oct 1, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Or maybe you are just blinkered.
13 EscapeVelocity // Oct 1, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Those Sandanistas were fantastic indigenous democratic revolutionaries too.
14 EscapeVelocity // Oct 1, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Vietnam, the list is too long.
And you blinkers are too tight.
15 balconesfault // Oct 1, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Are we calling for a censure for this?
Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.) “(the public health insurance option is) gonna kill people.”
No? Then how about this.
Ginny Brown-Waite (R-Fla.) in July: “Last week, Democrats released a health care bill which essentially said to America’s seniors: drop dead.”
As I said – Grayson is just driving 60 in the 55 zone, and the Republicans speeding past him are whining that the cops aren’t giving him a ticket.
16 anniemargret // Oct 1, 2009 at 6:02 pm
balconesfault: “As I said – Grayson is just driving 60 in the 55 zone, and the Republicans speeding past him are whining that the cops aren’t giving him a ticket.”
Spot on.
I watched the entire blip on CNN and Castellanos looked shocked; sputtered something about tort reform and transferable insurance across state lines, etc… He had no effective retort except they all jumped on Grayson because he smeared and tarred all Republicans with some strong analogy. Well, someone has got to say it! Because from what I’ve been hearing and listening and reading, Grayson about sums it up for the Republicans stance.
And to which Grayson kept coming back to the main argument- that thousands of Americans are *dying* from lack of affordable healthcare, and the Republicans are doing nothing but obstruct. Do they care? No.
Of course as you so aptly pointed out, the Republicans have been smearing and tarring with their ‘Obama is going to kill Grandma’ meme for months now and your examples above are simple testament to their ability to dish it out but can’t take it.
I hear Grayson now has a following. Why? Because thousands are deeply chagrined about the state of healthcare costs, directly impacting them and their families, and because to most Democrats – the idea that Americans would *die* in this country from something like this is too appalling to behold.
Republicans might be winning the battle over healthcare reform right now with their exaggerations and fear-mongering, but the ultimate war will not be won. Americans ARE paying attention, and one thing’s for sure – it is not the GOP who has taken the reins here on this serious issue, no way, no how. And come 2012, the ads will remind the voters just who cared enough to work hard at it – and who didn’t.
17 greg_barton // Oct 1, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Republicans want to censure Grayson for having an opinion, pure and simple.
Wilson was censured for breaking the rules of the House, pure and simple.
If you don’t get that, you’re simple, but not pure.
18 Links for the day – Kevin Burke // Oct 2, 2009 at 3:21 am
[...] Why the 24-hour media cycle is rewarding outrageous, dumb comments by politicians. [...]
19 sinz54 // Oct 2, 2009 at 10:35 am
anniemargaret:
Oh, brother.
The Dems have a 60 vote, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. If the Dems had their act together, they could railroad anything through the Congress they wished. That they have not done so is the fault of the Dem Party and the Dem leadership. (Did LBJ have this problem with Medicare and Medicaid?)
Even liberal blogs like DailyKOS and FireDogLake are saying that now. (Go there and see for yourself)
The real reason why the Dems can’t get their act together is that in the Senate, all states have equal weight. And moderate and conservative states don’t want to pass a Pelosi-style liberal health care bill.
The Dems, in their pursuit of power, ran center-right Dems candidates in conservative districts and states. It worked. Enough center-right Dems won to give the Dems a big majority in Congress. But now the shoe is on the other foot. Their conservative constituents of these center-right Dem politicians are demanding that these Dem representatives and senators represent THEM, not the liberals of San Francisco. These voters are demanding that their new Dem representatives and senators really act center-right.
For example, Blanche Lincoln is in a very tough fight for re-election in Arkansas. To fend off a strong GOP challenger in 2010, she has had to move further and further to the right.
http://www.politico.com/livepulse/1009/Facing_tough_reelection_Lincoln_sides_with_GOP.html
20 balconesfault // Oct 2, 2009 at 3:47 pm
If the Dems had their act together, they could railroad anything through the Congress they wished. That they have not done so is the fault of the Dem Party and the Dem leadership.
Yep – blame people like Max Baucus for thinking that if they took enough time on working directly with Republicans, they might actually find some level of bipartisan consensus. It seems that Dems have to discover over and over that Republicans have taken to heart Grover Norquist’s adage – “Bipartisanship is another name for date rape.”
Medicare? The Dems didn’t have 60 Democratic votes for Medicare, either. They only had 57, with 7 Dems opposed. However, 13 of 32 Republican senators voted in favor of passing Medicare. It was a different day. Although it’s worth noting that it wasn’t until 4+ years after Kennedy proposed Medicare that the bill finally passed.
Blanche Lincoln? Recent polling indicates that 55% of Arkansans favor a public option – 38% oppose it. In fact, 22% of Arkansas Republicans favor the public option (along with 56% of independents).
If Blanche Lincoln is worrying about the 2010 election, she’s worrying more about who’s going to fill her campaign coffers than what her constituency really wants.
21 MNBlue // Oct 5, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Michele Bachmann is a disgrace to the USA, MN, and the 6th. If you’re interested in getting rid of Bachmann, support democratic candidate Dr. Maureen Reed! You can learn more about Maureen, and donate, at:
http://maureenreedforcongress.com/
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maureen_Reed
You must log in to post a comment.