Tags
What do you think of using the term “Repug”? Some think Republicans deserve that and a few more tons of invective. Others wince at the thought that we’re trying to out-Coulter Ann Coulter.
Those of us who blog on this site sort of accidentally got an e-mail conversation going about that topic recently. It grew out of a discussion about an article by Joe Wilson that criticized Barack Obama for being too nice to John McCain when McCain openly insulted him. Jeannette Ward, writing about Wilson’s article, happened to use, as she often does, the term “Repug”. (I include her entire e-mail because she had some interesting observations on wimpiness):
I’ve been reading the discussion regarding who, Clinton or Obama, might better withstand and oppose attacks from the Repugs in the fall. Everyone keeps using terms like “fight back”, etc., as though discussing a prize fight or other sporting event. I guess it’s just our culture (even Democrats) to think in terms of fighting, conquering, dominating.
I like to point out that dominance or defending oneself does not always involve aggression or fighting. If you are a big enough dog, all you have to do is calmly regard your “attacker” with bemusement as if to express “do you believe this twit?”. I have seen dogs do this many times for example when a scrappy little toy stud barkingly challenges a Great Dane who could gobble him down in one bite. The Dane doesn’t bark back or go after the toy, he just looks at him like the toy has lost his mind.
I think Reagan intended to convey this type of dominance when he famously said “There you go again…” with a big confident smile. Kerry didn’t flunk because they attacked him and he didn’t fight back. He flunked because he was so obviously a wimp who wanted the job so badly that he couldn’t bring himself to do anything because it might be wrong and cost him the election. Everything about him was wimpy: his body language, the content of his speech, his manner of speaking, etc. I held my nose and voted for him, but consider: who wants a wimp for President?
On the other hand a hyper-reactive attack dog is not very attractive either and doesn’t really project the image of the rational, self-confident, together kind of a person that many would imagine a leader to be.
Just my thoughts on the utility of political conflict.
After a couple of other people commented on the meat of Jeannette’s observation, BillinMidMO wrote:
I agree with Jeanette….but not with her use of the term “Repug” . I see this term a lot in Dem/left listservs and blogs and it always makes me wince. I believe it serves no purpose other than to set up confrontation at a time when many Republicans are searching for a better way…recognising what they have put the nation through in the last 7 years. Fight for progressive principles…yes…leave the name calling aside. They are Republicans; there are many who really do have common cause with Democrats on many issues and can be swayed to vote Democratic as long as they feel welcome.
My 2 cents.
Perhaps some of the people who responded to Bill will copy those responses in the comments section here. That’s up to them. But whether they do or not, you may have an opinion to offer on the use of “Repug.”
Politics is a tough business for tough people.
I understand it when people recoil from the smash mouth aspect of our modern political reality. I really do. Just don’t expect me to pull punches.
The republicans will not let go of power easily (and power is what it is). In the coming election you should expect no quarter. Others may give some – I won’t.
Where was all of the post-partisan rhetoric after the 2000 election? Where was it in 2002? 2004? 2006? We’re only hearing the amplification of the usual hand wringing because the republicans know they’re in serious trouble. Their media enablers echo the pleas. They all also know our constituencies and the tendency on the part of some of them to favor mercy.
Here’s the reality – one out of every three people you encounter on the street thinks dubya is doing a great job. Still. If you think they’re going to vote your way you’ve got another thing coming. I’ve personally dealt with three former republicans. The only ones now left in the republican party are the true believers. There will never be any negotiation or common ground with them. Never. Look at the U.S. Senate – the republicans are in lockstep and the have obstructed at record levels.
I have had to spend far too much money and have too many scars over the years from fighting all the bad republicans have done. I’m nowhere near close to even contemplating mercy. When they’re down on the ground I’m going to kick them in the head. Several times. And once more just because I feel like it. And once more after that just to make sure they get the point.
Geez!!! I had no idea that the word repugnant was a swear word. Repug: tasteless perhaps; potty mouth probably not. I still find (almost) all of them repugnant.
Is anyone else offended like I am at all the vilification of Hillary by Obama supporters in other threads? I sometimes get the feeling that these people are not Democrats. Anyone who remembers Bill Clinton’s years in the White House remembers that there really was a ‘right wing conspiracy’ to take them down. I heard Bob Bennett who was Bill Clinton’s lawyer on the Diane Reahm show this morning on NPR and he was recalling what a set up some of the allegations were, especially the whole Paula Jones thing and how Whitewater proved to be baseless.To read Obama supporters use Republican talking points against Hillary fills me with saddness and makes me wonder if his supporters are getting his message. To be sensitive to any possible hint of racism and ignore blantent sexism in the same post makes me wonder if some of his supporters are indeed getting fanical.
Concerning anyone’s ability to get Republicans in congress to get on board with any progressive solutions to our country’s problems…I’m sorry I wish it could be true but that is “magical thinking”
“Repug” users and non-“Repug” users–all welcome.
but perhaps better late than never? Or more likely, who cares, so what, and I will just go ahead and add my two cents because I want to! So there!!!
1. When speaking about Republican legislators misbehaving, I have no problems with “repug” since it conveys the appropriate contempt.
2. I would have lots of trouble with the term applied to my very kind, and tolerant Republican neighbors.
3. I also think that it is an issue of style; I don’t use it because I am just not the snappy type of writer who characterizes sets of ideas or people using this kind of shorthand–I am far more plodding. But I believe that catchy epithets like “repug” can be useful expressive tools when used in a limited fashion as long as they aren’t the only tools used.
Just a simple call to end name calling in our dialogue about those we oppose. If you want to bring the good out in other people and maybe get them to vote your way, best not to follow the Rush Limbaugh game plan coining words like “Repugs”.
Ya know, even some elected Republicans have done some good in the world. For instance, Kit Bond initiated the Federal version of the successful “Parents as Teachers ” program. Other actions by Bond entirely offset this of course.
The real point I was making is that when we talk about Republicans in the abstract…meaning Republican leaders and policies and use epithets to describe them, ordinary folks who may usually (or always) vote Republican will think you are addressing them personally…turning them off to whatever point you are trying to make. True enough that former or current Republicans are most likely not rampant at Show Me Progress. Still…for the occassional Republican reader who happens on the site…lets not turn them off by referring to “Repugs”.
There are indeed plenty of individual Republicans with whom I am acquainted who volunteer for the Fire Department, work in Big Brothers/Sisters, scouting and 4H, etc. I do not believe you are going to convince these folks to vote in a more progressive way very easily by “…kicking them in the head.” Democrats can make common cause with them on issues of the environment, social welfare, health and education. We have a chance now to welcome them back into the Democratic party. Is asking for more civil use of adjectives (or is it adverbs?) too much to ask?
I’m one of the people who doesn’t use the word “Repug”. That doesn’t mean I’m contemplating mercy. I don’t give those SOBs in Congress any quarter, and every time I see Dubya on the tube, I shoot him the finger. I want impeachment.
To me, this isn’t a discussion about who is going easy on Republicans, but about the tone we set. I don’t use “Repug” because I’d feel sophomoric doing so. I’m better than Limbaugh and Coulter. I guess I prefer more … refined nastiness. My recent piece about Roy Blunt’s delusions of taking back the House wouldn’t be called bipartisan bridge building.
Here’s what I’d like to see: vilify the word “conservative” until it is indelibly and forever smeared, the way Republicans have vilified the word “liberal”. If I use words like “Repug,” I can be dismissed as a potty mouthed extremist. I don’t care to make it easy for anybody to dismiss me.