« What Has Happened To The Right? | Main | Ashley's Story »

October 09, 2007

It's Not About Virtue. It's Not About Principle.

John Cole goes into detail on the family the Right has decided to smear:

If you look through this family’s dossier, it appears they are doing everything Republicans say they should be doing- hell, their story is almost what you would consider is a checklist for good, red-blooded American Republican voters: they own their own business, they pay their taxes, they are still in a committed relationship and are raising their kids, they eschewed public education and are doing what they have to do to get them into Private schools, they are part of the American dream of home ownership that Republicans have been pointing to in the past two administrations as proof of the health of the economy, and so on.

In short, they are a white, lower-middle-class, committed family, who is doing EVERYTHING the GOP Kultur Kops would have you believe people should be doing. They aren’t gay. They aren’t divorced. They didn’t abort their children. They aren’t drug addicts or welfare queens. They are property owners, entrepeneurs, taxpayers, and hard-working Americans. I bet nine times out of ten in past elections, if you handed this resume to a pollster, they would think you were discussing the prototypical Republican voter. Hell, the only thing missing from this equation is membership to a church and an irrational fear of Muslims and you HAVE the prototypical Bush voter.

They are, however, not without fault. They are unable to afford insurance through normal means (and now that they have pre-existing conditions, probably couldn’t get traditional insurance anyway), and managed to get several of their family members injured in a traumatic accident. And, it appears, those are the big blind spots for compassionate conservatism. That, and the real big sin- allowing themselves to advocate for a policy that the Decider was going to veto.

Some are saying that the Frost family brought this on themselves when they let their child tell his story. They are saying that when they explained the difference that S-CHIP made in one family's life, they invited personal attacks, smears, harassing phone calls, the interrogation of their neighbors, etc, etc etc. That's madness. These are the same individuals, moreover, who were appalled that anyone would levy a personal attack against General David Petraeus, who'd made himself into a major national figure through a press strategy relying on profiles, interviews, and public testimony.

There is no coherence here. No principle. Only a vicious ritual of destroying those who disagree with them. And I use my words carefully. They are not arguing with the Frost family. They are not questioning their decision to share their story. They are trying to destroy the family's credibility and intimidate them, and others who might step forward to enter their personal stories into the public discourse, into silence.

October 9, 2007 | Permalink

Comments

It staggers the imagination that the right is attacking, personally attacking, a family for simply agreeing to tell their story about their reliance on a particular social program. This is a budget dispute, for chrissakes! How many bazillion "ordinary people" props has Bush used over the years to make his point about a particular program, and no one gave it a second thought, or maybe thought that (at most) it was tacky or hypocritical? The hysterical reaction by Steyn, Malkin, etc. is positively demented.

Posted by: Steve | Oct 9, 2007 6:11:30 PM

"Only a vicious ritual of destroying those who disagree with them." But doesn't David Broder say everything would be all right if the Democrats would compromise?

Posted by: David in NY | Oct 9, 2007 6:13:03 PM

Cole missed one point. The tragic accident was not a car accident. It was an SUV accident.

Posted by: Robert Waldmann | Oct 9, 2007 6:32:23 PM

Robert, SUVs are still cars. What's with the quibble?

Posted by: Justin K. | Oct 9, 2007 6:39:06 PM

in the same way they try to destroy any military authority, wes clark on down, who dare introduce a dissenting voice.

in the same way they set the playing field for any democrat who dares to run against them, the promise of slime and blood.

Posted by: brian | Oct 9, 2007 7:13:57 PM

I suppose the really scary thought is - how much worse are they going to get in '08 as the full scope of the disaster awaiting the GOP becomes clearer and clearer, even to the willfully blind denizens of right blogistan.

Posted by: Fledermaus | Oct 9, 2007 7:30:25 PM

Since we're on three posts and counting, I'd say Ezra's pretty exercised about this, and he's certainly not alone; there's been a general howl from the left ever since the questions came up. And while I wouldn't call it virtuous or principled, I also wouldn't jump ugly quite as quickly as Ezra is here; and I'd separate people - including, sadly, Malkin - who are trying to find factual details out about the Frost's case, at least from those who really don't seem to care what the facts are. Because that, I think, is the difference between this being crazed and irrational and, well, part of a debate. If, as I'm given to understand it, we're suggesting that S-CHIP expansion would help Graeme Frost, then it seems to me it's fair to ask questions about the specifics of the Frost's case. It isn't saying that an accident isn't terrible, or that a family is undeserving, or that a father isn't a decent man to ask for some detail. And that, I think, is the downside of putting oneself, or one's family, into the middle of a political debate.

Certainly, there are people who have gone too far - and I think, leapt to conclusions about the Frost's finances that really should have been further developed before people started throwing around accusations of great wealth and undeserving conditions. Indeed, I think the embarrassment of what the conservative attack dogs have ferreted out - that the Frosts really are in a bad way, that they really do have a small struggling business, a modest home, etc - has succeeded in many ways in doing just what lefties would want anyway: shaming people who should have known better before making unsupported allegations, and highlighting the desparate plight of people who need serious medical care. But still - if we offer up these examples, I think it's reasonable to expect that there will be questions, not all of them nice, and not all of them polite. And I think we're not in a position to say "you can't ask questions." And that, I think, is where Ezra is headed with his outrage.

Posted by: weboy | Oct 9, 2007 7:51:58 PM

weboy, my interest in spreading access to health coverage is precisely about making sure that the Frosts of the US are covered-- people who can't qualify for medicaid but, because they are self-employed or have a similar lower-middle-income job, don't have health insurance and can't afford private insurance. Ezra isn't objecting to those who ask questions about the Frosts' background. He's objecting to the people who are lying about the answers.

Posted by: Tyro | Oct 9, 2007 9:00:09 PM

Weboy, nobody is saying, "you can't ask questions." It's more like, "you can't stalk and harass people," and "you can't tell lies."

There's no good faith inquiry into the facts of the Frost family's financial statuts--there was never the slightest basis for thinking that they were anything other than proper participants in the program.

The whole reason for the proposed expansion of the program is that ordinary middle class families who don't have health insurance through their employers can't afford it otherwise.

Oh, and by the way, no one suggested that "S-CHIP expansion would help Graeme Frost"--he's presently covered under the program, and was using his own example to argue for expansion of the coverage to others

Posted by: rea | Oct 9, 2007 9:05:20 PM

THEY ARE SHOWING UP AT THEIR HOUSE, for the sake of Christ.

Posted by: Jason C. | Oct 9, 2007 9:12:03 PM

If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts.

If you have the law on your side, pound the law.

If you have neither, pound the table.

If that doesn't work, pound the defendant.

Posted by: a1 | Oct 9, 2007 9:34:00 PM

Cole has it wrong when he says:

"They are, however, not without fault. They are unable to afford insurance through normal means"

They are perfect republicans. Don't you know, American's are OVER insured. That's the problem, remember? They were young and healthy so they just followed Bush's advice. Health care savings accounts right?

Posted by: wtf | Oct 9, 2007 10:23:52 PM

personal attacks, smears....And I use my words carefully. They are not arguing with the Frost family. They are not questioning their decision to share their story. They are trying to destroy the family's credibility and intimidate them

You've said this several times, but can you give us an actual example of a single personal attack, smear, or intimidation against the Frost family? Particularly against the boy. Has anyone called him names? Has anyone brought up their sex life or their religion into the debate? In short can ANYONE here point out a major pundit or politician who made a truly personal attack against this family? Didn't think so.

In case you didn't know, their finances ARE fair game, however. Not only because they brought them up in the first place, but because personal finances are an integral part of the debate over S-CHIP. Or maybe you just don't want people who testify in front of Congress to have their claims ever criticized or challenged?

Posted by: John Rohan | Oct 10, 2007 5:58:53 AM

Can you give us an actual example of a single personal attack, smear, or intimidation against the Frost family?

Why, yes. Thank you for asking. And thank you for revealing that you don't consider stalking, threats, and harassing emails and phone calls to be "intimidation."

Posted by: Michael Bérubé | Oct 10, 2007 8:57:58 AM

Ah yes. Fair game.

Of course, the wingers are stamping and frothing on this exactly because everybody can identify with the Frosts, and it makes our need for "Medicare for All" obvious. They have nothing to say to that, so, in good Conservative fashion, they slime and defend.

Posted by: lambert strether | Oct 10, 2007 10:01:20 AM

to Michael Berube: No dice. I asked for where any major pundit or politician made a personal attack against them. The article you quoted could only quote a personal attack from an anonymous Red State commenter, not Malkin, Limbaugh or anyone else with a real voice. You need to do a little better than that. After all, I can comb the Daily Kos on any given day and find similarly objectionable comments from the other side of the sphere.

And as for stalking? Malkin only drove by the house and spoke to one neighbor to investigate for her column. Some "stalking". Oh, and I'm still waiting for someone to show me anywhere that this 12 year old boy was smeared in any way...

Posted by: John Rohan | Oct 10, 2007 10:18:38 AM

Ah, the tried and true tactic known as "Moving the Goalposts".

Posted by: David (Austin Tx) | Oct 10, 2007 10:56:34 AM

I asked for where any major pundit or politician made a personal attack against them.

Apparently the politicians wised up.

Republicans on Capitol Hill, who were gearing up to use Graeme as evidence that Democrats have overexpanded the health program to include families wealthy enough to afford private insurance, have backed off.

An aide to Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, expressed relief that his office had not issued a press release criticizing the Frosts.

As for the pundits, they lie about the Frosts again and again. They don't care about the truth. They know their base will buy whatever lies they sell.

Posted by: Steve | Oct 10, 2007 11:30:07 AM

Has all these people forgotten that time Bush staged a huge event and surrounded himself with "snowflake babies" to veto the stem cell research bill?

Posted by: Joshua | Oct 10, 2007 12:34:13 PM

Oh, and I'm still waiting for someone to show me anywhere that this 12 year old boy was smeared in any way...

Doesn't matter.
It feeds the feminized masses with their daily affirmation that they're better.

I wonder if Michelle Malkin woke up today hoping that some nobody would challenge her to a debate? Makes me rethink my plan to demand Kobe Bryant play me a game of one-on-one (if he refuses, he's a coward!).

To quote the Rock: know your role & shut your mouth.

Posted by: RW | Oct 10, 2007 1:32:35 PM

RW, never once did I ever see you condemning the dishonesty and violent rheotric lobbed at the Frosts, nor did I hear you condemn Rush for saying that Graemme had his head "filled with lies." It seems that you are the one who knows that your role is to shut your mouth in the face of dishonesty and immorality on the part of the right. Your'e standing by and doing nothing because you're a coward, like most right wingers are. The following is clear to me about the right: fighting terrorists is scary and something they refuse to do, and fighting against hateful pundits on the right is downright dangerous... but give them a working class family to beat up on, and they leap to the opportunity.

Posted by: Tyro | Oct 10, 2007 2:29:21 PM

"...General David Petraeus, who'd made himself into a major national figure..."

I seem to recall some of Petraeus's defenders arguing that the general was off-limits precisely because he was just following orders. Becoming a public figure wasn't his choice, it was his duty.

Joshua: "...that time Bush staged a huge event and surrounded himself with "snowflake babies"..."

I'm more reminded of the time Bush surrounded himself with family farmers would would lose their land to the estate tax. Did he ever actually find any such people?

Posted by: Grumpy | Oct 10, 2007 2:40:59 PM

Been a registered Democrat for more years than I care to count.As I look at the party of FDR,Truman and JFK
all I see is a bunch of pathetic clone's kind of like
stepford people and under control of the Pupet Master
George Soros...I voted for the first time and it was
for JFK.The whole country had a good feeling.Now the
crap that passes for Democrats wouldn't make a pimple
on JFK's butt...Tell me this if the Frost's are having
such a hard time with the medical how come the illegal
wet backs don't have the same problem,just a thought...
FDR,Truman and JFK Must be spinning in their graves...

Posted by: bobby lane | Oct 10, 2007 5:42:26 PM

Shorter Bobby Lane: "Democrats are n****r-lovers. And Jew financiers and wetbacks."

We all know you left the party when Strom did.

Posted by: calling all toasters | Oct 10, 2007 6:19:36 PM

"They are trying to destroy the family's credibility and intimidate them, and others who might step forward to enter their personal stories into the public discourse, into silence."

And they are, of course, completely immoral and worthless pieces of shit, if you ask me, but hey...

Posted by: THeDRiFTeR | Oct 10, 2007 7:19:54 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.