Alan Grayson was briefly a hero in the progresso-sphere, as a sort of liberal counterpart to Michelle Bachmann. Except, as people loved pointing out, while he was uncivil he was actually (more or less) stating things how they actually were. People loved him for that, and that was all well and fine. But there was always danger in trying to set up a liberal equivalent to Michelle Bachmann…namely that he would quickly steer into bomb-throwing for the sheer sake of it. Which may very well be what’s happening.
All of which only solidifies my belief that the truly progresssive response to lunatics like Bachmann and Glenn Beck and the like is reasoned discourse. We can’t out-shout them, and the more we try the more we’re adopting a form of rhetorical engagement which plays into their hands.
There’s the old Clinton line: “if one candidate’s trying to scare you and the other’s trying to get you to think…you better vote for the person who wants you to think.”
Well, he’s right. All other things equal, the more that people think the more we win. Which isn’t to say there’s no rational argument for a conservative position, obviously. It’s just to say that on balance conservativism is an attitude of disengagement. Vitriol, screaming, and general nuttiness aren’t intrinsically conservative, but the type of communicative process they embody certainly trends that way.