On heckling, Obama, and circular firing squads

[DonCoquixote]

Note: I am going to try and address some ugly truths, and while I am not going for offense, or shock value, I will say that some of my words may still yield that, but I would rather address an elephant in the room rather than let things fester.

OK: let's be honest with ourselves as the Left. At best, we are not a monolith, and we at least play lip service to not wanting to be one. We do not have some sort of politburo that sends people to Siberia because of thoughtcrime. Indeed, during elections, many people that work against each other often work as comrades, if for no other reason than we do not want to let another George Bush in the White House.

However, the flap here on DU has exposed a lot. The only reason the right is still afloat is, frankly, they have a talent for making us fight amongst ourselves. Back in 2008, there were people that supported either Hillary and Obama, and of these, there were people that frankly acted like a bunch of idiots. There were Obama folks that chanted "racist" and there were Hillary voters that chanted "sexist" till the meaning of both those words was at best diluted, at worst, polluted. Now, I say this, like in every crowd, a small minority was the one doing the mess, but the job was done. It sure did not help that the Libertarians were cheering both sides on, despite the fact that everybody knows that the libertarians would, by their own words, work against everyone. The admin tried to handle things, but frankly, I think they were overwhelmed, and it is not unreasonable to expect that, after all, we had just been through eight years of Bush.

Let me be blunt, Obama did act weak towards Gay issues. Yes, Bill Clinton was trying to pull the party to the right, and never called on it, which allowed Hillary to sit back and say silly things like "he's not a muslim as far as I know (giggle)" knowing exactly which Bubbas she was pandering to. Frankly though, Obama should have attacked the issues directly, making the GOP own and push every little limit, because that is when they show their faces. On the other hand, the Clintons are the ones that made their bones cutting welfare, which is damned well code for "we need to stop giving minorities money." People held their noses as progressive candidates left the race, and knew that they did not want Sarah Palin being one CIA-mixed heart-attack cocktail away from the nukes.

But there were issues, yes, Obama did end DADT, after being dragged to it by Biden. Yes, Hillary kept up the war machine, collecting scalps like Gaddafi and Ben Ladin, and yes, both these two seemed ready to run form the left, as the news media credited both Obama and Hillary's success to the fact they were willing tp punch hippies and piss off the left!
There was another side exposed, namely that many on the left simply did not give a damn about people in their group. What we have here, is not just a failure to communicate, but a complete contempt for the idea of solidarity.

Now, this is where I say my piece:
If you are a racial minority, and you do not see the LGBT struggle as your own, you are a fool, because the very same holes the churches want punched in their rights are the same ones they will use to take away your rights.

If you are LGBT, and think that minority rights are not your struggle, you are a fool. Yeah, the GOP might trot out Liz Cheney, and promise to let the wealthy LGBT enjoy marriage rights, but if you think they will not work on punch holes in your rights, think again.

We are dealing with forces that have used trickery long before 1776, and they, unlike us, do NOT stop and think "oh, we have won now."

Oh, PS: I applaud free speech, and any publci figure should be able to deal with a heckler, that being said, if you speak in a way that makes you an ass, you are still an ass, not an asset to your cause.

[onpatrol98]

1. Racial Minorities

"If you are a racial minority, and you do not see the LGBT struggle as your own, you are a fool."

That's a great soundbite, but let's be clear. This episode on DU exploded because Ellen Sturtz, a supporter of the LGBT struggle, demanded to be heard over Michelle Obama, another supporter of the LGBT struggle.

[pennylane100]

2. I do not think that heckling at that particular venue was a good way to promote her cause.

There was a discussion on another thread about whether the heckler was racist. I could not comment because I have been banned from that group, because I made a referral about the Palestinian cause in a post which apparently is against the rules. Oops. I guess not all causes are equal in some groups.

However, the OP is right in that it makes little sense for those fighting bigotry to be fighting each other. Howsoever, I think it is a stretch to call someone racist just because they choose to heckle the First Lady, "Not a very smart move" would seem like a better way to describe her actions."

[onpatrol98]

4. I doubt seriously the woman is racist.

I doubt seriously the woman is racist. I don't think she gave a moment's thought about the optics that would be presented to a community that highly identifies with this first lady.

But, the individuals who have chosen to defend her case by suggesting Michelle Obama "should have" relinquished her voice to a more appropriate one suggests an implied privilege whether recognized or not and also sounds familiar to this same community.

But, I think most individuals, even if they respond by acquiescing perceive being heckled or protested as someone picking a fight. If you're going to pick a fight, why not find an enemy?

Regardless, if you pick a fight, you shouldn't be surprised that the other individual doesn't expect to stand there and be a tackling dummy.

[DonCoquixote]

3. yes, but

the way Obama handled it opened him up for fodder; there is no reason he cannot sign an exec order, because he knows the right will hate him anyway.

That being said, for the heckler to whine about "she came right at me" is silly, methinks the lady protest too much when she heckles, and gets some right back.

[onpatrol98]

5. It sounds like an excellent conversation...

It sounds like an excellent conversation to have with President Obama. The actual person who might sign an executive order.

The heckler has been full of surprises. She was "taken aback" that Michelle Obama approached her. She was even surprised that the crowd was hostile to her.

See to me, this ranks as an implied privilege. Not, racism...a privilege she was born with and doesn't even recognize because it was a birth right IF this is true.

As someone who lacks that particular privilege....

If I enter an event and talk over a speaker, I am going to expect the speaker not to be happy. I won't be surprised if the speaker decides to express his or her displeasure. I also won't be surprised if the people surrounding me, who wanted to hear the speaker are displeased with me.

So, I'm beginning to think this woman's "taken aback" is full of it. She's not crazy. She knew good and well speakers don't like to be heckled. She expected to raise a ruckus and did.

She just thought she'd walk in, talk down the first lady with the cameras rolling and walk away like a prize fighter at a fixed fight. Maybe, go back and watch herself on television with her friends. Yeah, she was surprised, alright.

[pennylane100]

6. I do not think that the way Obama handled it is relevant.

I have no doubt it opened HIM up for fodder for his inaction and yes, she is married to him but she cannot sign an executive order changing anything. She may even agree with the heckler but that is irrelevant, she has the right to make public speeches without having to address every action her husband did or did not do that people disagree with.

I would think that if there were a Heckling for Dummies, this woman's actions would be strongly discouraged. Why piss of those with access person that you wish to influence.