Welcome to Talking Justice Sign in | Join | Help
in
Justice Talking About All Blogs Today's Blog Forums

Sarah Werthan Buttenwieser

About Sarah Werthan Buttenwieser

Sarah Werthan Buttenwieser's work has appeared in magazines including Brain Child, Bitch & New England Watershed, frequently on the web for Mothers Movement Online, Literary Mama & Mamazine as well as Women in News & Media's group blog. Her opinion pieces have appeared in newspapers including the Philadelphia Inquirer, Newsday & USA Today.

Any Olive Branches after Tuesday Night?

Can we talk about Tuesday? Beforehand, it seemed likely that Senator Obama would wrap up this Democratic nomination and we could all begin to focus upon beating Senator McCain. Obama had already begun to oppose him rather than his Democratic opponent, Senator Clinton. But Ms. Clinton did not receive Mr. Obama’s memo. Instead, she’d been fighting him with everything I hate about politics: fear, sarcasm, even disdain. She mocked; she taunted; she cut him down. Some accused her of dirty politics; others called her shrill. Maybe it wasn’t dirty, but it was far from squeaky clean. In response, Mr. Obama took the high road. Ellen Goodman pointed out that like the “victor” in a divorce, the high road was available to him. While he didn’t pull out the gloves—or the claws—he condescended, echoing obnoxious high school superiority as he’d done during an earlier debate when he’d said dismissively, “Hillary is likeable enough.” While he hints at her female weaknesses, she doubts his capability without subtlety in her ominous 3 AM advertisement. Let’s agree that no one is playing nice anymore.

 

Hillary’s tears or Barack’s audacious hope, I like both. I am inspired by people who care deeply about making this world a better place, so much so that I will put aside votes I disagree with (even her first Iraq vote) or proposals that disappoint me deeply (his health care policy). If these candidates are truly committed to working toward peace and meaningful access to health care, reproductive rights, improved education, and stemming climate change, I can swallow a few disappointments along the way. The art of inclusive, collaborative policy making is essential right now. The road to change can’t be cowardly and it can’t be vague. Telling the truth is necessary: about what war is costing us in dollars and lives and how far out of reach health care is for so many and how millions more children are living in poverty than a decade ago and how many bridges are at risk of collapse and what a warming world means in terms of how many “natural” disasters we will imminently face…

 

Tuesday threatened to preclude substantive discussion about the most pressing issues—and not just between Democratic candidates—for another eight weeks. Battles of personality and insubstantial questions of gender versus race or age versus youth or pragmatism versus idealism, let alone the endless polls that seem to be making this whole contest into a contest rather than a meaningful search for our next President, appears to be what we’ll face far into April. All this fluff comes with a ridiculously high price tag to boot.

 

The democratic, electoral process is supposed to be an actual process. Given that the Democratic Party hasn’t secured its candidate yet, back room deals are probably out of order. And in electoral politics, when punches are being thrown, ignoring them doesn’t seem to work, either. Thus, the risk is for a slugfest. Here’s my plea: for true democracy—its spirit intact—to prevail, the gloves must be discarded. Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton must act as colleagues who disagree on certain points and are stylistically different and bring distinct gifts to the table. They must not only find their respect for one another, but also assure that respect remain sacred. Given that negative campaigning probably saved Ms. Clinton’s bid this week, it’s extremely unlikely that either will heed this plea.

 

What I’d like to see instead is for candidates to reveal their deepest hopes and dreams. I’d like a chance to elect the Al Gore of An Inconvenient Truth versus the Al Gore of 2000. Dare I say it? The high road—high as in inspired—compels me. The rest disheartens me. That’s my vote.

Published Friday, March 07, 2008 12:00 AM by Sarah Werthan Buttenwieser

© Sarah Werthan Buttenwieser. All rights reserved.

Comments

Please note that we encourage a vigorous debate on the issues from all points along the political spectrum on the Talking Justice blogs and discussion forums. However, we ask that you stay to the topic of the particular blog or forum post and that the debate remain civil. Profanity, spam and personal attacks on the program host or guests, contributors or other Talking Justice users will not be tolerated and are subject to deletion without notice. Moreover, any comment which is patently offensive, threatening or potentially libelous will be removed without notice. Persons who repeatedly attempt to post material that violates the site policies may, at the discretion of Justice Talking, be blocked from participating in the future.

Justice Talking, not the individual bloggers on this site, will make all decisions about whether comments to the blogs contained here should be edited or removed and whether individuals who violate our policies will be allowed to continue to post. Also, please note that, like all of the content on the Justice Talking radio show, the views expressed on these blogs and discussion boards belong solely to the person or organization posting them and do not reflect the views or opinions of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, the University of Pennsylvania, or NPR.



 

Kristin from NYC said:

I, too, seek civility and positivity from our politicians, and I was devastated by the negative turn of the Democratic race last week.  This spring, instead of the opportunity to rally an energized party around an inspiring nominee to end the failed Republican policies of the last 8 years, Democrats are now wracked with anxiety as we watch our leadership destroy the advantages we were celebrating not two months ago.

But more important than positivity, and absolutely essential to our winning this race, is fairness.  The Florida and Michigan debacle must be handled in a way that is fair to both candidates (and, therefore, the millions of voters nationwide who have supported them).  And once that is settled, and I am optimistic that it will be, the Democratic superdelegates must protect us from an outcome with potentially devastating civil rights implications.  By June, either the first African American or the first woman will have won the majority of delegates in a presidential primary race, and their supporters will have the very reasonable expectation of seeing their candidate represent the party in November.  Should the "Washington insiders" effectively overturn these electoral results by aligning with the other candidate, the result will be alenation and disenfranchisement on a scale not seen by this generation.  And this would have implications far deeper than a win or a loss in this election.

March 7, 2008 11:26 AM
 

nycvoter said:

I love politics and I accept hard politics, dirty politics I disdain (saying Ann Richards in Gay, saying John McCain has a illegitimate black child, saying John Kerry wasn't a war hero).  I found some very disheartening things in the last 6 months of this campaign that culminated in the Clintons being labled racists, having it accepted by democrats who had know them for years and the media often repeating it.  If we remember it wasn't a blantant statement of racism but was considered a patter.  Billy Shaheen refering to Obama's drug use, RACIST!!!! (I couldn't figure it out) Bob Kerrey in acknowledging a question on Obama's multi-culturalism (which Obama often uses as a badge of foreign policy) by answering that it would obviously send a positive message to the world having an African American President whose grandparents were muslim and a father from Kenya RACIST!!! (pretty much fact, that Obama still quoted today in a brief about his readiness to be commander in chief). Bob Johnson of BET saying Hillary Clinton was out working for children and civil rights while Obama was still doing "I don't know what in High School" RACIST Then the final step, looking at the polls in SC Bill Clintons says, "jesse jackson ran a good race in SC and he won, so had Barak"  The only two other recent democrats showing those margins in SC, were John Edwards (he was still in the race) and Clinton himself.  So if he was trying to show a similar situation, it really only left him Jackson.  Obama loses New Hampshire, oh no it's the Bradley effect... racism!!!  Obama could have stopped this narrative at any time by doing what he did when someone accused Biden of using racist language calling him articulate.  Obama stopped in the debate and said, I can represent for my friend Joe, he's no racist.  He chose not to represent for the Clintons.  Jesse Jackson Jr. a national chair for the campaign has been aggressively pursuing African American super delegates telling them they don't want to be on the wrong side of history, they don't want to wake up and find a young African American male running against them in their next election.  So in my mind the campaign has had a nasty tone for a while, one that I do not consider hardball highminded politics.

Hillary having a commercial just asking who do you really think should be commander in chief is not Carl Rovian tactics, can I remind you the last commercial was a pack of wolves running through the forest circling pray.  Would I prefer she just had a voice over of the 30 generals and admirals who endorsed her maybe, but it's hardball politics but nothing I lose sleep over.  I'm partisan to Hillary, which you probably can tell but I don't see her commercial as so awful.  Wow you must have hated the one where she mentions that he hasn't held one oversight meeting of the NATO committee that deals with Afghanastan -- Harsh!

I do agree with Sarah that the debate would be more substantive if the media asked, well what are the candidates saying here.  How does that play out on their records, let's ask them to talk a little bit more about NAFTA and investigate the Candian leak story or put it to rest, let's ask about those hearings that were never held?

Maybe I'm too cynical for this blog...

March 7, 2008 11:48 PM
Anonymous comments are disabled. Click "Join" at top-right to add comments.

Closed to Comments

Note: Justice Talking ceased production on June 30 of 2008. The Talking Justice blogs and forums are provided as a read-only resource for historical interest only. Commenting on blog posts has been suspended.

All opinions expressed are those of the author. The Annenberg Public Policy Center makes no claim as the the accuracy of claims or continued availability of any third party web links found on this site.

This Blog

Select Blog by Day

Syndication