|
CONTACT THE TERRYREPORT HERE |
||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
SITE PROBLEMS |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXPLANATORY JOURNALISM: The TerryReport |
||||||||||
|
News, commentary, opinion on politics, government, books, social trends, American life, travel, cycling, books, other stuff |
||||||||||
|
A commentary by Walter Rhett of South Carolina |
||||||||||
|
The Lessons of Celebration and Eric Cantors Loss Who speaks today of Jim Wright or Dennis Hastert? Eric Cantor is a name that will slip easily into the past, having achieved little on his watch except his own ambitions which now will remain forever incomplete. The ladder of success is a two-way passage, and Cantor obviously forgot the Old Testament teachings that among the many meanings of Jacobs ladder is the changing affairs of human community. Tuesday, Cantors fates changed; his Congressional career and ambitions perished in a hell of his own making. He wakes up today to find the gates slammed shut on his dreams. He earned his current infamy. Yet by all accounts, he never saw it coming. That he missed what should have been in plain sight is explained in the text of a old southern, African proverb: A blind mule is never afraid of the dark. Cantor blindness begins when he miscalculated the dynamics of his gerrymandered district which runs from Richmond to the Washington suburbs. His briar patch of safety was filled with thorns and he got stuck, having created many reasons for personal grudges in a district both conservative, educated, and middle class—“rich and stupid” is the shorthand I have used to describe it. Conservative, yes. Loyal, no. Reactionary, yes. Racist, yes. Invested in a Koch brothers-writ future? No. Despite Cantors loss. His district, which contains a fair share of federal workers with civil service protected jobs, felt empowered to vote against the political establishment and Cantor, one of its major leaders. They bear direct witness of the destructiveness of current politics. Their pay checks were cut by sequestration, a House deal Cantor bragged he originated; their pay checks were stopped by the House-engineered government shut down, which Cantor helped enable. These conservatives saw in Cantor grandstanding and speech making that brought no progress or stability, that instead attacked their own tenuous hold on what was a secure government lifeline: a civil service job, with college loans at the credit union, and good health care and a generous pension fund. For them, big government means waste, fraud, and politics; they are anti-establishment, not necessarily anti-government. Daily, they are privy to unfair sharing and the whiplash of politics and it drove them to the cynicism at the base of conservatism. Their positions are more nuanced than tea party supporters in North Carolina, Georgia, or Mississippi. They work in government. They simply want to eliminate what they see as its unfairness, the way the system is rigged to exploit families and workers. Cantor stood alone, exposed against the backdrop of Washingtons giant machine, but also against the backdrop of the paper work and memorandums that crossed their desks and the themes of their meetings. In every decision, they could see Eric Cantor. Take away the partisanship and he was the establishment. He wanted his district to overlook how deeply embedded he was in the establishment, but he overlooked the daily remainders they received. Like the repeated (fifty and counting!) meaningless votes to repeal the Affordable Care Act. His smug, annoying arrogance and obvious love of power and partisan political combat didnt help.** His district remembered he was eager to hold up federal aid after hurricane Sandy until budget cuts paid for the emergency assistance to home owners who lost everything, to others needing the basics of shelter and food. His district remembered too well in their time of desperation, he put the budget first, yet supported continuing tax breaks for corporations imploding with cash. His district was filled with conservatives who wouldnt work against their self interests. They hated phonies. They were not buying a conservative agenda with a one-sided sacrifice. His district remains reactionary when it comes to race. Its closeted racism had sustained Cantor through earlier elections. The visceral hate of Barack moved them to vote for anyone who was fighting against his agenda. Their fear and anger at an African-American President trumped their hostility to the establishment. Cantors failure to succeed against Baracks agenda, or to block its major bills, created a growing base of disappointment that eroded his support. Why vote for Cantor if he were only a lighter version of Obama? Cantors politics seemed to be all show and dough, noise and fury. Immigration coalesced his districts anger about Cantors failure to met the challenges of Baracks policies. Cantor had been smeared by the deal-making and was increasingly seen as a traitor to the cause and comfort of white-only national power. Traitors suffer first, and Cantor had become a traitor to the main cause of white privilege, the protection of its population from being overrun. Evidence? The Hispanic population grew in his district; again, evidence personally observed by those who voted yesterday. In the minds of the primary voters, Cantors views would only open the floodgates to increase the Hispanic presence, and worse, make it legal. The rich and stupid occasionally stumble on their ignorance, and Cantors campaign badly stumbled on its messaging, never fully understanding the difference between running negative ads against Barack and going full blast against a local schmo. The attacks actually brought attention to his opponents campaign, elevated it to the ring by giving it energy and attention. Strom Thurmond years ago pointed out a jewel of political wisdom: never mention your opponents name. Cantors people forgot this as the campaign suddenly became increasingly oppositional and negative. But dialectics points out that negatives taken far enough, in the right circumstances, change into positives. As New York Times commenters from his district pointed out in todays digital edition, each of Cantors ads provided free publicity and alerts to his opponent while never finding resonance on personal or political issues. Cantors people should have known its hard to attack an opponent as liberal when right wing radio is supporting him. Cross talk doesnt work. Despite the campaigns negative media (surrounded by a positive conservative sound screen), his opponent came to be seen as the better hope. Finally the polls failed. So intense was the opposition to Cantor, people disguised their vote until it was cast. (No, there was no Democratic crossover as many seek to believe!) And my subjective assessment? I havent felt this good since as a child I saw the wicked witch melt down. Barack won two national elections. Cantor couldnt manage to win a primary in his own district. Oh, the challenges of broom sticks and blind mules. |
||||||||||
|
Walter Rhett is a writer and frequent online commentator nationwide on many issues, especially race and politics. He is a scholar of southern history, particularly that of South Carolina and the era during and after slavery. He resides in the Charleston, SC area. |
||||||||||
|
**Mr. Rhetts comment in regard to Cantors love of power and annoying arrogance might be one of the keys as to why Cantor lost. Both Cantor and Paul Ryan of Wisconsin have a way about them that seems to say, Look at me. I belong here in power. It is a way of carrying themselves, the look on their faces, the comments they offer. There seems to be no humility in either man (Cantor might get a chance to learn some now.) Body language says a lot about people, a lot that we dont even realize we are observing at the time. Voters have a way of telling politicians, Go be arrogant somewhere else. I am tired of you. It takes an extraordinary person to package arrogance in a way that people will embrace it. One such man was the late senator Lloyd Bentsen of Texas, a man who believed in himself, from all indications, more than he believed in anything else on earth. He was regularly elected to high office and nominated by his party to be vice-president of the U.S., serving as treasury secretary under Bill Clinton before his return to Texas. |
||||||||||
|
CONTACT THE TERRYREPORT HERE |
||||||||||