« Ronald Reagan: Not just a President, A Great American LEADER | Main | At the Threshold: Scared of the Forest? »
June 12, 2005
Bailout Response to Matt Estes' Column Praising Reagan
I've heard from many readers of the Daily Bailout who were stunned or livid that Matt Estes' column praising Ronald Reagan appeared on this website yesterday, a website that typically supports and promotes Progressive causes. So let me explain our decision to allow Matt Estes' column and hopefully answer some doubts that some progressives are having.
One of the basic characteristics about being American is openness. We may not have as much as we would like now in our White House or Capitol, but it is still true that openness is critical to our American identity. And I say this, knowing full well that openness is a key tenet of being a progressive. This is often taken to mean being of a mindset that is welcoming of others, an opposite frame of reference from the right-wing dogmatism that has dominated our country's debate over the last year. Still some progressives would say we must be pragmatic and careful about whom we allow into our group.
I have always rejected that kind of paranoia and secrecy.
Posted by wjbailes at June 12, 2005 10:09 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://chattablogs.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/21987
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bailout Response to Matt Estes' Column Praising Reagan:
Comments
John,
Communication? Hell, you don't even communicate with me.
Wade
Posted by: Wade at June 12, 2005 11:19 AM
I don't see it has anything to do with secrecy, paranoia, openess vs. closed-mindedness or any of that.
My personal objection to runing a tribute to Reagan on a Progressive site is this: "THEY" have their own media empire - corporate control of MOST of the nation's newspapers, MOST of the television and radio airwaves. What is wrong with having something of our OWN??? Do you think a right-wing blog would feel morally compelled to run a tribute to Clinton? DUH!
I do agree that the one point of this tribute article could be taken to be our dire need to get people who seriously admire Reagan to see that in spite of his "feel-good" persona, he did a lot of harm to America and the majority of it's people.
I say "fair and balanced - HELL!" even Fox doesn't abide by it's own catch-phrase. This is one of the ways we screw ourselves as Democrats and Progressives, by feeling we have to be open to ALL points of view. Openmindedness does not imply that we have to allow our minds or our blogs to be dumping places for other people's garbage. We can have some discernment about what we allow in without becoming ignorant bigots ourselves.
By the way, I just UNsubscribed from any newsletters from NDOL yesterday, after getting one where they are advocating passage of CAFTA. With "friends" like that, the working people of America don't need any enemies (although we have plenty). And I sent them an email to tell them explicitly WHY I was unsubscribing.
I still say tributes to Reagan belong on a Republican blog.
Posted by: Sadie at June 12, 2005 01:49 PM
You're probably right, Sadie. I can't say that anything more offends me than a biased point of view, like the one presented by Matt Estes.
But if we read George Lakoff carefully and search our minds, we have to recognize that the Right hears us and we sound like we're being biased too.
And maybe that's your point. It's okay to be biased. I worry, however, that without a bridge between these biased points of view we will end in a civil war from which we may never recover.
Posted by: Bailes at June 13, 2005 01:59 PM
Once people start realizing that EVERYBODY ON THE PLANET is biased, the sooner we'll get people actually working together.
Posted by: Bill at June 13, 2005 02:05 PM
Yeah, Bill. But how do we get everyone to agree to disagree without someone being disempowered politically and economically. Politics is war.
Posted by: Bailes at June 13, 2005 02:49 PM
It's easy.
1. Be polite. LISTEN to people even if they don't listen to you. Do exhaustive research.
2. Strive for truth, not acceptance (that's why I hate politcial parties). It can ugly, but, hey, it's TRUTH.
3. Be willing to admit you are wrong sometimes. Don't argue a point just to beat someone on a personal level. (That's where the "war" part comes in.) Hate the sin, not the sinner -- if you wanna break it down to a religious level.
4. Vote your EXHAUSTIVELY informed conscience.
5. Walk away and do something for somebody else.
I should add that I hate politics. Really. I do.
Posted by: Bill at June 13, 2005 03:02 PM
bill, if everyone is baised, how do we know what "truth" is?
Posted by: JosiahQ at June 13, 2005 03:21 PM
Scientology, man. Scientology. And incense.
Posted by: Bill at June 13, 2005 04:29 PM
1. Bill - If you hate politics, you have more feelings about it than I thought. To hate or to love anything is to invest some feeling into that. Now, if you were indifferent about it, I guess I would understand why you don't care about politics. I agree with you, btw, most of the time. It's the 5% that we don't agree on that gets us into political fights.
2. Josiah - Truth may be steady and real, but no one knows it. I guess we can be sure of its character, however.
Posted by: Bailes at June 13, 2005 04:40 PM
I have lots of feelings about bee stings, too, but I don't like those either...
Posted by: Bill at June 13, 2005 04:45 PM
What are your feelings about bee stings, Bill?
Posted by: Bailes at June 13, 2005 05:52 PM
i loved Matt's tribute to Regan -
Posted by: matt estes at June 15, 2005 08:51 AM
And, I've written a few where the words gis spatial are to that same point, but although shape files I can hear music to set them to, it's japan map nothing solid, or it isn't fully Right. generalization That's weird for me
Posted by: mcnally at July 13, 2005 06:12 PM