The Tolerance of Liberals
Some people don't understand what it means to win with grace
The Tolerance of Liberals
When you tell someone that you don’t respect their choices, they tend to react with anger. That’s what happened last week, when I made a very public acknowledgement of my sorrow at the re-election of Barack Obama. The emails were numerous, many caustic, some unprintable in a family newspaper, and a few threatening. One fellow called me a “dirty cu*t,” another questioned my sanity and a third tried to use his law degree to shame me into silence. Note to the middle-aged male attorneys out there: save your arrogance for the pretty little things on bar stools who are more susceptible to your checkbook-er-charms.
Given the fact that I’m a conservative in a very liberal town, one in which there were precincts that registered zero votes for Mitt Romney (voter fraud? What voter fraud?) the hostility of my readers doesn’t surprise. What does, however, is the level of vitriol that spews from mouths and fingers when you say something that annoys.
I spent a good part of Thursday ‘unfriending’ people from Facebook, and not only the crass-and-crowing liberals. Some of the comments lobbed by suicidal conservatives made me realize that even among my fellow travelers there are extremes which should be avoided at all costs. Of course, the balance is always tipped in favor of liberals when it comes to offensive behavior; remember the nice things allegedly mature women said about Sarah Palin? Remember how they accused her of not being the mother of her Downs Syndrome child, the one a few shameless souls thought she should abort? And remember the deafening silence of the Democrats or, more specifically, female Democrats? The hatred was palpable.
I’m nowhere as important or ubiquitous as the comely and savvy governor, so my critics are both less vocal and less newsworthy. Still, it was with profound sadness that I read the emails in response to my piece last week, because they represented a hollowing-out of the human soul, a degradation of the spirit that separates sentient beings from damp clods of earth. I have learned that when someone is unable to defend his position, he resorts to ad hominem attacks with tangential topics. For example, there was the fellow who assured me I was racist because I refused to use the term “President Obama” in my column, even though I’d referred to him as “president.” There was the woman who said that she was a Catholic who believed in abortion, and don’t dare tell me that she wasn’t in good standing with the church (okay, I won’t. I’ll leave that to the Bishops.)
There was the gay man from San Francisco who, even though I hadn’t said anything about same-sex marriage in the piece, felt it necessary to tell me that his ‘husband’ was a much better “American” than I was because his “people” came over on the Mayflower. There was the black woman who said that Barack Obama was so much better than those mediocre white men who had been keeping her people down all these years. To her, I was moved to mention that mediocre white men had freed the slaves, passed the Civil Rights Act, ended segregation, and risked death at KKK road blocks like my father. I also reminded her that this president had come from the womb of a mediocre white woman
I could tell the comment was not appreciated by the response, which included several words not even Andrew Dice Clay could pronounce.
Some people actually tried to engage in civil discourse, but they were about as common as a bar of soap at an Occupy rally. Others mocked my sadness, going so far as to say that I should just jump in front of a Regional Rail car and be done with it. Given the problems SEPTA has in running its trains on time, this is probably not the most effective way to do myself in if I were so inclined.
And then there were those who were convinced that I hated Barack Obama, even though I said I didn’t. Apparently, when a white person doesn’t vote for the “First Black President” and then brazenly admits it in print, she must be hiding some crisp percale sheets in her linen closet. These were the most depressing emails, the ones that saw racism in the shadows and refused to believe that anyone could actually embrace a conservative without ulterior, sinister motives.
Every four years, there are winners and losers. But there is a bitter edge to it this time, a sense that we’ve been ripped along jagged lines that draw blood.
I’m not done fighting for my beliefs, not by a long shot. But I do seek an armistice of sorts. Not yielding, not compromising.
Just finding that place where, as Yeats wrote, “peace comes dropping slow.”
Just more hypocrisy from the aptly named HypoChrissy. I would urge anyone with a sincere gripe against Christine's sickening blog and column to write her an e-mail (of course, I would suggest being reasonable and relatively polite, as she routinely recycles hate mail into "I hate liberals" postings). Maybe she will quit and we will finally get some peace around here.— sophistry- I spent most of yesterday away from my computer and just came across today's blog.
Christine, you have not written anything that calls for the kind of hateful vitriol that you have received from your opponents. You are ALLOWED to be disappointed and melancholy over the results of the election.
Some people simply do not know HOW to win gracefully.
Please know that you are not alone in your values. Those of us who are moderates are not for total government intrusion in our lives. As someone above said, all we ask for is opportunity.
One way that opportunity appears is in the form of a decent education, which is my personal cause, an education that is free and open to all. That kind of system requires government support.
See, that is my idea of ideal. The government is not there to tell us how to live our lives but offers the supports we all need occasionally to make the most of them.
Meanwhile, Chris, you have a right to your opinion which is neither racist nor misogynist. You are correct that whites as well as blacks sacrificed and on occasion were martyred for the advancement of civil rights.
We are a country of personal ideologies, principles and opinions with the overarching freedom to say what we want.
Unfortunately, the haters among us abuse the privilege.
Shame on them.
— Gendres - It is just amazing, utterly breathtaking, the hypocrisy, intolerance, and willful ignorance of most on the political left.— Mirror
- PG, in answer to your question, I believe that philly.com is international including its blogs.
As far as the stock market, there is still trepidation over the impending fiscal crisis in January. If everyone will just sit down and accept a compromise that repairs the tax system and increases revenue while controlling spending, the crisis should be resolved and the economy moved forward.
This is NOT the time for politics as usual.— Gendres - Oooops, meant to type PJ.— Gendres
- Mirror - even Christine acknowledges that many on the right are just as extreme in their responses. There are equal opportunity offenders on both ends of the spectrum.
I agree with Chris that it is time for a cease fire and some truce talks. This is the government we have and we should be able to use it wisely to solve some serious problems like disaster relief, improving infrastructure and supporting a fair and equitable health care system.
— Gendres - Carl, I read Annette's column and it is indeed moderate in its appraisal, unlike some of the acid content so prevalent in some corners. Of course, Annette can afford to be generous because her side won and won big.
But there should always be room in this country for those with a conscience and personal values that may not exactly click with the avant-garde who want to push the norms of society further and further to the left.
It is always about finding balance between the extremes.
But we must never be deaf to the views of others.— Gendres - "even Christine acknowledges that many on the right are just as extreme in their responses. There are equal opportunity offenders on both ends of the spectrum."
And yes, Ann Coulter gets a passing mention as an offender.
But the offenders on the right are never worthy of the kind of screed that Flowers launches about the left. Why is that?— scoobysnacks - carl, some things transcend politics. Personal values and philosophy are at the top of the list. When voting, we try to choose those party platforms that most agree with those ideals.
Sometimes we have to compromise when it is not 100% in our favor.
I think that all opinion writers are brave, especially when they espouse controversial positions. You are correct that some of the private emails they get are horrific and vile and I am glad you are sorry for that.
Christine, who is a conservative writer in a liberal paper in a mostly Democratic town is a particular target for this venom. She is allowed to vent once in a while without being criticized for that too.
I do not advise her to quit, because then the paper would be entirely off balance. Even the Inky has only a few conservative columnists.
No, she should not abandon her post as a religious concervative writer.
And she won't.— Gendres - And, Carl, if we had no opinion writers. bloggers or cable pundits to stir the pot, life would be much duller. Those of us who are political junkies would be especially deprived. It is an exciting sport.
Miss Flowers and I do not agree on everything, but I support her writing because she voices much of what I do support.
And I especially support free speech.
8-)— Gendres - This comment has been deleted. — carl and sons
- Thank you!
Back in the day, there were only the Sunday morning talk shows and Washington Week on PBS. The latter was, and still is, especially notable for its civil dialogue between panelists from across the political spectrum. They are patient and polite. They disagree, but do not shout one another down.
Unfortunately, that no longer sells. It's considered a snorefest by today's audience. We've been brought down to the Jerry Springer/World wrestling level of Fox News and Hardball. - I don’t know if Flowers has any say in the headlines to her blogs or columns (excoriating random “liberal” comments but never addressing the equally or more appalling comments from the right), but she certainly is responsible for the content. She is notoriously ultra-thin-skinned and reactionary. All too often she goes off on an emotionally-based tirade, without taking time for basic dialog with those whom she disagrees (her use of snide language clearly indicates that she feels far above them), but because she cannot find it in herself to go outside her bubble, her blogs and column are and will forever only be arrogant pout-shout fests. They are perhaps the most wasted valuable space on this website, anytime she is not writing about sports or non-political-religious matters (I have found those blogs and columns to be the most fulfilling, personally). Does she even grasp what the concept of “every action (her blogs/column) has an equal and opposite reaction (emails/comments)”? Instead of scouring other right wing columns and blogs for source material, she’d do better for herself by not trying (and almost always failing) to insult her detractors if she did a little soul searching, express more fully-informed experiences – certainly her output would seem more heartfelt than bitter, mean and petulant, if she did. Often, it has disappointed me that she, a woman who seems to have had some significant career achievement, in a field that can provide some unique experiences to form some well-rounded views, falls so short of sharing truly inspirational or informative commentary most of the time. Not just in writing, but in her TV appearances, as well. There is a clear lack of self esteem going on. Or a major disconnect of what is in her head from what’s in her heart. But more columns of this tone/intent will unfortunately, only bestow a sub-par legacy and sadly, only more of the same kind of reactions. Deserving or not, that’s part of having this privileged platform.— Tuptim
- Very well put, @Tuptim. I have never understood WHY Flowers even has this great platform, when most of what she does is 1) recycle her own pouty rants or 2) recycle some other RWNJ's (sorry, but that is what they are! Look at her right-wing extremist sources...and Facebook!) loony arguments and 3) insult anyone who disagrees with her.
That is par for the course: the disagreement. You can't expect people to think you're a goddess, Christine, when you well know that your "see no shades of gray" opinions are extreme, old fashioned, and very unpopular, especially given the way our nation has just voted.— sophistry - Tuptim (The King & I reference?), as a woman I too am often disappointed with Flowers, and perhaps that is why I go harder on her. She has this prominent platform and she practically wastes it by using it as a playground for her feet-stomping, flailing temper tantrums. I’ll probably get slammed for saying this, but I truly think she has it in her to deliver columns with a higher level of intellect. But I also have a gut feeling that she merely chooses not to, on advice from her employer, to submit these kinds of low-based provocative screeds. It certainly draws numerous comment posts, and that has to count for something on this site. She has demonstrated pure eloquence and visceral compassion when she doesn’t deliberately employ easily divisive and cynical tactics. So, we know it’s there. What we don’t know is why it isn’t always there. What, is intelligence, compassion and comprehension now a thing of the past in order to keep your blogger/columnist job?— B Beal 19146
Email Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com Reach Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com.
