Bearing Witness Against Cyber-Smears in the Immigration Debate

What? Shiny? Where? Oooh!

My comment about Olbermann wasn't meant as either an argument or a distraction. It was plain old snark. But since we're on the subject...

From what I've seen -- and I may be missing something here -- there probably are more crazy emailers on the right than on the left. There are plenty of possible explanations why, among them the plethora of left-leaning media out there willing to spread half-baked theories. (Keith?)

But that's not my main problem. My real problem is McLaren picking a bunch of random, admittedly loopy emails and assuming that these anonymous amateurs speak for the conservative movement as a whole. Any of you guys ever hear of Charles Krauthammer? George Will? Bill Kristol? Fred Barnes? Jonah Goldberg? Heritage Foundation? American Enterprise Institute? National Review? Weekly Standard? Powerline?

Seriously, its very rare to see anyone here address the arguments raised by the actual intellectual leaders of the conservative movement. The only exception to the general rule is Cato Institute. Every now and then someone at Sojo will cite them, but only when there's some intramural disagreement having to do with the fine points of libertarianism.

Wallis, McLaren, et al are supposed to be political sophisticates here. So why do they spend all their time picking on novices who are blowing off steam? Why not take on someone in their own intellectual weight class?

Or maybe Sojo's brighter lights are afraid that they can't hang in there intellectually with the Krauthammers? So they beat up on the Joe the Plumbers instead?

Look, I could go on all day about Keith Olbermann, and Olby has a name and a face and a TV show. I can link to youtube videos of his rants. Brian McLaren has a bunch of anonymous emailers that he can't even bother to quote from. And we're supposed to take him seriously as a critic of conservatism? Please.

LV

Melt...

[

Rant Warning Alert: You have set me off, so buckle up!

Why not just have said all that in the first place instead of offering the snark? Part of the problem with people not being able to communicate intelligently about important issues is the dismissive nature of snark. It is in fact, this exact tactic that drowns out the Conservative voices of reason you speak of.
I used to think they existed, you know, those "Conservative Voices of Reason." But from what I have seen over the past year, they have gone the way of the dinosaur. As evidence, I cite elected officials being shouted down at town hall meetings where people just can't seem to express their views intelligently and respectfully. I cite "death panels" and other deliberate lies used to derail intelligent conversations about the very grim future we face with health care. My hope that that creature exists is dashed every time Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck opens their mouth. My desire to hear reasoned discussion on important issues went out the window when someone yelled "you lie" at our President. See, all these people I mention have driven my belief that the reasoned conservatives that you speak of have taken up residence with Big Foot and the Yeti (with an occasional visit from their friend Nessie). And in order to understand the gravity of those statements, you need to understand I used to be a moderate, and I have voted Republican in several elections. But such voices drove me leftward.
So I ask you, if your reasoned conservative views are being misrepresented by those I just mentioned and these ridiculous e-mails, then doesn't it seem reasonable you should direct your disdain not towards those who are receiving the misrepresented conservative message, but towards those who are actually misrepresenting it? if you really care whether or not Conservative views are being represented fairly, then by all means, PLEASE express your concerns to those who are doing the damage. And please don't blame those of us whose ears are unwittingly filled with the voices of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, and Ann Coultier. These are the ones misrepresenting your views, and these are the ones yelling the loudest, and try as I might, I just can't hear the still small voice of reasoned Conservatives through all that din. By all means, if this concerns you, take aim at the annoying voices who do nothing, absolutely nothing, to further reasoned and respectful dialogue. But don't blame those of us who receive their message for not being able to sift through to find the gold among the gravel.
Your argument sounds very much like the one I've heard atheists cite about Christians who plead "no, we're not ALL like that!" The voices we hear are what represent truth to us. All else seems like myth.
And yes, as I'm sure you can tell by my tone, I'm angry about this. I'm NOT angry at you, so please don't take it as an attack on you. But I am sick and tired of reasoned discussion being drowned out by those who have no desire for it. There are far too many incredibly important issues at stake in this country for this kind of third grade mentality to drown out the reasoned voices from both sides of the issue. And I actually value diversity of opinion. But if such diversity comes only in the form of shouting and yelling and refusing to listen and discuss, I'd rather send those diverse voices to their room without supper so the adults can get some work done.

Look! Squirrel!

And how about those mean-spirited evil republicans bearing false witness against Obama's healthcare plan by calling into question the money to fund abortions.

Oh wait, those are several brave house democrats asking that question...

The benefit of the "Christian" position (as opposed to the hysteria of any one disagreeing with open borders) is the eventual elimination of foreign aid to poor nations.

If I articulated the ten most important commitments of my life related to public/political life--I would not feel at home in the Democratic Party, nor the Republican Party. I would not feel represented in either the mainstream media--nor world of punditry, commentary,opinion.

I do not think I am alone.

The primary facilitators of public discussion are political leaders and mainstream journalists. To what degree do you believe they are placing important issues on the table and leading reasoned discussion?

What we are seeing is a free-for-all in response to this sector that either abdicates responsibility; or acts in an elitist manner. It does not matter whether they are elitist. That is how many perceive them--and feel treated by them.

The reality is that virtually everyone--right up to the President--feels that powerlessness. And it tends to lead to propoganda at best and vulgar shouting/violence at worst.

So I appreciate McLaren's call that we individually respond in dialogue to those who spread misinformation. He highlights, in spite of our sense of powerlessness, that we all have a level of power and responsibility. It highlights we all have a level of power in our hearing and in our speaking.

My points: 1. It is hard to place great expectations on people with relatively little power when so many of the voice with primary responsibility for shaping the macro-discussions in our society act with such frequent childishness; and 2. I think our pushbacks towards responsible dialogue need to be separated out from our advocacy and partisan activity (ie it doesn't work to say "I'm right because you yell")

Most people end up creating their own religion, in their own worst image. One must admire the zealousness of the subsequent faithfulness in the face of all contrary evidence, including even against the testimony of the Holy Spirit.

Hi, in Canada we have no healthcare rationing, beyond booking appointments in advance for non-urgent problems--or choose another doctor. Depending on where you live, you may wait many weeks for elective surgery like knee replacement, or pay for it yourself at a private clinic like cosmetic surgery which isn't covered. Medication is, hospitalization and physicians are, and if your family insists (my inlaws did) you will get full ambulance, ER and advanced intensive care every time you turn blue at the nursing home even if you have Alzheimer's, heart failure, and many other medical conditions. We have world-class cancer treatment, surgeons and research.

What would you liberals need email forwards for? You already have Keith Olbermann.

Most of these contentious issues are not easily expressed in either/or terms, but our society of urgency and immediacy demands instant reply and decision. When these one-sided messages appear, they depend on people refusing to take the time to probe the complexities. I agree that discussion without emotional entanglement does more toward solving the problems, but problem-solving often is secondary to politics and partisanship. I pray that cool heads and civil discourse can take place, but I wonder......

This is misinformation. I find this offensive and inappropriate. Can I explain why by phone?

LV

Thank you thank you thank you! I've spent countless hours fact checking those e-mails and responding to the senders with what I hope are encouraging words to not bear false witness, but to in all things seek and speak truth.

There are those who love to hate and who enjoy being in on the secret of a good conspiracy because like the Gnostics of old, it implies knowledge that only the chosen could have. It gives credibility to a superior faith, or righteousness. And much of it is received out of fear.

I always respond to these e-mails by first doing a fact check for myself and then forwarding on the information. Just googling the questions can give a wealth of information, or using a fact finding site such as snopes.com will help debunk any number of myths floating about.

As fellow heirs of Christ, we are accountable to each other and to God and will give an account for every word we speak. My first clue as to the veracity of what I hear, is whether it meets the standards of what wisdom from above, or Godly wisdom is. Or does it contain those things which God hates.

Divisiveness, fear mongering, contentiousness, tale bearing or gossip, name calling, unwillingness to listen or be reasoned with. What rotten fruit comes from it. Certainly nothing savory or perfumed as the essence of Jesus. May we build and edify always even as we speak forth truth.

What is misinformation?

I like Brian McLaren. I also liked the heart of this message... I am a liberal-loving, Obama supporting, health care and immigration reform nut! But, in support of the very ideas BL is attempting to champion here, I take issue with one statement in this post:

"These e-mails will link God, country, and the good old days

Ah, Lord Voldemort. Classic diversion tactic. Sometimes I wish I taught philosophy classes, as this site is full of great examples of fallacy in arguments!

Here's how the conversation went: you took exception to McLaren's argument calling it "misinformation". I asked what was misinformation. LetJustice answered for you saying that you seemed to be taking exception to McLaren's implication that the cyber-trash e-mails are strictly a Hyper-Conservative phenomenon, and Liberals don't do likewise. I asked for some examples of Liberals doing likewise. Instead of responding to my observation and experience that I have never received even one such liberal e-mail, you divert to Keith Olbermann, from whom I have never, by they way, received even one e-mail.

Look over there! Shiny!

This new format is awful -- it is nearly impossible to follow discussions because replies are in the right place. Maybe everyone wnt home for the week-end. And I'm not on a Mac.
I agree with your resopnse to LV -- the hard-to-find serious conservatives are the ones that should be responding to the screamers who just say anything they think will get attention. But it almost looks like they are afraid of the screamers. The screamers just keep doing it because it seems to work, and some of them are making a ton of money doing it.
AS for people forwarding these hateful lying e-mails without reading them, doing that is in my opinion just as much a lie as is spreading gossip without even caring if it is true. I would never forward an e-mail to my friends and familyl without reading it. Pleading ignorance is just inadequate.

1. All else being equal, snarks are better than rants. If nothing else, they tend to be shorter.

2. You tend to find what you are looking for. If you want to hear reasonable conservative points of view, they aren't all that hard to find. If you want rants, we got those too.

3. Look, my main beef is with Brian McLaren, who presents himself as a deep thinker but picks on anonymous folks who don't write for a living, and then doesn't even give us the benefit of letting us see what the heck it is he's all worked up about. Instead he just says they want to go back to a time when white folks ran everything. Well, maybe that's really what they're after, and maybe it's not. Without a link or a quote, God only knows what's in these mysterious emails. If someone wants to throw around accusations of racism, they might want to present some proof.

4. Enough, you have the last word if you want it. I'm gonna do something more constructive. Did anyone happen to see a squirrel?

LV

mbt.com offers Mbt shoes.Mbt MBT Safiri---Fashion design,top quality.

B-Mac,

Thanks for the advice. Can't wait until I get my next email blast from Sojourners.

Under your definition, ANY lying would be excused as long as the person doing the lying thought some greater good was going to come of it. That "moral heirarchy" is rather flat. Sorry, but at least in Catholic theology, the bar is quite a bit higher than that. And the sort of lying we're discussing here in the immigration, health care, and just plain politics "debates" just wouldn't come anywhere near clearing that bar.

Should we kill an abortion clinic Dr? When the end justifies the means all kinds of things happen.

I've often wondered about this too. Perhaps I'm just not in the right circles, but I've only seen one "liberal" email forward come my way. It was back during the Bush years and it said Bush was secretly trying to bring back the draft. But I get tons of "conservative" email forwards.

I wonder why this is. It's not that some liberals don't misrepresent or lie about politics; they do, just like some conservatives do. But they don't create email forwards to do it. I don't get it. I also wonder who sits down and takes the time to actually come up with these things. Weird.

I am not sure why not, but some of my CRAZY liberal friends are not shy about posting un-fact checked liberal craze all over face book and other social networking sites.

Yes, but keep in mind that conservatives began this tactic long before liberals. Your liberal friends are only responding to the conservative attack machine. Truth be told, you can't blame them.

I had a similar experience when I first gave control of my life to God's principles. I was in the process of examining the idea that you had be a right-wing Reopublican to be a Christian, which is essentially what fundamentalists taught. I re-conneted with my oldest friend whose strict religious upbringing was always in my mind a plus. I totally trusted in this friend's high moral character. As it turned out, this person had become arrogant, judgmental, bigoted and cruel. This old friend had been eaten up by an ideology that permits just about anything in the name of Goid. It exalts judgmentalism over charity, church attendance over living what Christ taught, arrogance over repentence.
I know not all conservatives or right-wingers are like that. But as with any group, it's the noisiest ones that get noticed. I don't identify with either the right or the left, but rather try to make my decisions with guidance from Christ's teachings. I do not trust anyone who lies or distorts the truth. There is so mu;ch of that in everyday life as well as politics that it is pretty easy to identify. It does seem to me that the right seem less bothered about lying. It seems as long as it is for a good reason, it is OK with them. Then it gets to be a routine, a habit.