Heh, I think some of you were almost as pissed about me apologizing for the "jump in a river" line as the "uppity" comment. For the record the line was directed at some of my fellow pundits and bloggers who've been on this "woe is Sarah Palin" kick. As much as I disagree with them, I don't actually want them to jump in a river--not even metaphorically.
Anyway, I get why people actually recoiled at the apology. When tackling the opposition, there is always the temptation to respond with as much force as possible, to marshal all your sarcasm, all your anger, all your righteousness, and hurl it at them without regard. When I write, I'm always at war with that temptation. I did a lot of that when I was young, and I quickly became a master of The Screed, if not much else. It was writing as a sort of scrawled pornography, writing as masturbation, writing to work out my own anger, and the issues of people who happen to agree with me. But when I looked up from it all, I still felt alone--my whole audience consisted of people who were like me, so effectively, I was.
You can beat the opposition with a club all day long, if you have no regard for the people on the side getting sprayed with blood. That's a kind of writing that pleases me and people who agree with me, but shows absolutely no regard to people who either don't agree, or aren't decided. I have no idea why anyone would want to write in such a fashion. It's arrogant, self-absorbed, and better suited to one's diary, or their inane, half-drunk, happy-hour ramblings.
If you see me apologize, and think that it is, as one commenter said (In Bush-like fashion, may I add) "a sign of weakness," know this--I care about what is, not "signs" of what is. My strength isn't in my righteousness, my haughtiness, and it damn sure ain't in my spelling. My strength is in--if I may be so bold--slinging verbs, in pulling from arcane places, and--mostly--in assuming that the people on the other side have their reasons also. What I hope to do is engage those arguments directly, honestly, without strawmen (the truest sign of weakness), and respectfully. If you see me apologize, it's because I didn't do that. I have no fear of admitting an error--and I don't do it to comfort the other side. I do it for me, and for those who might be swayed. There's nothing weak about that.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2010 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
I couldn't agree with you more about the need to recognize the other side's point -- I've always prided myself on that. But it's pretty damn hard right now, with so much on the line, and a candidate which I actually admire AND want in the white house.
*applause*
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Attaboy, if you will.
Complete sights and new heights after I get deep
You don't have to speak just seek
And peep the technique
Niice@TNC.com
well said, pal. you're on the right track here. and, i might add, forward-looking. as we mature as a nation, this will become the predominant mode of political discourse. you know, rational, respectful, and thoughtful, without being wishy-washy about what one believes or values.
Well said. Apologizing is a sign of strength, not weakness.
When did Bush say that apologizing was a sign of weakness?
Regarding the thread this refers to, do you think this Newsweek article about Kwame Kilpatrick and Obama is racist? It doesn't seem so to me, but I wonder what your take on it is.
TNC,
Just recently discovered you through Sully and Matt. I love your posts and the angle from which you approach things. And it's good to see the occasional, non-reporter type language and emotion break through.
Loved your post re the uppity remark - have you seen that the guy in question has not backed down and now says he was never aware that this had any racial connotations. Even a youngster from the Home Counties in England (like myself) knows this is absolute bulls**t. How can he get away with this?
I still think they should jump in a river.
Bob asks: "(H)ave you seen that the guy in question has not backed down and now says he was never aware that this had any racial connotations. Even a youngster from the Home Counties in England (like myself) knows this is absolute bulls**t. How can he get away with this?"
He's getting away it because the Republican base - especially in the Southern states - is still proudly racist. That's why George "Macaca" Allen still nearly won his Senate race after being revealed on film as a race-baiting fool. It's also why they cling to the Confederate battle flag.
TNC
I can't speak for anybody else, but I wasn't upset about the apology, just frustrated that some of us always have to play by rules that "the other side" seemingly has no regard for.
You bodied em with that comment and were speaking for not only yourself, but for all of us fed up with that brand of bullshit and it was good to see some of that fire, so I'm sure some were disappointed you backed off those comments.
I spend more time reading stuff I disagree with than anything I would co-sign. It gets the blood boiling and it's tempting as hell to react in kind, but I just take it in stride. You learn nothing about the people you disagree with if you don't at least make the effort to see where they're coming from.
I feel you though, by apologizing for letting your anger get the best of you, and saying "I ain't gonna be that guy" you're being true to yourself, and you're also not letting "them" pull your strings.
They want you to go off and give them ammo to say "see, this is what (whatever group they're demonizing at that moment) does". Which is why I'm loving how Obama and Biden are laughing off some of the vitriol they've had slung at them in recent days.
Anyways props on this, I see where you're coming from.
TNC:
Virtue is its own reward... Good on ya for apologizing when you felt like you needed to.
Devo:
I got into a knock down drag out with my parents (early 60's) three weeks or so ago about Obama. Basically it was me saying ends don't justify means and I'd rather Obama lose with dignity than win disgracefully. My parents basically said anything goes because this election is too important to lose. I feel their and your pain... I want to win the right way, but I do want to win. Obama winning a 50.1 to 49.9 "base election" is going to hamper his efforts even though Dems control congress because the conservative Dems are going to be under immense pressure to try to tap the brakes on universal health care, military spending and the like. If he can win in a relative blowout, he has much more cred, and can basically give W's speech from 2004 (I have capital and it will be spent).
Fred asks: "Regarding the thread this refers to, do you think this Newsweek article about Kwame Kilpatrick and Obama is racist? It doesn't seem so to me, but I wonder what your take on it is. "
I wonder if Fred sees any blatant racism in he comments in the 'uppity' thread, and if he'd point out any comments in particular that are beyond his idea of the pale, if he has one.
Ta-Nehisi - These people were against identity politics, before they were for them. There's no need to apologize. As a minority, I can't tell you how many times I've heard "their side" drone on and on about the "perceived whine" of the aggrieved minority. I have no sympathy for their crocodile tears in this matter. Their candidate has been under the scrutiny due a vice-presidential nominee of her background and qualifications for SIX DAYS. Maybe when one of these amorphous "liberal commentators" starts spreading rumors that there's a tape of Sarah Palin saying she "hates whitey", I'll take them a little more seriously. But right now? Nah.
I agree, TNC. This is, more or less, the same attitude that Obama has adopted... and it has served him well.
In the words of Brian Fantana: "Take it easy, Fred. Why don't you sit this next one out, stop talking for a while."
Right on. Well said. We need more of this, not less, in our discourse.
Wow. Big respect. That was some real shit.
Knowledge reigns supreme over nearly everybody
Call up TNC - guarenteed to rock the party.
Bloggers act like they don't know.
Beautifully put. I understand why some people felt your apology was a kind of retreat, but as someone with a temper kept in check solely by a gossamer thread of superego, I know firsthand that apologies for an outburst of anger are about setting yourself right internally, ensuring your behavior is congruent with your own standards, not genuflecting to whatever vileness provoked the fury.
Every day I dig you more. The Atlantic is lucky as hell to have you.
This is why your site is the first one I bring up in the morning, and last one I read at the end of the day. Well put.
I understand where you're coming from, and I appreciate that you're classy enough to apologize. Still don't think you needed to, necessarily, though. I read blogs as reflecting the emotions and reactions of the blogger-- and your comment certainly did that. I guess I'd put it in the same category as typos.
And I still think anyone whining about Palin-- while ignoring crap like 'uppity'-- can jump in a lake. That may be part of it too.
That's a kind of writing that pleases me and people who agree with me, but shows absolutely no regard to people who either don't agree, or aren't decided. I have no idea why anyone would want to write in such a fashion. It's arrogant, self-absorbed, and better suited to one's diary, or their inane, half-drunk, happy-hour ramblings.
I read this blog to learn, to challenge my beliefs and get a point of view that is free from the insults that emanate from the echo chamber blogs. I understand that people get frustrated and want their beliefs reinforced and their anger justified, but that gets old real fast. It is kind of like eating a frozen pizza at 2:00 AM when you are drunk. It satisfies at the time, but when you are sober, it isn't a balanced meal and it doesn't taste so good.
If you are ever in Detroit, I will supply the happy hour beer, you provide the ramblings.
Real Fred: I think my advice to Fake Fred is still valid for you.
http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/07/01/semi-literate-michelle-obama-got-by-on-affirmative-action/
Okay, google "Michelle Obama" and affirmative action and tell my why it is that we are supposed to apologize to these people again? We win on the issues. I don't care how many buckets of crocodile tears they shed when we vet the candidate they love despite never having heard of her six days ago. Their culture of "victimization when it's convenient" is truly disgusting and is a continuation of the well-worn hypocrisy which, quite frankly, I'm sick of even having to point out.
As a club, "jump in a river" is more of a nerf bat. Nevertheless, I see your point.
I once read a conservative commenter who remarked that the Lord of the Rings movies had reminded him of the importance of fighting evil. To me, though, I thought the message of LoTR was that what was important was *how* you fought evil.
Fight with faith and confidence. Obama seems to be going for an actual mandate. Win big, win for his policies, or don't win at all. Such confidence I haven't seen in a Democratic politician for a long time.
We need to let go of our fears, and stick to our agenda. Sarah Palin is meant to distract us from noticing that the Republican Party has nothing to offer America. They aren't even trying to be serious about dealing with our biggest problems.
I didn't think I could enjoy your blog any more than I already do--and now you've gone and done it!
Seriously. I love it. Don't ever sell out?
For the most part, I do agree. What is EFFECTIVE, is a more important question, than the normal bitching sessions.
The thing is, what to do when one feels outrage, that is effective? Reverend Kind and others, never gave into screeds of self-righteousness, mostly, because they didn't expect good behavior, and also realized it was ineffective.
We middle class whites though, think that our outrage is justified. Take a look at Krugman, Delong, regular moderates, initially driven crazy by the lying and crimes of this administration.
Of course, as you say - outrage is easy. Just look at how the right wing borg uses it, and gets in a manic frenzy.
So for the most part, you are correct. Calm and clear eyed, is the best, even when you see something that is obviously outrageous, you respond in a more useful way, than a narcissistic way.
TNC,
This sentiment is true and good. Hold on to it.
I'm still amazed that there's all this contention over what was really a pretty bland burn.
Real Fred and Chris,
Please don't derail. No offense, but this is why people start their own blogs.
Great, now you have me thinking about personal growth stuff.
A true apology, and this is what you did, is a statement that you acted in a way that you think is beneath you, not in keeping with how you see yourself and how you want yourself to behave in thsi world. It has very little to do with the other party.
It is not the "I am sorry if anyone has been offended" false political apology.
It is a statement that I have offended myself, and I am sorry for that. And that is a position of strength, of strengthening, of improving yourself.
That is why Major Winchester in the M*A*S*H* tv series asked his parents to send him deoderant. He was offending himself, and could not stand it.
Taking the high road is difficult, and keeping to it even more so. But I would prefer to lose an election than call my oponent the toad-sucking tree-drilling nastertium-kicking person that she is. But I have gone too far and apoligize to anyone who may think that they should have been offended by what I said.
I'm not sure your strength is recognizing reality--"I did a lot of that when I was young,"??
What do you think you are now? Just a young whippersnapper who can sling the verbs. Enjoy your youth while you have it.
I thought the apology was graceful. Funny how the evangelicals have become more visible and so many in the public behave with so little grace.
Out of respect for T-N C's request not to derail, don't respond this question here, Chris, but in the next relevant thread T-N provides, tell me which issues you feel you win on and why.
i am very impressed by this post.
you have my deepest respect for the sentiments and attitude you expressed here, and for the code of communication you preach and practice.
my hat is off.
I just donated to Stephen Camp, who as you know is Lynn Westmoreland's opponent, in your honor. I am a liberal, female, white St. Paul, Minnesota resident. Although St. Paul is overwhelmingly DFL (that's what we call it here: the Democrat Farmer Labor Party), we welcomed the Republican Convention with open arms. Now I am ashamed we hosted that scumfest. All I can do in penance is send money- to Senator Obama after Governor Palin's hateful performance, and now to Stephen Camp. I encourage others to do the same.
As a republican, I wish people like that were (metaphorically) thrown in a river and never heard from again as politicians by our party. WTF? How can somebody 1) say what he said; 2) not apologize? 3) Not be immediately censured. Either way, love the post. I think a lot of people go through the screed phase, and hopefully grow out of it, although very few will ever write as well or as reflectively as Coates.
Honesty is the best we can ask for, in this case. If more people would be honest about their meanings and feelings around these matters, the better off we'd be. Lynn Westmoreland's bullsh** claim today about the meaning of "uppity" will work for him (click my name for a link to why it's absolutely a lie) because this is an area in which we all expect dishonesty, and straight up racists like him can exploit that.
I respect you for your apology, especially because most would say its not necessary to apologize for a minor infraction. It demonstrates that you are more self-aware than most.
My insight on this topic: Some years back, my wife and I took a "How to be Married" class. It was worth it for this single insight. "Any 'apology' that includes the word "if", "but" or "because" is not an apology; it is an excuse."
I'm on 25 years and counting.
real recognize real, keep doing you.
No one with two brain cells to rub together doubts that Republicans play the politics of racial polarization. A few, such as Lee Awater shortly before death, occasionally admit it.
But no GOPer that I know of has ever admitted that what people like Westmoreland are really after is outrage from the media and Democrats. There are votes to be mined from casting Republicans as the party of whites and Democrats as the party of minorities.
It's a filthy tactic, but until it's demonstrated to be a loser they'll keep employing it.
Thank you for this incredibly well-written discussion, which I shared with my college-level HS class. Keep up the amazing work!