How To Win Nascar Dads: "Republicans Are Pussies"

Crossposted at DailyKos and http://thedemim.blogspot.com

THEORY
One of the ways that Democrats have given Republicans the discursive advantage in elections is by claiming that they represent the male or father subject position and Dems represent the female or mother position. As problematic as we may believe it to be, gender norms dictate that leader is synonymous with masculine (especially in times of terror and fear).

I would argue that the Republicans did an effective job of framing the 2004 Presidential Election in these phallic terms to Bush's advantage and Kerry's downfall. The Democrats made the strategic mistake of focusing their campaign on issues and events of the day as supposed to emotional truths, and projections of strength and character.

On the issue of strength, in particular, the Republicans' talking points sounded as though they were speaking specifically of a phallic competition. Kerry was portrayed as flaccid (a "flip-flopper" that went "whichever way the win blew). Bush constantly re-affirmed how "steady and strong" he was. I think the Democrats must cast themselves as the party of strength and power normatively classified as masculine.

(The good stuff is below the fold)

PRACTICE
We have a prime opportunity to make this argument in the context of the NSA scandal, Patriot Act, and other overreaching by the government to "protect the homeland" at all costs. While Bush does his best Judge Dredd impression, we must remind the country that he operates out of a position of extremism based in weakness and fear, not strength and character. Currently, when we attack these programs, we are framed as wimps who are weak on terrorism. Instead we must frame them as weak, scared pussies who are letting the terrorists win.

Here is our argument:

The terrorists attacked us on September 11 to attack our very way of life. They thought they could bring "terror" and fear to our lives and force us to reject our deeply held beliefs in hope, freedom, and justice. Now the Republicans in Washington want to capitulate to the terrorists and give up on our greatest ideals. They want to tear up the constitution. They want us to live in a climate of fear and doubt. They are willing to surrender our rights and liberties to the terrorists. Under their rule, the terrorists have won the battle to define our priorities of America.

We can not let the terrorists win. We believe in an America that never lets terrorist thugs determine how we run our county and we will NEVER sacrifice our freedoms and beliefs out of cowardice or fear. Courage is staring fear down and proclaiming, "we will not let you intimidate us. We are not afraid of you. We will never let you determine how we live our lives." In America, we have a slogan: "live free or die." We will "live free" no matter what the Republicans or the terrorists have to say about it.

Let's go out and spread the word.

Tags: (all tags)

Comments

6 Comments

sure but...
I agree with the main idea, but the problem is you spend two paragraphs describing why you are not a pussy.  This is something only a pussy would do.  

Just call them pussies and don't waste so much breath.  Wait for the standard doomsday "we must give up our freedoms" talk from them, and then call them a pussy for being so scared and needing daddy Bush to protect them.  You won't convince anyone you are manly by writing an essay constructing a well-developed argument that you are not a pussy.

My 2 cents

by Tugboat 2006-01-18 09:36PM | 0 recs
Re: sure but...
I think this is a good point. Democrats often overthink things like this. Our strategy should just be to say, "The Republicans are overcome with fear." When they respond, then we hit them with our argument. Your main idea is right, though. These guys are shaking so hard that they aren't doing anything to tackle the problem.
by bluenc 2006-01-19 07:05AM | 0 recs
Just wanted to remind you
that "pussies" is a word that derogates women. I would hope that we don't have to become sexists or racists to win over Republicans.
by Populism2008 2006-01-19 01:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Just wanted to remind you
I don't see 'pussy' as racist or sexist.  I supposed it COULD be taken as sexist, if you're hypersensitive about that kind of stuff.  It's just a little ridiculous.

Of course, using the word 'pussies' in a political discourse IS more than a little juvenile.  There are  more sophisticated ways to say that... like 'cowards', 'capitulators', or 'giving in to the terrorists' or 'being OBL's unwitting puppet' or whatever.  'Taking the easy way' or 'stupid' are also decent.  

'Pussies' just sounds like two 12-year-olds arguing over a Yu-gi-Oh! card, but it'd be nice to get something with the same punch w/o the nya-nya-nya-na-na quality.

by teknofyl 2006-01-19 03:55AM | 0 recs
On "Pussyness"
I wrote this posting with a certain critical distance to the argument I am thinking we need to promote.  I am using such strong, controversial language to comment on both who we are attempting to persuade and the most basic discursive frameworks on which I think this demographic operates.

This argument is way too complicated to address in a comment but I have found that post-structuralist feminist theorists Judith Butler and Luce Irigaray offer some illuminating thoughts on issues of gender and power.

by The Democratic Instant Message 2006-01-19 06:48AM | 0 recs
Re: On "Pussyness"
And I would add that Camile Paglia has some interesting thoughts on the subject as well.  
by Winston Smith 2006-01-19 03:08PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------