The Right Kind Of Attention

As we've discussed the news of this past week - and truthfully much of this political season - with our staff, and others, the events of the day keep bringing up a certain childhood memory for one of our staff members.

As a child, this staffer would occasionally throw a doozy of a temper tantrum, a real get-on-the-ground-and-kick-your-heels affair. After our staffer's mother had yanked the child up, and disciplined our colorful colleague accordingly, "Staffer Mom" would sit our young hothead down and explain what the display of unfocused anger had accomplished.

"If you were attempting to get my attention, you got it," she'd say. "But it's the WRONG kind of attention."

In the same way, we've looked at many of our friends and professional contacts on the right over the last year or so, and often remarked, "I understand you like the Tea Partiers because they get you attention in the media - but it's the wrong kind of attention." That's not just our opinion. The most recent NBC/WSJ poll confirms that many in the Republican party feel the Tea Party has been good for getting them attention - even if they also think many on the far right are crazy.

We were also reminded yesterday of the power of positive attention. Even in the midst of the arrogant GOP blocking Federal funds for jobs, and the cowardly Democrats putting off the debate on tax cuts until after November's elections, positive attention still made a difference on Wednesday. The right kind of attention - cooperative, sensible, even-tempered, methodical attention - accomplished the difficult, yet worthwhile, bipartisan passage in the House of Representatives of the 9/11 Responders Health Care Bill. It's a simple bill, designed to cover the ongoing medical treatment of those who - when everyone else ran away from the World Trade Center on that September day - ran TOWARDS the burning and eventually, collapsing buildings.

Some Americans are also hoping for more of the right kind of attention this Saturday, in Washington, D.C., as the "One Nation Working Together" march meets on the Washington Mall.

Like the far-right tea party meeting hosted by Glenn Beck a few weeks ago, in the same location, the event this weekend is a combination of groups who are also angry with our government. Unlike the Tea Partiers, however, the many diverse groups hosting this Saturday's march aren't using fear, intimidation, and anger to get the attention of our leaders and media.

Instead, this group is planning on peacefully yet firmly demonstrating their commitment to continue trying to find common ground with other Americans, in order to solve the problems of our nation.

That's the correct kind of attention - something our country could use a whole lot more of.

Drawing Clarity From Confusion: Who Should We Cheer For?

It's exceedingly obvious to nearly anyone, anywhere - even outside the United States - that the American public is angry, frustrated, and worried about the future as the November election looms. However, if you're like us, and you pay attention to the details and statistics, you'll see that the American public IS angry - but they don't know WHO to be angry at and who to cheer for.

We pointed out yesterday in our "Notable News" links that, in the latest CNN/Opinion Research Poll, a majority of Americans believe that congressional Republicans are more responsible for America's economic problems than Democrats are. Yet, as Greg Sargent noted, voters say in that same poll that they currently believe Congressional Republicans are also more likely to improve economic conditions in America. This makes ZERO logical sense. Without context, informed & educated voters aren't likely to trust the same group of people they blame for the recession we're still struggling to get out of, to make that situation better. Voters operating from misplaced anger might act in this mystified way, however.

This isn't the only news topic where the normal expectations of Americans are being confused by reality.

Normally, Republican leaders can be counted on to be stalwart defenders of business interests and capital punishment. Yet Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger - one of the best known active Republican governors - recently granted a temporary stay of execution to a California Death Row inmate. More shockingly, in a speech he gave Tuesday, Schwarzenegger blasted Texas oil companies and the Koch brothers - two of the Republican Party's most wealthy billionaire backers - for spending millions of dollars to attempt to buy off California elections, specifically the attempt to repeal California's landmark climate and energy law.

Don't even get Americans started on religion; those who think they're the most devout actually seem to know the LEAST about religion, according to the latest Pew research survey.

Some Americans might think we know who to boo - like Sarah Palin when she appeared on "Dancing With The Stars" on Monday. Those Americans would be wrong. We may find her internet missives inane, or her politics offensive, but if we're going to be civil with each other, we shouldn't be booing a Mom - even Sarah Palin - who is just showing up to cheer on her daughter in a dance competition.

None of this seems to answer the question: for whom should we cheer?

We DO have a solution: In most situations, cheering should be reserved for one's favorite sports team, or favorite singer at a concert.

Responsible politics - and being a responsible citizen - is about caring enough for your country, your region, your state, and your city to research the facts and understand the details before heading to the voting booth. As the President and Vice President have echoed over the last few days, it's time for Americans of all kinds to stop their whining, and get back in the game.

Know the facts on the issues you'll be voting on in less than five weeks - and once you're educated on them, go vote.

At that point, it will become abundantly clear who to cheer for: The informed and intelligent American voter.

Hopefully, that's the only kind of voter who shows up.

Common Sense Still Isn't

As a Daily Felltoon reader, you most likely find yourself involved in political discussions on a regular basis. We frequently communicate and debate with each other on the tactics and wisdom (or lack thereof) of different political figures of nearly every type - and we know our research helps many of you as well.

When a person communicates on a regular basis with powerful bloggers, journalists, and business and political figures, it's easy to fall into a false sense of what is and is not important in such discussions, according to "common sense." We see it all the time in well-known blogs and newspapers, and we hear it on the air from both local and national sources. We also hear it in person, in far too many political discussions, the supposedly "common wisdom" that "everybody knows" some piece of information.

The truth is, common wisdom isn't exactly common.

For example, one of our staffers had a discussion with a political party official last weekend, where the official stated they had never been able to get an answer to the questions our staffer asked. Our staffer reminded the official that no one who wants to work in politics for either major party would ever give a serious answer to someone at that official's level of authority.

Another staffer recently heard from a political contact because of work on the Daily Felltoon. The political contact seemed surprised at the reach of our work. We're not surprised at all. Our staff knows a number of influential people through the country, and even overseas, who read our work, click our links, and enjoy Paul's cartoons - and we'll continue to keep that contact list private.

That we're regularly contacted by influential people like those on Capitol Hill simply proves the "common wisdom" by some of our readers that The Daily Felltoon is just another internet publication, might not be so wise after all.

Blogs and other electronic publications far more famous than ours continue to fight a similar "common wisdom." The media has changed a great deal in the last 20-30 years, and it's likely that it will continue to morph into new forms as we head into the future. Many of these forms will continue to employ more freelancers, and will continue to change the "common wisdom" of how people in positions of authority interact with members of the media.

The difference these days is that those involved in media as we are don't seem to be as heavily swayed by the "common sense" of the traditionally "Very Important People." Maybe it's because, as Paul Krugman mentioned in his own blog Monday, those like us remain professionals, while being a bit more detached.

More detached may also mean less biased, and more honest.
That's a bit of wisdom that's not so common at all.