Jon Stewart -- the definition of insanity

By R.K. Barry

I like Jon Stewart. I like The Daily Show and usually watch it every night. One has to be constantly reminded that Stewart is primarily a comedian because his political commentary is so frequently bang on and his interviews so thoughtful and compelling.

But even before the recent Stewart/Colbert Rally to Restore Sanity, something was starting to bother me about Stewart's approach, which has been, simply put, his more recent suggestion that the left and right in America are in some sense equally culpable for poisoning the current environment in which political ideas are framed, articulated, and advocated.

If what he means is that conservatives have bent the truth beyond recognition and pandered to the worst instincts of human nature in order to troll for votes, while progressives have fought back as best they could, though fairly feebly, then, yes, both left and right are equally culpable.

Let's face it, for the past many months, countless Republican candidates, Tea Party activists, Fox News and its stable of crazies, and other purveyors of the hysterical conservative narrative have shown no interest in facts and rational argument and reasonable political accommodation. They have harnessed voter anger and frustration in the most effective ways possible.

Democrats, who clearly have not caught on fast enough to the "new normal" of political discourse in America, have been getting their asses kicked.

So, watching Jon Stewart say to what were undoubtedly mostly a bunch of fairly progressive citizens that they ought to become more reasonable and rational in their attitude towards politics was a little like watching the Rand Paul campaign organizer asking the women whose head he stomped to apologize for getting her noggin stuck under his foot.

Surely Mr. Stewart doesn't think that his audience, either on the National Mall or at Comedy Central, is composed of many conservatives.

But it is conservative hysteria that has driven the current climate of debate and to suggest that progressives, liberals, or Democrats are equally culpable is to show that one has simply not been paying enough attention. To ask this group to calm down and be more "sane" is not only foolish but a little dangerous.

I cannot help but think of a dozen metaphors to express what is wrong with this, most of them violent metaphors (make of that what you will). The inadvisability of unilateral disarmament comes to mind.

The current election campaign is now almost over. I invite you to catalogue the misrepresentations, outright prevarications, and bat-shit crazy ideas and behaviour coming from the conservative leadership in the current struggle for the hearts and minds of the American voter. And while I would not suggest that Democrats are devoid of sin, you cannot reasonably compare the two. But the conservative record is pretty clear.

Where to begin? Sarah Palin's lies about "death panels" in Obama's health-care legislation; Carl Paladino's homophobic rants; Rand Paul's misrepresentation of the Civil Rights Act and his thuggish repression of dissent on the campaign trail; Sharron Angle's call for Second Amendment remedies to solve disputes; Christine O'Donnell's rejection of the separation of church and state; Ken Buck's rejection of abortion even in the case of rape and incest; and almost anything said by Glenn Beck and all the others on Fox News about America's inevitable descent into totalitarianism at the hands of the socialist Obama. And I can't even begin to list the instances of idiocy from the likes of Rush Limbaugh.

Again, it's late in the campaign season, so there is no need to restate everything. But to suggest that conservatives and progressives are equally culpable for poisoning the tone of debate is not credible.

Yes, people like Ed Schultz, Keith Olbermann, and Rachel Maddow get excited in defending the truth, and I am so glad they do. It is not, after all, passion that we should worry about, for passion in the service of the truth should always be looked on as a positive contribution.

It is passion and aggressiveness with the goal of misrepresenting the facts in order to appeal to people's fears, irrational biases and lesser angels. This has been the conservatives' stock-in-trade.

By implication there is a suggestion on Stewart's part that we all just need to calm down and talk to each other rationally in order to arrive at some sort of agreement as to how America can move forward and solve the problems that need addressing.

Great idea, but that train has left the station. For conservatives, I don't think it ever made that station stop at all.

Passion in the defence of truth, passion in the defence of the facts, passion for the openness of political discussions that might get us closer to solving our problem. Yes, to all of these things.

But now is not the time for progressives to calm down in their struggle against the dangerous vision for America presented by the likes of the Tea Party movement and those others in the Republican Party afraid to cross them.

Progressives are in a very serious conflict here and they will need to bring their best effort to have a chance, both over the next few days and in what is to follow. It would be insane to do otherwise.

It is simply not true that progressives and conservatives are equally responsible for the tone of the current political debate, and we ought to stop suggesting it is. Conservatives have, for the time being, cornered the market on anger. Progressives need to get back in the game and be just as passionate in defense of the kind of America they want.

To do any less would be the very definition of insanity. And -- forgive another violent metaphor -- it would be like bringing a knife to a gunfight.