I recognize I'm late to the dance (I'm 68), but recently I naively decided to enter a discussion board on IMDB's Tom Cruise board, what I thought was a respectable organization, in order to discuss whether judgements about Tom's professional career (or, generally, any actor's) could be separated out from judgments about Tom himself, particularly as he is depicted in his role as a celebrity. I'd been interested in this topic for some time, discussing it with friends and others of my acquaintance. Even though I'd seen examples of what I thought were juvenile behavior on the board, I ventured ahead anyway. Well, there were a number of respondents who went after me for what they perceived as defending Tom, merely because I thought we should be able to reject what he was promoting, particularly what presumably was derived from his relationship with Scientology. My own view that we should "live and let live", derived in part from the idea of "judging not that ye be judged", was not well-received.

Well, I learned my lesson, I suppose, and after one false start I tried again, staying away from issues that were inflammatory. One of the thoughts that lingered had to do with the justifications used for the kind of outrage and ridicule these folks used. One that stayed with me had to do with how Tom should be held accountable for his behavior. It was these folks' task to bring him down, using the most vile language they could summon.

The unfortunate lesson I'm learning from this is that this new medium is serving to divide us. The whole notion of tolerance itself is suffering.

James

This was my intro to Rebecca. Terrific writing. I'll be looking to hear more from her. Though Greenwald is probably right about the protective barrier that keeps Matthews on the air, it would be interesting to see if there is enough backlash from viewers to put at least a dent in his chauvinism. On the other hand, particularly if Obama strengthens his position, some in his fan base could make Chris more adored. Already some of Obama's supporters are out there claiming election fraud and how they so enjoy the way Chris needles "the witch". This, from a group whose leader espouses unity among factions as his principle message. I think I'd support Obama more if he would decry some of his supporters, including those in the media. We'll see.

James

Bashing the Senate by arguing that they continually vote against what the people want, and is against their best interests if they wish to stay in office doesn't take into consideration that the Senate is that part of American democracy which in some sense resists general public pressure, presumably to advocate for what's right for their state, or possibly what they believe to be the best course of action for America, competing on an equal basis with every other state. In order for Americans as a people to make significant course changes there needs to be a real social movement, one that isn't identified merely by its hatred toward one or another person who will be short-lived. Civil rights movements have that stature. How they come about, I'm not in a position to know. How they might have been forestalled by clever political strategists, I have no idea. But as they aren't happening now, or if they are they are not particularly visible, I think we are stuck with how these political institutions were established.

Of course, this is not to say that elections don't have an impact. But of these only the presidential election has the more immediate effect. Congress, while acknowledging that it ought to be considered a co-equal branch, doesn't have the tools or constituency to make any mandate the public might want it to have to change course so quickly. Even the so-called revolution of 1994 couldn't make headway much against the Executive Branch. It just takes more time and possibly even a friendlier presidency. Notwithstanding this, of course, there is something to be said for having strong leaders in Congress that are willing to make a stand and fight for one or another cause. Having Congress check and balance the presidency seems to be what Americans traditionally have sought, once we've determined the extent of damage the presidency has brought about. It's not a big reach to say that the American political system is designed to frustrate the general will of the people (or if not the general will, at least a strong particular will).

James