Last week, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) called President Barack Obama stupid.
Using Twitter he wrote, "Constituents askd why i am not outraged at PresO attack on supreme court independence. Bcause Am ppl r not stupid as this x prof of con law."
Now, first of all, I think if you're going to go out on a limb and call the President of the United States "stupid" - especially one educated at Harvard - you should be really careful about writing something like, "Bcause Am ppl r not stupid."
Actually, if you are going to call anyone "stupid," you should be really careful about writing something like, "Bcause Am ppl r not stupid."
Actually, if you're going to call anyone stupid, period, for absolutely any reason at all, you're probably best advised not to use as your outlet something whose root word is "twit." However, if you do feel utterly compelled to tweet and convey to the world that you believe someone is stupid, it's probably a good thing to craft your thoughts beforehand and try really, really hard to make it sound thoughtful, credible and substantive. "Bcause Am ppl r not stupid" sort of backfires on you.
Secondly, if you're a U.S. Senator and want to address philosophical differences with the President of the United States, you're really doing yourself and your constituents a huge disservice by limiting yourself to 140 characters. There are perfectly good reasons to use Twitter if you're a Senator (like maybe you saw Justin Timberlake at the restaurant you're at and want voters to think you're cool). But name-calling the American President isn't one of them. It's the equivalent of a 12-year-old texting, "Becky is so mean. I hate her." (Or, as Mr. Grassley would put it, "Bcky mean i h8 hr.") If you're a U.S. Senator and you have serious, valid issues with the Leader of the Free World, you actually have far better options at your disposal than most seventh graders.
For starters, your local TV station would be thrilled to do an in-depth interview with their senator. Or you could call "Fox & Friends," who would fall over themselves to have an actual senator willing to slam President Obama on air. They might even turn it into a primetime Sean Hannity Special. But if you didn't want to go on television for fear of having to extemporize, then simply lay out your charges on your personal website - all U.S. senators have them, free of charge. It's one of the job perqs. Or better yet, if you want to seem hip (as you surely do because you have a Twitter account), put your presidential blast on YouTube - maybe it's go viral! Or just write something for Facebook. You can not only criticize the president, but actually take the time to explain why you think he is stupid and do so in a contemplative way that can be scathing in its details and show u to b gr8 thinker. That's the thing about limiting your whining to 140-characters - it pretty much suggests that you don't have anything meaningful to say.
But third, though, there's this. That pesky matter of perspective. The always-problematic "Consider the source" kind of thing. After all, if you're going to go on record stating that the "Am ppl r not stupid" but the President of the United States is - then you probably don't want to be on record trying to terrify those same Am ppl by suggesting Your Government is trying to kill old people.
He wasn't even being metaphorical about Death Panels ™, Charles Grassley (R-IA) told an Iowa town hall meeting in 2009, that you should be actually scared. "You have every right to fear," he fearfully insisted. And then added, "We should not have a government program that determines if you're going to pull the plug on grandma."
To be clear, we don't have a government program that determines if you're going to pull the plug on grandma. And anyone who thought we did is, actually, really stupid. And you don't have to be an "x prof of con law" to figure out why.
Mind you, unlike Charles Grassley sniping at President Obama, I don't think the Republican senator is stupid. I think he was shamefully pandering to that town hall crowd and pandering with his tweet. But ultimately, when you're a United States senator and claim that Americans should fear that the government is going to pull the plug on grandma - and then insist, "Bcause Am ppl r not stupid," you've not only ceded the high ground, you've started digging a hole to get as low as possible.
It's the same pattern we see as Republicans try to rile their party by attacking any word out of Barack Obama's mouth for the sole reason that it's out of Barack Obama's mouth. There's no attempt to offer any thought or explanation. It's the political equivalent of having the Terrible Two's. Stomping your feet, pouting and crying, "No!!" just because someone else said "Yes."
It's fine to disagree. But actual leadership demands thought. Reasoning. The "why." Without it, you'll always come across like a twit. And the Am ppl deserve better. Because in the end, it's true. The Am ppl r not stupid. It's just that some senators keep treating them that way.
Robert J. Elisberg
Tidbit Bay
Robert J. Elisberg
- Location
- Los Angeles, California,
- Birthday
- December 31
- Bio
- Robert J. Elisberg has been a regular contributor to the Huffington Post since 2006. His writing has appeared in such publications as the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Daily News, and Los Angeles Magazine, and served on the editorial board for the Writers Guild of America. He has contributed political writing to the anthology, "Clued in on Politics," 3rd edition (CQ Press).
Born in Chicago, he attended Northwestern University and received his MFA from UCLA, where he was twice awarded the Lucille Ball Award for comedy screenwriting. Most recently, he wrote the comedy-adventure screenplay, “The Wild Roses,” for Callahan Filmworks, and had published his comic novella, "A Christmas Carol 2: The Return of Scrooge."
MY RECENT POSTS
- The Writers Workbench:
Rechargeable Power
May 21, 2013 10:41AM - Stand By Them
May 20, 2013 10:43AM - Rand Paul is Really Sick
May 14, 2013 10:35AM - What a Difference a Month
Makes
May 08, 2013 10:49AM - Cruzing for a Bruising
May 02, 2013 10:21AM
MY RECENT COMMENTS
- “> When you write that
61% of the 47% (and how did
you ever
get that figure,
by…”
April 18, 2013 03:49PM - “> Spin all you want.
First of all Romney's comment
of 47%
was talking about
Fe…”
April 18, 2013 03:47PM - “Thanks for the notes.
And yes, even I am amazed by
the
prescience, and
grateful…”
March 19, 2013 10:33AM - “Thanks. It's one of my
favorite "Hollywood stories"
I've
heard, and
I'…”
March 06, 2013 01:13PM - “> Except for the
"borderline," I would have
sworn you're
talking
abo…”
February 14, 2013 01:08AM

Salon.com
Comments
r./