A reader recently forwarded what amounts to a gibberish generator. It’s a list of 30 words, numbered 0 to 9 in each of three columns. The trick is to think of a three-digit number, then match those numbers with a word from each column. The result is a three-word phrase of stunningly bureaucratic buzzwords. For example, today’s date, 323, yields “parallel, monitored mobility.”
A former federal employee named Philip Broughton came up with the list, whose products can be employed in any memo or report, public- or private-sector, and give the author an air of “responsive, third-generation capability” (582) or even “systematized management flexibility” (201).
Politicians surely must be aware of this device, because they can doubletalk with the skill of even the most obtuse bureaucrats.
But sometimes, when the campaign rhetoric grows blunt and ugly, a concerned and sensitive citizen might wish that the candidates tone it down a little. Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, not known for her rhetorical restraint, recently pleaded with her party’s dueling presidential candidates “to remember we have to keep our eyes on the prize, which is the general election in November.”
The candidates themselves manage to keep a reasonably civil tone, but their high-profile surrogates don’t. Their fault-finding, their pointing-out of weaknesses and disqualifications, is getting shrill and sounding desperate.
The problem with a protracted party primary is that it gives each camp more time to paint the other candidate as a terrible choice. If it’s bad now, it will get worse when it’s a competition between parties, for the general election.
Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama haven’t yet reached the level of inter-party bombast which drives some to say that a victory for the other party would be intolerable. But it still contributes to a feeling that no one should be expected to accept a leader who wasn’t his or her first choice. The other side is not just wrong, it’s corrupt and corrosive and evil. Intolerable. Unacceptable. How can a right-minded citizen follow such a leader?
Recent polls have shown that this hyperbole is starting to have an effect. Until recently, most Democrats thought they had a splendid dilemma — either candidate would be a fine choice. Now, an increasing number see the downfall of the republic if their candidate doesn’t get the nomination.
A month or so ago, some Republicans had that attitude about John McCain as their party’s choice. He was unacceptable, unbearable, totally unsuitable. But now things seem to have settled down on the right wing, and McCain can concentrate on November. He can look like a grownup while the Democrats squabble.
It’s difficult to say how this will end. Obama’s winning message has been that he’s a different kind of candidate, someone who can work with the other side — calmly, civilly and productively. But he can’t continue to claim civility if he’s forced to attack.
The media love the conflict and are only too happy to play it up. But by the time November gets here, after weeks of what are bound to be fiercely negative ads by those shadowy “527” campaign supporters, the excitement will give way to disgust — reinforcing those bad feelings every candidate’s partisans want us to have about the opposition.
By the way, 527 in Broughton’s formula is “responsive, monitored projection.”
Fred Brown (punditfwb@aol.com), retired Capitol Bureau chief for The Denver Post, is also a political analyst for 9News.
