Jackson Free Press

I don't know about you, but I'm sick of nastiness. Of sniping. Pettiness. Silly arguments. Name-calling. Divisiveness. It seems as if hurling insults has become the new national pasttime. Chris Matthews yelling louder than his guests. Michael Savage telling a presumably gay listener he hopes he contracts AIDS. Ann Coulter accusing anyone left of Attila the Hun of committing treason. Michael Moore exploding at the Academy Awards.

And it's not just the national media concubines out to make a buck with their insults. Everyday folk troll the Web, almost always incognito, looking for the perfect victim."See, told you you're a bleedin' liberal! You just said to help the poor." (That's probably during a reasoned discussion of poverty.) "How dare you defame the government. You oughta just pack up your bags and leave the country." (Maybe you're trying to debate foreign policy.) "That's the most racist thing I've ever heard." (Often uttered by a white person after a person of color tried to explain his or her unique take on race. Maybe it really is the most racist thing they've ever heard.)

Of late, this nasty tone in the country has reached epidemic proportions. How dare one even try to have a smart conversation that is seen as an iota left of the status quo? (And the status quo is so far right these days that "the left" covers just about every point of view, except the most extreme right wing.) Folks who are clearly, firmly right of center will be called "liberal" if they even try to discuss different points of view. And the Lord help them if they question the war.

We're at a time in our history when the world is so uncertain that we need to be putting aside our differences to look for creative ways to prevent more violence, even as we try to apprehend the "evil-doers." We should be pulling up to the collective table, ordering a cool drink, and asking each other questions, talking and listening. We should be questioning everything our "of-the-people" government does. If there is ever a time to just get along, it's now.

Instead, though, try to consider different sides of an issue, and an angry voice starts yelling: "You're just an elitist, treating Americans like they're stupid!" Uh, why is that—because I'm trying to have a conversation? Au contraire: I happen to believe Americans are some of the most intelligent people on Earth—look at our Constitution, after all—but like anyone else we need information, and to think about it in the shower after a good chat. No, it's the folks who don't want us to think and discuss who are treating us like drones and idiots. And they—how can I say this sweetly—can kiss my butt.

Fortunately, I believe it's only a handful of folks out there who really set out to squelch thoughtful discourse. Unfortunately, they're the loudest and the whiniest. But I talk to people every day right here in Jackson who have varying political views who want to meet in the middle and have an honest dialogue over a cold beer or a smoothie, and then part kindly. And the saddest part, perhaps, is that in all the Coulter-esque meanness, we completely miss any nuance (and life is about the nuance). I, for instance, consider myself an independent thinker who believes in the traditional meaning of "liberal" thinking. That is, not boxed in by a regressive, unquestioning status quo. Call me a "free-enterprise progressive." That means I support locally owned businesses over corporate monoliths, particularly those that bilk their employees and investors. I am all for rights over one's body and bedroom and any other personal right. I believe that preventing the establishment of religion is what preserves our freedom of religion; that is, giving up a prayer or "Thou Shalt Not Kill" (as much as I wholeheartedly embrace that one) in a classroom is worth the freedoms that result. I am for responsible fiscal policy, and for helping the poor and creating opportunities for the downtrodden to help themselves because it's the right and moral thing to do. (Me and the Republican governor of Alabama. Who knew?) I believe that education and tolerance in all its forms, along with strong local businesses and a healthy, honest dialogue, can solve about any community problem.

My own journalism career shows that independent streak, I believe. I won an investigative reporting award in Colorado for exposing problems with a private ambulance company when the public fire department could have done a better and cheaper job of getting to dying people quicker. At the same time, I was writing a series of articles for a business newspaper about why the rich city utility in Colorado Springs should not compete with local Internet providers and other small businesses, using taxpayer money to squelch free enterprise.

I voted for President Clinton twice, despite his apparent sexual harassment of women, fully knowing that I would skin him alive in print if he were conservative. When the Lewinsky scandal broke, I searched my soul and, indeed, skinned him alive in print. (I've also criticized him for his globalization and drug-war policies, among other New Democrat faults.) My liberal friends would get mad when I explained that I believed Clinton had committed an impeachable offense, not to mention the most tasteless Oval Office acts I can imagine. (I thought cigars were gross before then, but yuck.) But, ultimately, most of my liberal friends respected my independence; hopefully, we're all the wiser for the debate.

Language expert Deborah Tannen warns in her book "The Argument Culture" about this growing American habit of divisiveness, fed by sensationalist media that just want there to be "two sides" to a story. In search of mythical "objectivity," they frame news into "battles" and "wars," us-vs-them between interviewees, leaving out the whole reasonable middle. Occasionally, someone will ask me why I don't publish more "conservative" columns to "balance" out our progressive viewpoints (which actually run the ideological spectrum) with more Fox News-like frothing-at-the-mouth diatribes. No. Intelligent conservative viewpoints, yes. Conversation-stopping blather, no. I don't want it from the left, either, by the way.

I am heartened by the response to our "positive" approach to journalism. Don't mistake that for fluffy, non-critical, press-release-hawking puffery that you see in publications that are afraid to stir up the pot a little. In our paper, and in our daily conversations, we want civil, intelligent conversation. We respect all of you—women, men, young people, seniors, Democrats, Republicans—at least until you do something to tarnish that respect. And we want to hear from you, and we are. For a publication that doesn't fear controversy, the ratio of positive-vs.-negative feedback has been astounding.

Thanks for your respectful tones, and your mutual love for Jackson. Keep talkin', y'all.
Donna Ladd is the editor-in-chief of the Jackson Free Press.