Ha!

You thought I forgot to blog today. Wrong.

So a while back I said I'd write about my conundrum about haters on Facebook. I'll try that now. (Sorry it took me so long, Nic).

I have friends, actual people, who do not share my political persuasion. I can handle that. Each to his own and all. But it has put me at a loss when it comes to some of the things they post on Facebook. For example, I have a friend with whom I recently reconnected. I don't remember that he was a conservative of any stripe. Maybe he was and I just never noticed. (Although in the period during which I knew him I was about as radical as ever I was in my life so you'd think it would have come up). During the health care debate he was constantly posting status updates about "Obamacare" and skewing statistics and generally being fairly Glenn Beckish. And I never responded because, despite the wild inaccuracy of some of his stuff, I figure dude is entitled to his opinion. Except sometimes it got pretty outlandish. And what I really wanted to say was, "Remind me again who you work for?" Because he works for a giant insurance company. Hello? But I didn't do it because it seemed petty.

But it still bugged me.

I have another buddy who I really like on so many levels. In this case, I've always known my friend's political leanings and she knows mine. It's nothing to do with the core of our friendship so we let it lie. But sometimes she puts up stuff that is so outrageous that it makes my heart hurt. Seriously. Because, I'm sorry, when you start out a post with name calling that just tells me right away that we're not going to be able to have a civil conversation. Not to mention, it frankly disturbs me when someone who I know to be compassionate and loving sounds so damn hateful - there's no other word for it - when she starts talking about the President.

So what to do?

I think that if I have any charge to lay at the feet of the GOP, and I have one or two, it is this: when did y'all abandon civil debate and discourse. Let's disagree, sure, but can't we do it without the name calling and aspirsions and vitriol? Must we be so certain of our position that we can't entertain even a fair hearing of the other side?

Maybe social media - networking sites and blogs - have made it all too easy to spout an opinion without much risk of challenge. Typically, we all align ourselves with people who generally think as we do. Most of my friends on FB agree with my position about health care (and most other stuff). But it's not that there are people who disagree with me. Again, it's the sheer anger in the disagreement that leaves me completely confounded as to what to do.

In most cases, I don't do anything. I ignore the hateful posts and comment when they put up something pleasant. But that doesn't really do it for me all the time. Especially when the outrage seems so misplaced or perverts facts. But the few times I've come back with anything the response is just more outrage. And the only reason I feel compelled to respond in the first place is partly to serve notice that not everyone agrees with them but mostly it's to try and engage in civil debate.

And then I remember that civil debate isn't possible with someone who so hates this President that they call a health care plan he didn't write "Obamacare".

Oy.

Bottom line, I got nuthin'. And I think part of the reason is because I'm a Democrat. Because truth be told, one of the things Democrats take heat for is not being tough enough. And that's deserved. I mean, seriously, who do the Democrats have that could be even remotely compared to, say, Ann Coulter? No one. Maybe Jim Carville or Rachael Madow or Keith Obermann. But historically Democrats are not out there in front of issues setting the tone or proclaiming the agenda. Not like Rush and Glenn and all those dudes. And maybe we need more of that but it still has to be truth telling and record setting straight stuff. If we're just gonna get down in the mud and wrestle with the other side and see who can use "why do you hate America" more than the other guy we still haven't gotten much farther ahead, now have we? (And of course, my deep desire for the debate to be more civilized might prove the whole Democrats-aren't-tough-enough argument. But again, if by "tough" we really mean being ugly and playing dirty, I don't want to be tough).

Consequently, I'm guessing that more often than not I'm going to be letting that stuff slide because I don't want to engage when there doesn't seem to be a point in engaging.

But that said, there's one thing I have been thinking about, and it's something that may be employed. Let me go back to a time, a few years ago, when I was visiting the folks. Dame Judi has picture magnets plastered on her fridge. Each picture is of someone she keeps in her daily prayers and she puts them on the fridge because she goes there several times a day and it's a good place to house such reminders. So I'm looking at the pictures and there in the middle is one of George and Laura Bush. And I exclaimed, "Why is there a picture of Bush on here?" (forgetting, in my surprise, that she likely voted for him). "Because," she softly replied, "Scripture tells us to pray for our leaders and that reminds me to do so".

Oh.

And further more, yes. Admittedly, I didn't pray for George W. Bush as much as my Christian duty called me to do. But there's a lot of wisdom in the notion. First of all, if you're praying for someone, you really can't hate them. And hate is a bad thing. Second, my general philosophy of prayer is that you never know how powerful it can be. I mean, seriously, if every praying person in this nation was intent only on upholding the nation's leaders, whoever they might be and praying for them to be wise and good and focused and if we were doing that on a daily basis, who knows what could happen.

So I'm not going to be going head to head with most of my right wing FB buddies (who also happen to be evangelical Christians). But every now and again I may just leave a comment that says, simply, I Timothy 2:1-2.