“A supporter of policies that are socially progressive and promote social welfare.
A supporter of a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.”
Definition of a Liberal
“A person who advocates thorough or complete social or political reform.”
Definition of a Radical
One weekend afternoon, back in the summer of 1994, I struggled on the Collins Street beach in Dewey, Delaware with an epic hangover. Despite growing up with a father who was never a match for the bottle, in my early 30s it was as much a part of my list of peccadillos as it was of his when he was my age. The only difference between us was I still had only myself to sabotage, not a family with small children. Of course it’s a certainty my day-after headaches were as debilitating as his had been, with exhibit A mercilessly throbbing away as I massaged my temples and awaited the four Advil I had downed earlier to kick in.
Sitting with me were several of my beach housemates, including one lovely woman named Jill, who worked on Capital Hill for the Republican national election machinery in some capacity. In between fending off relentless stabs to my frontal lobe, I listened to Jill relate her enthusiastic assessments of the GOP’s off-year election prospects to a friend. “I think we’re going to take control of the House,” she pronounced cheerily, “the numbers look really good… everybody is excited!” Ever the know-it-all, I scoffed audibly enough for both ladies to notice and stop their conversation as they awaited me to validate my rudeness. “Sweetie,” I patronized, “Republicans haven’t had a majority in the House since Eisenhower was President; that’s not happening. If it does I’ll shave my head and run around naked squawking like a chicken!” They laughed and Jill responded with something to the effect she couldn’t wait to hold me to my word.
Thankfully, several months later she was nowhere to be found, and I was spared the indignities my inane and dead wrong cockiness deserved. After all, I was soon going to have the rest of my life to experience baldness; I didn’t need to accelerate that process. Regardless, In January of ‘95 the insufferable Newt Gingrich of Georgia, once a marginal Reagan Revolution back bencher with nothing but guff to offer, became Speaker of the House, transforming the GOP from a partner in to an immovable obstacle of American governance. It would be the first of several debilitating milestones on the slippery slope to our present day crisis.
When General William Sherman marched 62,000 Union troops from Atlanta to the Georgia coast in late 1864, his desire was to break the spirit of the south by confronting citizens with the direct consequences secession produced. However, while Sherman’s troops surely destroyed infrastructure and sustained themselves on what they freely seized from farms and plantations of all sizes along the way, a number of outrages that took place during the Confederacy’s final days were carried out by bitter and desperate rebel soldiers, whose crimes were conveniently forgotten or merely blended into the March to the Sea’s calamity by future Dixie generations. They preferred all of their Civil War narratives free of any murky grey areas regarding accountability. Historical accuracy has never been a southern strong suit when it comes to retelling of the Civil War and the lessons it may, or more importantly, may not have imparted.
A century and a half later civic success still eludes much of the south due to its inability to attain the societal synergy this fundamental character flaw proscribes. Way too many still believe there was never anything to be ashamed about, nothing to atone for. They were actually the victims, still are. Of course such collective character disorder explains their affinity for Trump and MAGA nihilism, but come early January the fate of a nation rests on just how far many Georgia voters are willing to push that envelope and embrace a couple of nothings.
By most all go-to metrics for quality-of-life standards Georgia should be doing much better than it is. Despite lavishing businesses with enough goodies to rank it number three nationally as a state to do business in, Georgia comes in the bottom half of the country for income, and the bottom fifth for poverty. The disconnect continues through other basic categories. Despite a number of world class hospitals, Georgia ranks 41st in health care, and 39th in access to primary treatment. There are some top-notch colleges within its confines, yet Georgia comes in 30th in education. Home ownership? Bottom half of the country, number 29. Crime? Not much better at 27th. In other words, like most all other southern states, Georgia underachieves.
One would assume the Peach State’s US Senate contingent is well aware of this fact and that their job demands they spare no time or expense to make certain constituents are at least confident of their concern. In an election cycle where both GOP incumbents failed to garner 50% of the vote required to declare victory and avoid a January 4 runoff, impressing on voters a degree of certitude about focus and resolve as to “dinner table” problems seems a given, a no brainer. Not so with Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler.
Anybody who wants to contest the premise that Republicans have little interest in democratic governance received no help from Sunday’s Georgia Senate debates. Loeffler offered nothing substantive to promote her candidacy, instead robotically repeating over and over that the only thing she could assure is she’s not Raphael Warnock, her “radical liberal” opponent. She did however bother to post for the occasion, which gave her a one up on Perdue, who actually blew the whole thing off. In his defense, after being mercilessly filleted last month by his Democratic opponent, David Ossoff, Perdue’s reticence was understandable; he had no comebacks then and surely dreaded repeating the ordeal. Yet and still, it was no less glaring, and Ossoff calling him a coward no less appropriate. One would have thought Perdue could have perhaps come up with an excuse for not attending, maybe exposure to Covid or some kind of pressing conflict, but no, even that was a bridge too far in the effort department.
Georgia’s two Republican Senators, running for re-election in races that will determine which party controls the US Senate, quite literally have nothing to offer voters. That neither possesses a scintilla of ability to think on their feet can at least partly be explained by the fact both came to high office with not a minute of legislative experience, a deficit each touted from the start as every reason Georgia voters should distinguish them from their swamp-tinged opponents. But a lack of debate skills is one thing, complete disdain for the entire exercise quite another.
Whatever deficits the skill sets and platforms of David Ossoff and Raphael Warnock may suffer, there is no doubt both are thoughtful candidates, carrying out their campaigns with the good faith and enthusiasm that should be the floor of what citizens in a going democratic concern demand. Neither Purdue or Loeffler meet that bottom rung of reasonable expectation. Loeffler’s pathetic indifference Sunday removed any doubts about that. She had only two points to make, and she repeated them constantly: Raphael Warnock is a radical liberal, a bizarre term she never bothered to define; and the repercussions of getting caught red handed dumping stock immediately after being briefed on the coming Covid scourge are “an attack on all Georgians.” Of course, the empty chair Ossoff was forced to address was just as effective at underscoring Perdue’s insufficiency.
Incredibly, neither Purdue or Loeffler can publicly accept the only premise that makes either of their vapid candidacies viable, that they are the firewall to a Biden Presidency that will go unchecked if they lose and the Senate flips to Democratic control as new Vice-President Kamala Harris becomes the tie-breaking vote. Both are the definition of Trump sycophants, and would be the last to defy current White House fiction. However, supporting Trump’s sociopathy leaves each with only their qualifications and records of achievement… in other words nothing. That’s what it’s come down to in Georgia. Here is the operative question: are we such a worthless polity that we’d rather have nothing promoting our interests on Capital Hill because at least it isn’t something the nothings tell us is the worst, those radical liberals? Maybe some questions are simply better left unsaid. After all, hasn’t that always been the Southern way, anyhow? BC