Why my Bennet-Bitterness will last a bit longer

17 Comments

by: Timberline

Usually, watching Keith Olberman’s Countdown is a guilty pleasure sure to improve my mood after a rough day. Yesterday evening, when I was finally over my hangover and my initial disappointment at Romanoff’s loss, and possibly because I was visiting my parents, who actually own a TV, I decided that turning on Olberman would be a good way to improve my day. Instead, the few minutes of his show that I was able to watch brought home exactly why Bennet’s victory upset me.

Since I’m relatively new to actually writing anything on this site (although I’ve read it quite religiously for some time now), I think I ought to give a bit of information about myself to help clarify why I see politics the way I do. For one thing, I have to confess that I actually care very little about national politics. I’m a fifth generation Coloradan. I’ve only left the state a handful of times, and don’t plan on going anywhere else anytime soon. The issues that I really care about are the environment, gay rights, and the rights of immigrants who contribute so much to our state but receive so little for their efforts, just because they don’t have all the right papers. All of those, at least to me, are policies whose facets are best addressed at the state, rather than the national, level.

For me, then, the right Senator is someone who will devote themselves to the facets of those three issues which do have to be addressed in the national arena: a cap-and-trade bill, repealing DOMA, and the DREAM Act. Both Romanoff and Bennet fit that bill fairly well. Romanoff, in my opinion, fits the bill even better than Bennet (principally due to his stance on federal marriage equality legislation, whatever Voyageur might say). Still, I would (and will) have no problems voting for either of them in a general election, which is why I wanted to get over my sadness at Romanoff’s loss as quickly as possible. At the very least, I could brooding and start canvassing my precinct for Hickenlooper or the No on 60/61/101 campaigns — things I care about a lot more than the Senate race, in all honesty.

Olberman, with his fiery rhetoric, would, I thought, be just the ticket to get me excited about politicking again. Unfortunately, he had just the opposite effect — because one of his lead stories was on the nationwide primaries, including Colorado. In Olberman’s defense, much of my anger could have been diffused if he had simply pronounced the name of our state as ‘Colo-raa-do,’ instead of ‘Colo-rah-do.’ His pronunciation is probably technically considered correct throughout most of the nation, but it couldn’t help but remind me that he is not from our State, and that his commentary is that of an outsider.

The substance, rather than the sound of his speech is what really set me off, however. His entire coverage of the story was simply that Obama had backed Bennet, and Bennet won, and, therefore, Obama won.

Indeed, it seemed like the media’s entire focus on the story was that OBAMA had beat Romanoff — not that Bennet had. The front page story in The-Paper-Which-Must-Not-Be-Named today was guilty of the same sin, focusing so much on Obama that I have a hard time believing that anything about Bennet himself, besides his position as a cog in the national system, really did lead to his victory.

Let’s face it — Bennet is not a particularly distinguished superintendent, public speaker, or Senator. It’s frankly very hard to get excited or emotionally stirred by either his personality or his campaign. When I hear a story about Colorado on the national news, I want it to be about an issue that is relevant to me as a Coloradan — not about how our Senator is more-or-less just a tool of the Obama administration.

Following his coverage of the Democratic Senate primary, Olberman went on to explore the fact that more Republicans had turned out that Democrats in the primary, again focusing on the national implications of the story (Tea Party motivation? Anti-administration bitterness?), rather than the more reasonable local explanations. “Colorado has a ton of independents who will probably swing Democrat in the general,” I shouted at the TV. “And there were two major Republican races, but Democrats only had one big fight.”

Why couldn’t Olberman just try to understand the local issues a bit, instead of framing everything in a national context, I wondered?

And then it struck me — probably because the Romanoff/Bennet story really isn’t a local story. Olberman isn’t the only one that sees the senate race as a product of national, rather than local, politics. He’s in good company with Senator Bennet, whose rhetoric is so filled with vague national issues that I’m not sure I’ve ever heard him address something that I thought was Colorado-specific, besides Pinon Canyon. So I’m going to let myself be bitter for a little longer. At least until I can come to terms with the fact that our Senate race isn’t about Colorado as much as it’s about Washington.

I must confess that I’ve often disagreed with Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, and Ben Nelson for bucking the national party on issues that I care about to cater to their constituencies. But I’ll say one thing for them — at least they remember that their job in the Senate is to represent the voters of their state, and not the Democratic Party.

17 thoughts on “Why my Bennet-Bitterness will last a bit longer”

gertie97 says:

August 12, 2010 at 9:26 pm

You let Olberman frame the race and its result for you? You let a talking head do that?

All politics is local, as the Tipster said.

Colorado races are Colorado’s. The national media get paid to try to draw national trends and conclusions. More often than not, they get it wrong, and it doesn’t matter if they’re on MSNBC, FauxNews or any other outlet.

Both Romanoff and Bennet talked plenty about Colorado issues. Try listening locally and ignore the talking heads.

Do your own thinking.

Log in to Reply
1. JO says:
  
  August 13, 2010 at 1:00 am
  
  Is the environment a “Colorahdo” issuer? Energy? Tax policy? Stimulus vs balancing the federal budget? Involvement in Afghanistan?
  
  Please name one of these “Coloradah” issues that’s relevant to the United States Senate.
  
  Log in to Reply
Ralphie says:

August 13, 2010 at 3:43 am

This is only politics.

I lost a kid this year.

Log in to Reply
1. Gray in Mountains says:
  
  August 13, 2010 at 5:12 am
  
  I think all parents sometimes do imagine it. I’ve dreamt it and awakened crying. I am so sorry for your loss.
  
  Log in to Reply
2. jpsandscl says:
  
  August 13, 2010 at 7:01 pm
  
  my mother lost four of hers before passing. I cannot imagine losing one of mine. My heart goes out to you Ralphie.
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. Ralphie says:
    
    August 13, 2010 at 7:14 pm
    
    I wasn’t looking for sympathy, just trying to tell the OP not to let bitterness consume him/her. It’s just an election. There will be another in four years. In the overall scheme of things, it doesn’t matter much and it’s not worth being miserable over.
    
    Log in to Reply
    1. jpsandscl says:
      
      August 13, 2010 at 7:22 pm
      
      perspective is always good to keep. Gets to what really matters in life.
      
      Log in to Reply
3. peacemonger says:
  
  August 14, 2010 at 3:07 am
  
  I am so sorry to hear it. Did you write about this? I didn’t know. My heart goes out to you.
  
  : (
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. Ralphie says:
    
    August 15, 2010 at 7:59 pm
    
    I might write more as time goes on.
    
    Search my site for “Carina”
    
    Log in to Reply
Ray Springfield says:

August 13, 2010 at 6:57 am

It’s time to move on Ken Buck

Log in to Reply
jpsandscl says:

August 13, 2010 at 7:14 pm

for a first time post. And I don’t read you as consumed by this bitterness, just honestly expressive of it. And that is a great part in the healing from it.

As I have been told countless times in my life, this too shall pass. It is true of both the good times and the bad.

And while I agree in general with many of your characterizations above, I also caution a little about rating charisma too highly. Many lunatic charismatics out there…

Log in to Reply
1. Ralphie says:
  
  August 13, 2010 at 7:15 pm
  
  Log in to Reply
Whiskey Lima Juliet says:

August 13, 2010 at 7:48 pm

Don’t get involved with politics if a loss is going to destroy your world. I love the passion of people in politics, but honestly, nothing changed for you at all. We will have 2 Democratic Senators that will vote exactly as you would like them to. So your guy lost, that is what happens sometimes. Who you believe to be the best will not always win. Ask Jay Fawcett about that.

The people that voted for the other guy are not bad people, nor are you. The President did what I think all elected officials should do; say what you believe instead of hiding behind their thoughts because they may lose votes and piss people off. Yeah, it creates controversy, but if you hire me to lead a corporation, I am going to my opinion on who I think my corporate officers should be. If the stakeholders disagree, so be it.

This is not that complicated, nor should our elections be a place for anger. For God’s Sake, if this was a small developing nation, the President would have just sent assassins to do his bidding. This process is much better.

Honestly, not trying to piss anyone off, I just think this whole thing is way out of control. And is no way President Obama’s fault or victory.

Log in to Reply
1. Automaticftp says:
  
  August 13, 2010 at 8:20 pm
  
  When you’ve heard live bullets flying over your head, you realize that most of this is less than critical . . .
  
  Log in to Reply
BlueSkies says:

August 13, 2010 at 8:55 pm

Eh, it was either going to be the “Obama’s Guy” or “Another Incumbent Booted” storyline. Olberman’s an entertainer doing a short segment for a national audience. It’s pointless to be bitter at Bennet for something Olberman didn’t say. Time to get out of the bitter barn and come play in the hay.

Being senator is a weird balance of national and local concerns – read JO’s post about nutjobs in Oklahoma being balanced out by non-nutjobs in other parts of our country (my paraphrase). Sure, there are local issues and we probably missed a chance to talk about some of them since I can’t really remember that anything more than the value of PAC/campaign money was discussed. And, as a long-term Coloradan, PAC money actually wasn’t on a list of things that I think about on a daily basis. I’m an environment-education-civil rights voter. In my mind, either candidate would’ve been decent.

I’d suggest getting to know the candidate better now that the primary is over. Take a look at the Library of Congress’s Bill Summary & Status roster and it shows that Bennet has sponsored a number of bills of local importance, depending where you are in the state, including assistance for military families and rural areas. Some are intended to make the Senate work better. And, some of those bills don’t matter to me at all, but they do to someone outside my neighborhood. Even if those efforts aren’t successful in the end, I appreciate the thought behind them. I know there are plenty of voters, and posters here, who will breathe fire over some of the bills and that’s OK, too.

I hope you’ll get the chance to hear Bennet in a small group setting. He’s clearly bright, compassionate and knowledgeable. I’ve met plenty of public servants who aren’t. He’s never going to light up a stage like Obama or others we all know, but so what. Regardless of what his detractors say, I think you’d like the one-on-one interaction and appreciate his forthrightness.

None of this diminishes Romanoff’s individual talents. Just seems to me that since Bennet is the guy now, doing some research and making the effort to hear him in a non-rally setting, without Olberman whispering in your ear, would be helpful. And, as for being a Democrat responsive to a consituency, I’ll take Bennet over Ben Nelson any day.

Log in to Reply
EmeraldKnight76 says:

August 13, 2010 at 9:51 pm

wondering why they are only talking about national issues? Olbermann’s job is to see the Senate race in a national light for his national audience. Why would people in Florida or Maine give a shit about the local issues the campaigns are running on in Colorado? Why would people in Colorado give a shit about the local issues of North Dakota or Hawaii?

All politics are local but all network pundits are national and the idea is to tell a story a viewer can relate to no matter what state that viewer is in.

Log in to Reply
Voyageur says:

August 14, 2010 at 3:00 am

but you really should try reading it sometime. But even assuming that you can get around it, I still await the details of your strategy to gain 60 votes to force a fill mandating gay marriage through the Senate.

Having a senator who has actually read the

Constitution and come up with a practical way to advance gay rights just doesn’t strike me as such a terrible thing.

As as a five general Coloradan myself, let me remind you its Koh’-loh-rad-on in espanol;-)

Log in to Reply