|
Edited on Wed Oct-28-09 09:50 AM by Armstead
This is a sorta philosophical.psychological quesion. I'm curious about others' opinion.
I saw Newt the other day on TV and -- as usual -- he made my skin crawl. His smug prissiness, that whiny little adolescent voice, that "I know it all" tone he always has...It didn't matter what he was saying -- bad as it is -- I just couldn't stomach him.
But would it matter what he was saying? Suppose he was the same person, but a progressive liberal Democrat. Would I still have the same instinctual reaction to his persona? or might I actualy like him?
Most other Republicans and conservative pundits strike me the same way. I get a personal reaction to them, regardless of their words. John Bohner seems like some kind of weird alien...Sen. Kyle's bully boy hardn ess, Sen. O'Connell's grating drawl, Inhoff's meaness, Sean Hannity's rat-a-tat stupidity, Anne Coulter and Michelle Malkin...well no more need be said about them...the list goes on and on.
It's not universal. there are a few GOPers or conservatives who don;t drive me nuts. Sen. Lugar seems like an affable fellow. I admired Jack Kemp's earnestness...there are some others. But they are relatively few and far between.
I do wonder though how much of my personal perception of them as annoying people is based on political factors or whether it is the inate characteristics of people who tend to the conservative line. If Sen. Kyle were a staunch bully for the progressive side, would i admire that? Would Mitch McConnell's drawl be endearing if he were using it to fight for single payer health coverage? Would I think Anne Coulter is brilliant and funny if she were skewering conservatives?
Of course that is the "what if" world....But it is interesting to speculate how much of one's personal reactions to the personalities of political public figures is based on whether you agree with them or not.
In any case, I do find them annoying, and usually have to turn off the TV or raeio when they come on.
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
|