Lincoln delivered this famous speech, noted for the phrase “a house divided against itself cannot stand,” when accepting the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate from Illinois in June of 1858. In July of that year he challenged his Democrat opponent, Stephen Douglas to a series of debates over admitting Kansas into the union as a slave state, and, to a large extent, over the future of slavery and of the union itself. Lincoln, of course, represented the anti-slavery position. The skill with which Lincoln debated Douglas helped catapult him to the Republican Party’s nomination for president in 1860, a race which he won.

MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN OF THE CONVENTION: If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into the fifty year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object and confident promise of putting and end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease until a crises shall have been reached and passed. “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.”
- at http://www.nationalcenter.org/HouseDivided.html

If I have learned one thing on this campaign, it is this: the democratic process is broken. Our house has more than divided. It has fractured into numerous splinters of extremists, fundamentalists, partisan hacks, conservatives, neo-cons, liberals, progressives, moderates, independents, … you name it. And the sad thing is, none of them can work together towards actual progress because they constantly demonize and cannibalize one another.

I had the honor and privilege of working on the Gene Locke for Mayor campaign. As I’ve said before, I had decided to support him before I was even approached to become his Social Media Strategist. When the opportunity arose to help elect someone whose no-nonsense problem-solving practicality and his experience fighting for civil rights and serving the community inspired me, I took it. It’s not often you get to work with and for someone you believe in. And it’s not often that if you do your job well, you could possibly effect positive change across the fourth largest city in the United States of America. So yeah, I was excited.

In the first few months, it was challenging. We had to adjust to a new team “gelling” together. We had to deal with challenges we inherited from an earlier team. And in a short period of time, we had to deal with the first negative attack on our candidate – an email from an opponent’s supporters that painted Gene as a misogynist.

Apparently, no one in the media or blogosphere thought that calling Gene – a civil rights advocate and the father of two strong, successful women – a misogynist was offensive. They picked it up and ran with it. Many of us women on the campaign and many of Gene’s female supporters were incensed. This is not the man we know. Many of the allegations in the email were lies or items taken out of context to mislead its audience. But we took the high road. Instead of fighting fire with fire, we simply stated that we were offended by it, and returned to the issues.

The bloggers who supported that opponent, however, added it to their mud-pie fillings. A small group had already started lining those pies with accusations of racism and pandering, when Gene said he supported ethnic groups working together. Apparently, that was unacceptable to one blogger, who called me personally to attack me for agreeing with Gene. I see no problem with minority groups working together. Many of them face similar issues and challenges that they can address more effectively by collaborating. And, from my experience, if I want to participate in their efforts, whether or not I was of their ethnicity they would probably welcome my help.

Similarly, I don’t feel like I’m being discriminated against if GLBT groups work together. In fact, when members of the GLBT Caucus invited me to their meeting, I enthusiastically attended … despite them having endorsed our opponent. I support equal rights for the GLBT community because I care and believe in social justice. I admired Gene for also supporting GLBT rights, which he’s proven since his early days as City Attorney. We continue to do it because, as Gene says, “it’s the right thing to do” – NOT because it’s politically expedient. Gene has nothing to gain from it. The GLBT Caucus already endorsed Annise. And when one person called me a derogatory name as I left the meeting, I reminded myself, “That is just one bully. He does not represent them all. Rise above it.”

So it offends me when people accuse our campaign of being bigoted, or pandering, or lying, or anything else that twists the truth. The people I’ve worked with on a daily basis are all incredibly intelligent, respectful and have the utmost integrity. (There are many I haven’t even met yet, however, so I can’t attest to their characters.) It offends me when people accuse us, and especially Gene, of pandering when we state what we support. It deeply disappoints me when those accusations are completely baseless, and it truly hurts when it comes from people who I previously believed stood for the same things that I do: equal rights, unity, social justice, progress, positive change.

The issues we face affect us all, no matter what color or creed we ascribe to. Lincoln was a Republican. F.D. Roosevelt was a Democrat. They were still two of our nation’s greatest leaders who were able to bring our country together and help it rise out of seriously troubled times. Rather than competing on the issues, however, people used divisive tactics and smear campaigning to drag this mayoral race into the mud, from which it never recovered. They didn’t care who they hurt, or how it would damage their effectiveness in advocating for the issues they believe in. They didn’t care if it was factual or a baldfaced lie. They didn’t care if it split their own party in two.

In their singular focus on winning, the political hacks forgot there were real people involved. They forgot that in trying to smear people’s characters, they were destroying potential allies. Instead of elevating the debate and campaigning on the issues, they built a whole kitchen full of mud and threw it to see what would stick. We started with a race of good candidates who would be great leaders for Houston. We ended with a race of “the lesser of two evils.” They’re the same people, with the same positions on the issues. The only difference is, now they’re buried in mud. You can’t see them clearly for all the mud whirling around in the political spin.

In the end, all the hacks will have achieved is an even more fractured house. Someone will have won, but no one will have won. Not in the ways that really matter.

When David Plouffe was in Houston for The UP Experience, I talked to him about the Locke for Mayor campaign. He said he decided to be President Obama’s campaign manager because he realized it was his opportunity to run a campaign based on hope and inspiration, instead of on mudslinging and spin. I had hoped this race would offer me the same opportunity. But it’s hard to run a clean race when you’re barraged by mud. Next time, I’ll wear a rain slicker. Or bring a fire hose.

It is legal in Texas, and in Houston, to discriminate against gays and lesbians. Gene Locke, before someone on his campaign told him to “cool it,” was committed to changing that at least with regard to city policy and with regard to those who do business with the city. Annise Parker was committed to NOT changing that. That’s the big difference between the two candidates that for some odd reason no one paid attention to. Although Steven Hotze did. Steven Hotze wanted Gene Locke to sign a pledge that he would not do what he was committed to doing. Gene Locke refused. Steven Hotze still endorsed him. Obviously because of reasons other than his position on gay rights. Had it been solely on that basis he would have refused to endorse Gene Locke and probably damned him the way he damned Annise Parker.

Gene Locke took the high road. Annise Parker and the media took the low road. And have continued to imply that if you vote for Gene Locke, you are a homophobe.
- Posted by: Charli at December 10, 2009 03:41 PM