It'd be nice if we exposed hypocrisy because we're noble people carrying a light in the marketplace in search of one honest man. But, let's be for realz here: exposing hypocrisy is super fun. How great it is when the anti-choice zealot gets caught shipping his daughter off to Europe for an abortion? How giddy does it make us when the "family first" activist gets caught getting his luggage lifted? Schadenfreude is cheap, man. But so is a McDonald's soft serve.
And, goddammit, they are both delicious!
On the other hand, if you're the one accused of hypocrisy, it really only makes you mad if you're really being a hypocrite. If you're not, I find it's way more bemusing than rage-inducing.
Let me give you an example from my own life: I am a vegetarian. I haven't eaten meat in like ten years. And so so so many times as this fact of my life is exposed in conversation does some dude work HARD to out me as a big old, low energy, needin' some protein hypocrite. But I'm not wearing a "meat is murder" tee shirt. I'll have dinner at the Chop House with you (if you're paying). And I (like, I wager, most American vegetarians) agree that PETA should really just STFU. So when some guy is all "ah ha! Those shoes you bought at Goodwill are made of leather," my general reaction is, "Why yes they are! And they were only THREE DOLLARS! Couldja just die?"
In much the same way, I was bemused by a recent Facebook status proudly outing Democrat Nation as a bunch of nitwit hypocrites for featuring video of Ted Kennedy. This hypocrisy is twofold, apparently: the Kennedy's (like the Romney's) are rich! And also Kennedy killed a woman in a drunk driving accident, so suck on that, war on women.
Let me take these one at a time: Liberals don't mind rich people. We love many rich people. Many of us hope one to be rich people! We're all quite fond of George Clooney and think Bill Gates is doing the (metaphorical) Lord's work. And we are, of course, all taking orders from the super rich George Soros in advance of the great migration to the Soviet Socialist State of Americastan (but don't tell anyone! This is a SECRET!).
What we take issue with are policies which privilege rich people to the detriment of the poor and middle class and are bemused (and, I confess, a little rage-induced) by people who don't seem to get why we think rich people should pay a fair tax rate.
As for the War on Women - this isn't about who talks a better game to women, who panders more to the Moms (lordy... I really grow to loathe the word "mom" every election season) and sets up the pinkest Women's station. This is about policies which affect women adversely, make it harder to get health care, and harder to get paid, motherfucker (was it clear that I was doing a white lady riff on street talk? That's what I was going for, in case that wasn't made perfectly manifest by my crystal clear writing.)
And while I normally abhor the silly faux-centrist bullshit known as "both sides do it," I will say that both sides engage in the fuckwittery of political theater. Both sides parade out veterans and women and people of color and gay people to give the appearance of diversity and inclusiveness. This is exhausting and more than a little embarrassing for everyone. But the Democrats are actually putting forth policy that helps the poor and the middle class achieve some kind of economic parity; the Democrats are putting forth policy that helps women achieve equal status in this country.
The theater doesn't matter. The policy does. And that's why we like Ted Kennedy. And that's why we're voting for Barack Obama.
And if this is not as yet clear, let me just give you one more example: I don't give the tiniest rat's ass that Marco Rubio speaks Spanish better than Julian Castro. Tell me which candidate is going to throw his weight behind the D.R.E.A.M act (not for nothing, the failure to pass this bill is the biggest blightiest bit of tea party poison on our beleaguered and just terrible congress)!