Forget "Issues" --Authenticity Is All That Matters

Jeff Feldman decries the rise of “authenticity.”

Americans, he says, should reject the very notion of authenticity in favor of that old traditional value, pragmatism. In fact, he has a highly pragmatic proposal for our leading Democratic Presidential contenders: they should call for “NATIONAL CONVENTION TO SOLVE AMERICA'S HEALTH CRISIS.” (Evidently, putting it in all-caps and in bold makes it more, um, pragmatic, I guess. Maybe it’s more “frame-shoppy.” I don’t really have a clue.)

Intending only to help a worthy cause, Jeff has managed to embody almost single-handedly why Democrats are so singularly unsuccessful – and unsuccessful they are, in light of the huge majorities of Americans who agree with what they say they want to do. Too bad because Jeff's a fighter on the side of the angels.

It’s often said that we Dems are left-brainers – verbal, analytical, plodding, meeting-holders. And on the whole I agree. The Right wants leaders, the Left wants a meeting.

Oh sure, it’s a grand and glorious tradition – and of course the reason why Democrats are so much better at “governing.” But it ain’t gonna get us the political movement we need. We don't lack for good ideas, or snappy labels (OK, maybe we do, but it's not what's killing us). And we surely don't lack for meetings, workshops, or national conventions.

FDR (and this next sentence always begins with FDR, doesn’t it?) was our last great leader. Of course, under 8+ years of his leadership, the nation remained more or less stuck in an economic depression. But what he offered the nation wasn’t successful government programs. He offered hope. He offered a sunny, upbeat personality that somehow let every American believe that we’d get through the crisis.

People who work on Madison Ave (as I sort-of do) know that commercials for Campbell’s Soup are not about soup. It doesn’t matter if it’s tomato-i-er, or higher in protein or lower in msg or sodium. What matters is that your mother loves you, and that you love your kids. “Lower Sodium” as a claim isn’t about sodium; it’s about showing how much you care.

Hillary Clinton is yet another in a long-line of deeply dislikable Democratic nominees. I believe she thinks the campaign is about health care, the war, improving education and the like. No matter how much she thinks that’s true, it isn’t. It just isn’t. The campaign is about which of these two candidates do we like better.

Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney are by almost any reasonable measure not likely to be good for most Americans as President. But people will like whichever one prevails. They’ll seem jovial and confident. They’ll come across as reasonable people who want the right thing. They’ll have a very good chance of winning the election.

McGovern. Dukakis. Mondale. Kerry. Gore-2000. These people were deeply dislikable, and went down to defeat. Carter seemed likeable in76, but after 4 years of grappling with the issues of the day, seemed to lack confidence in himself. (As opposed to Reagan, a dreadful President revered to this day.) And consider what they did to Bill Clinton—a likeable sort. Their entire campaign was not to make us think his policies weren’t good, it was to make us hate him.

The Republicans know how to sell soup. If we don’t learn, we’ll just keep on making the best soup no one buys.

Shameless Self-Promotion

OK, it's time to promote Comedywise's newest adventure, DepressingThoughtofTheDay.com. Frank Santopadre has been percolating this idea for quite a while, and it finally burst forth on June 1. You can subscribe to get it in your e-mail via the site, or grab it via Twitter.

Try a taste -- here's today's Daily Dose of Downer (tm)

Cigarette mascot Joe Camel debuts on this date in 1987. Underage smoking soon increases.

Enjoy! Tell your pals!

Whither Immigration?

I've been hearing comments like this from our brethern on the right:

Normally, I am the first in line to support my party and the President. The Immigration fiasco/sellout that President Bush and others are pushing has caused me to rethink things. I declined to donate anymore until immigration is fixed. By fixed I mean border control first-funded, built and staffed, then legalization/visas as separate law next. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Posted By W. Brucker, MD, Eau Claire, Wisconsin : June 18, 2007 5:16 pm

This was over on CNN.com.

For the life of me, I cannot begin to understand immigration outside of a frankly racist context.

I do not understand what Dr. Brucker, of Eau Claire for heavens' sake, is so excited about. We have any number of flagrant law violations in our society, but the "failure to control our border" seems to be especially irksome. Don't know why this is so. It wasn't, say, 18 months ago, nor for the previous 400 years that Europeans have been here. So I'm not sure why this is so urgent. (But then again, I was never clear on the urgency to confront Saddam Hussein's failure to adhere to the UN's instructions either. It must be me.)

Nor can I see why English is so damn important. Folks on the right are happy with the market shaping our society, at least when it comes to who can afford health care or higher education or have job security, etc. (Some of the most extreme want the government to stop regulating the purity of foods or the safety of consumer products on the grounds that the markets provide more effective and more efficient protection than the hated government regulation.) But when it comes to speaking a language, or regulating who can have sex with whom, etc., all of a sudden the market is irrelevant and there is a moral imperative.

People have been not speaking English on this continent since humans first came here. Since the founding of our little Republic, there has been constant and in many cases uninterrupted non-English speaking. And we have all survived. Why is it now all of a sudden critical to somehow or other find a way to inflict some kind of painful consequence on those who do not speak this particular language?

I fear that too large a proportion of our population has gone round the bend for good, much as happened in the 1830s-1860, when nearly half of us were 110% certain that any tinkering with slavery would assuredly cause the loss of everything of value, so much so that nearly half of us were ready to fight and die for it. Whatever one's views of the causes of the Civil War, it is certainly undeniable that bloodshed was unavoidable or desirable. It was stupid then, and the same insistence on sticking our heads in the sand now is just as stupid now.

Vive la Revolution!

Why Embrace Defeat?

The Democrats have reportedly agreed to drop timetables from their funding bill. And Democrats are claiming defeat. I can't for the life of me see why.

The Democrats should remove these timetables and declare it a Republican defeat. Not a Democratic one. We have not "caved." We brought pressure to bear in a situation where we lack the power to coerce a favorable result. There is not enough support from Republicans to force the President's hand. This failure to stop the war lies at the feet of Republicans unwilling to join us. Not with us.

To those who say we should simply stop funding the military, you will have to recognize that this is not a viable option. Our C-i-C would use that as a justification for all kinds of mischief. He'd put our troops into even further needless danger. He'd use the lack of funding as an excuse to blame the Democrats for losing the war -- a meme that could well find traction. After all, the Republicans are about to start a Presidential campaign in which they all are against the war, all are in favor of withdrawal as soon as possible, and united only by their belief that the problems we've had are the fault of Defeat-o-crats. And while we won a righteous victory in 06, do not expect your fellow Americans to suddenly stop buying the Republican line of crap. Nah. Gon. Hapn.

This Nails it

I wish I had the talent of James Wolcott. In this post's 2d paragraph, he articulates my thought about 10 times better than I ever could my self. The master writes:

The ashy clouds over Mordor have parted, my friends. It was only a year or so ago that the Permanent Republican Majority seemed not only a grim possibility, but a stark near-inevitability. Karl Rove's master plan seemed to have a mortal lock on the political future. So downbeat was the daily news and so dispiriting the performance of the Democrats in 2004 that I had internalized liberalism's permanent underdog status, consoling myself that at least I lived in a liberal city in a liberal state and had plenty of company in the commisseration ward. But I also took heart in Emerson's insight that everything looks permanent until it's secret is known; that invisible cracks form deep in even the sturdiest structures and over time will not be denied. But "over time" can be a long time. Decades, even. And so much would not survive that long a wait.

He then goes on, of course, to herald the start of a new era of progressive ascendency, massive change on the near-horizon.

Interesting Essay on Outsourcing

There's an interesting essay on Salon.com today about outsourcing. Go read it and come back.


Some of the commenters say David is a big cry-baby for giving up steak dinners and ice cream ("CEO-ness," I think someone said) To them I say: you have no idea what David has given up. I'd guess he's lost quite a bit more than mere perks. Certainly his ego and self-esteem have taken a beating.

Secondly, to those who feel that David was a fool for putting in $2M to a dying business -- well, all I can say is, "nice hindsight, buddy." Why would you think David, his father, the SBA and the banks are such fools? Wait -- I know why.

In our post-Reagan society, people who experience loss DESERVE to. David isn't unlucky, or a victim of circumstance. No, out individual-centric worldview demands that his fate be somehow his fault. So to those who condemn David for looting his Dad, or his Dad for believing in him: shut up. You are simply wrong.

Finally, to the anti-globalization crowd: David's right, there is no stopping it. Not via tariffs, not via regulations, not via anything. Do you think the US government would have allowed Detroit to export all those jobs in the 70's and 80's if it had a choice?

The so-called "race to the bottom" is a fact of our market-based economy. In fact, the process of seeking ever cheaper production is what drives our economy and always has. It's why Europeans invested in North America in the 17th century. It's why Phildelphia is crowded with office buildings built for companies who have long ago moved out or closed. It's why India is finding that it's ability to attract jobs is being undercut by lower cost providers in Manilla and Malaysia.

The lesson to be learned from all this one that David is just beginning to grasp. Our market-based system has been one of the great creations of humankind. Of course it has limits, and it must be carefully regulated to work to society's advantage. What's missing now is not market mechanisms, or tariffs, or a soul. What's missing now is the simple faith that the future will bring us new opportunities and new rewards. And this faith is, in my experience, largely a product of a society's leaders.

It's what endeared FDR to a couple of generations of Americans. It's what made JFK seem cool. It's what makes Obama seem cool. It's even, God help my immortal soul, what made people like Reagan (the evil bastard!).

David's bankruptcy lawyer was right. He's a young man, with obvious gifts. He'll survive, maybe even thrive again. The future's like globalization: there's no stopping it.

We would do well not only to recognize that but to embrace it. One of the posters commented that the government has robbed us to give money to defense contractors, etc. I think this is right. What we should be doing instead is investing that same money in our future. We should be saying to David and everyone else who is trying make their way, "we've got your back. Your healthcare is on us. Your kids' education is on us. You won't starve or become homeless." And we should do that not because we're interested in creating a class of people addicted to a nanny-state. We should do that because we believe in David and in each other.

If David were a stock, I'd be ready to invest (if I had any money, that is!). Our future can be a great and wonderful thing, but only if we let go of the past and start to invest in it by investing in ourselves.

Abu G

Mr. Gonzales' performance yesterday before the Senate Judiciary Committee was by any standard preposterous.

Well, not by any standard. The President, the one person who matterswas pleased with the Attorney General’s testimony today.

I have this image of the President sitting in his office watching these old fuss-budget Senators fuming and sputtering and stewing and full of righteous indignation, and the President simply enjoying the fact that there is not one goddamned thing any of them can do about it.

Mr. Bush has nothing to fear from the electorate or even his own party. So long as Mr. Gonzales is willing, my bet is that the President continues what is for him a ritualistic humiliation of pompous blatherers.

Things We All Know

There are certain things We All Know. In fact, quite a lot of things. The best example of things We All Know is that we all know that there is not an old white man living in the sky who looks out for us specially. We All Know that there is not an invisible Jesus who tells us what to do if we just listen hard enough. Whenever I hear Jesus freaks ranting about religion, I think there is no one they are trying to convince as much as themselves. They know, deep down, the truth. Their religious talk is a desperate cover -- a cover they feel strongly about because they so want it to be true. Even the Rapture: what better fantasy than that any day – tomorrow, even – one might awake to find all earthly cares swept away and replaced by truly transcendent bliss.


When these folks see secular media, they see a world that mocks them. The people they see on TV, movies, etc., are well off, educated, part of a meaningful group doing meaningful things, etc. They feel excluded from that mainstream society, and understandably they scorn it, mock it. And their legitimate feelings are manipulated and exploited by conniving men and women who see these dispossessed souls as a pool of money and votes to be commandeered for their own nefarious purposes, generally involving big houses, swimming pools and the odd private jet.

We need to acknowledge that these folks are our fellow Americans, and that those of us still feeling part of the mainstream have failed them terribly. Perhaps we have blame for defining society in such a way that it doesn’t include them. Perhaps we deserve blame for not fighting to address their real needs. Perhaps we should be ashamed that we have not treated them with the respect they deserve. There’s no shortage of blame. Only a shortage of clear paths to a better future.

There are a lot of Things We All Know. We all know that our society has lost the will to address our most pressing problems, even to the point of allowing our fellow citizens to die for lack of a modicum of health care. We seem uninterested in preparing tomorrow’s citizens for the world as it will exist. We seem determined to treat the least of us as a pariah whose misfortune is morally justified and whose amelioration is surely not our responsibility.

We All Know that the current regime is not in the least bit interested in doing what’s best for the voters. We All Know that the conservative movement is not really interested in lowering taxes, or reducing the size of government, or for preserving individual liberty, or for walking softly and carrying a big stick. We All Know that too many Democrats and most Republicans are so enthralled with the comforts of access to plentiful cash that they cannot be counted on to turn their backs on their paymasters and take up the cause of the people they purport to represent. We All Know This.

For today, let me point out something We All Know. We All Know that the President and his party have absolutely corrupted the US Attorney corps, just like they corrupted every other part of the executive branch. We Also All Know that the Attorney General was and is no innocent victim in this. By shifting the story repeatedly, We All Know these people are showing a guilty conscience. Finally, We Also All Know that however satisfying it may be to see Mr. Gonzalez removed in disgrace, the truth is he was a dutiful soldier, carrying out the wrongful instructions of his principal, whose continuing presence in the Oval Office is an embarrassment to us all.

Comedywise on Gothamist

The Gothamist.com has an interview up with yours truly and my partner Frank Santopadre. More press for Comedywise!

The Trouble We're In

Gary Kimaya writes a nearly perfect encapsulation of the thinking of many on the left, "Is There Life After Bush?"

Like so many, Kamiya has become so focused on the excesses of the Bush administration, he has a hard time seeing the bigger picture. Which unfortunately is quite grim.

Back when South Carolinians were electing the 90+ year old Strom Thurmond, I used to joke (mostly) that the problem wasn't Senator Thurmond but rather the people who kept voting for him. Indeed, I used to propose that states or other jurisdictions which made obviously foolish choices -- choices that were not merely unwise or foolish, but choices that bespoke a fundamental lack of judgment such as sending an obviously incompetent man to the Senate -- should be penalized by having the right to send a representative suspended for some time, say 10 years.

The point of this was to focus blame where it belonged: on the people hiring these guys. And as awful as these guys can be (I'm talking to you, Junior Bush), they aren't the problem. The problem is our fellow Americans who keep voting for them. And they're not going anywhere.

In some imporant ways, people like this have been here since the Puritans landed. There have been sporadic clashes between these forces and the rest of the nation as long as there has been a nation.

But what's happening lately takes this to a new level. This slice of America is becoming radicalized as it is becoming organized and entrenched. It is a religious phenomenon, but it is also unmistakably a political and cultural phenomenon. Alexandra Pelosi's Friends of God offers a compelling glimpse of the alternative society now growing withing our larger society: a distinctively militaristic and persecuted society, in which almost any measures are acceptable because they are mandated by God (whose word is delivered by humble servants like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell). It is a society that proclaims its commitment to Christianity while it actively works to thwart Christian values.

Unfortuantely, the harm is not confined to the many good people who have been fooled into buying into this nonsense. No, this pool of people is an ocean of gasoline waiting for a match. And the flames will threaten us all.

In "American Fascists," Chris Hedges describes this movement. Comparing it to movements he witnessed in other parts of the world, he told Salon

Those of us in New York, Boston, San Francisco or some of these urban pockets don't understand how radically changed our country is, don't understand the appeal of these buffoonish figures to tens of millions of Americans.

This build-up of fear and hate, of expressed longing for a cataclysm that will finally give their lives the meaning they now lack, will not just go away when Bush goes away. No, as Hedges told Salon

It takes time to acculturate a society to a radical agenda, but that acculturation has clearly begun here, and I don't see people standing up and trying to stop them.

So the problem, friends, is not merely this or that horrendous politician or preacher. The problem is with our fellow Americans themselves. Bush didn't vote himself into office (Supreme Court or no, the man got a lot of votes.) Bush is the symptom of a much larger problem we will have to confront -- sooner or later.

God in America

A lot of talk about religion in our society these days. The thing that always strikes me is that the people with the most passion in their assertions about God, Jesus and all the rest are mostly trying to convince themselves.

Watched Alexandra Pelosi’s “Friends of God” on HBO, and was struck by this with renewed force watching Ted Haggard, who was earnestly explaining how great it was to be a heterosexual Christian because of all the great sex within marriage. I can’t believe he was trying to convince anyone as much as he was himself.

Alexandra showed us all manner of Pharisees and scribes, all of whom were fixated on telling other people what God wanted. (Evidently, He is much consumed with marriage.) I seem to recall the New Testament as being fairly clear that faith is something that is personal and that the important part is what is between each person and God.

So I’m fairly certain that all this talk about God and religion is in fact not really connected to religion at all. If someone really has faith, I’m not sure what’s gained by talking about it.

U-Turn Coming!

It appears that Dear Leader is preparing for one of his trademarked long-overdue U-turns. Having bad judgment as a part of his fundamental nature, the President has often had to reverse his initial wrong positions. Lots of folks have to make frequent corrections to their views owing to mistakes out-of-the-gate, and it’s to their credit that they do so.
But the Current Occupant manages to couple this U-turn habit with a stubborn hubris that makes them long-overdue as well as a condescendingly dismissive attitude towards those who try to point out the error of his ways.
So folks, as we all await anxiously the release of the ISG report, let me tell you What To Think.
Bush has never hesitated to abandon previously held positions, even (especially?) when they were held with seeming certitude that he would never abandon them. Here’s some quick examples, many from this excellent list:

CHIP Program (Texas Governor)
Patient Bill of Rights (Texas Governor)
Nation Building
Protecting Social Security Surplus
Steel Tariffs
Clean Air Standards for Power Plant Emissions
Storage of Nuclear Waste at Yucca Mountain
Assault Weapons Ban
McCain Feingold Campaign Finance Reform
Creation of Homeland Security Department
Creation of a 9/11 Investigation Commission
Testifying before 9/11 Commission
Rice Testifying before 9/11 Commission
Giving 9/11 Commission deadline extension
Creation of WMD Investigation Commission
Finding WMD’s in Iraq
Iraq connection to 9/11
Winning the War on Terror
Friendship with Enron CEO Ken Lay
Need to Capture Bin Ladn
Power of Intelligence Chief to control intelligence budgets
UN Approval of Iraq Invasion
Federal Government regulation of marriage
“Jawboning” OPEC to lower oil prices
Staying the course in Iraq
Warrants for Wiretapping

So one thing seems certain: Bush will almost certainly reverse course on Iraq. If I’m wrong, there are plenty of folks who can cry “I Told You So.” And my guess is that Bush will go into his “Stem Cell Decidin’” mode: he’s getting lots of advice from the best people, and will soon tell the press he is going to make a Decision, and he’ll go on national TV and announce that he has no intention of reversing course and anyone who says he does is a dirty liar, and then he’ll announce a series of steps that, taken together, amount to reversing the course.

We’ll see what happens. The move might even revive his flagging popularity. It's hard to believe -- as much as one might want to -- that a President's approval ratings could be so low for so long. But you never know.

And that, my friends, is What to Think.

The Day After

Whew. My faith in my fellow Americans, sorely tested these last years, is restored. Our democracy lives. Maybe "survives," in light of the many blows it has taken.

The evil cretins who have control of the Republican party will always be with us. When I was younger, we referred to them as "John Birchers," and the Red States were called the "Bible Belt." These people are at the end of the day our fellow Americans, and will be with us moving forward.

When their influence is on the wane, we can progess. We they are ascendent, we go backwards. Their day, for now, has come and gone.

Sure, they'll continue to blame everything on Nancy Pelosi (funny how they didn't demonize Majority Leader Reid), Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton. But their attacks won't work if Americans don't buy into their schtick.

And after this cycle, it seems clear that Americans are looking to move beyond the politics and fear and hatred that have marked our politics for the last 10 years.

A corner has been turned. We move forward from here.

What to Think...About the Election

Let it not be said ("Nay! Nay!") that I did not commit to electronic form my predictions for tomorrow's midterm elections. So, before they go into the mayonnaise jar on Funk & Wagnall's back porch, here are the Answers in Advance(tm):
1. Eppes, in Sc-5th Senate, cruises to easy election. Frank's good humor and great common sense will be evident to the 97% of voters who have either met him or seen him from a distance, up to 1/4 mile depending on visibility. A win for the good folks of the SC's 5th Senate District. And a great relief to Frank's law partner, who will now have several good days a month in the office to himself.
2. The US House of Represenatives, where the good Dems will net gain 26 seats to re-claim the majority. This will allow Republicans a good chance to blame every thing that goes wrong -- including Alex Rodriguez' lack of clutch hitting -- on the Democratic House. Soon, everything that is not Bill Clinton's fault will be Nancy Pelosi's fault. Welcome to Scape-goat Land, Speaker Pelosi.
3. US Senate -- Repubs hang on by a thread. The brave and true Dems will pick up just 4 seats here, with Tenn and Mo (as well as Ariz) staying red.
4. NY Comptroller -- Alan Hevesi beats with several points of margin Republican Non-Criminal Chris Callaghan. I heard Mr. Callaghan this morning on WNYC, and he is in so far over his head it ain't funny. I'd prefer the vaguely comeptent criminal to the hubris, naivete and incompetence of Saratoga County's proudest fiscal officer.
5. Studio 60 -- Sorry, Charile, but this show's toast. An interesting and noble effort from Mr. Sorkin, but Sports Nite it ain't.

Well, I think that's enough, don't you? Stop by tomorrow and witness the amazing accuracy of my Answers in Advance(tm).

Home Stretch

The die is likely already cast. Even a fake dust-up over john Kerry's typically obscure remarks is unlikely to make a difference.

The House seems in the bag at this point. As for the Senate, it seems that it's coming down to 3 races: Virginia, Tennessee and Missouri (Webb, Ford and McCaskell). We would need to get all three to win, barring an unforeseen upset elsewhere.

Even so, no doubt a Dem victory in the House will allow conservatives a wonderful opportunity to re-load. For the last six years, everything bad has been more or less Bill and/or Hillary Clinton's fault: 9/11, recession, stock market crash, poor job growth, the coddling of North Korea, Iran and Iraq, global warming, etc. But starting next Wednesday, everything can be the fault of Speaker Pelosi and the Obstructionist House.

So, we'll have all new vitriol and all-new hyperbole. Let's remember, even if we get the White House and the Senate in 08, these clowns will continue to bitch and moan that everything we are and everything we do is wrong, un-American, etc. They did that when they were the kooky John Birchers, and they'll do that long after George W. Bush has been unanamously elected Worst President Ever. It's what they do. It's our challenge to ignore them and marginalize their impact as much as we can.

P.S. This November 7th, lucky residents of SC's 5th Senate District get the honor of casting their votes for the estimable Frank Eppes. Those lucky dogs!

I've Just Got To Say This...

You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.

-- A. Lincoln.

Doesn't this explain perfectly the implosion of the conservative movement that is underway? The whole thing is a con job, and it can work on some people all the time (the 30+5 who will always think GWB is a great man), and it can even work on all of the people some time (all those who voted for the movement these past five years), but at the end of the day, the body politic ain't that stupid and will wake up.

I've long maintained that when this movement failed it would be all at once, in a kind of "emperor has no clothes" moment.

That moment may be at hand. (It may not.) But the forces of light, reason and righteousness will have their day, and in the end, as ever, will triumph.

Now if we could just get this idiot Tom Kean Jr. to lose...

God Lives!

From today's Greenville News:

Eppes, who took 534 votes, for 91 percent, said he expects the runoff to bring more attention to the race, but his campaign is about getting out and meeting the voters. He said he doesn't have "time to fret about the opposition." He said education is the most important issue.

So you see, there is a God. Now let's see what happens in the general election.

A Giant Strides onto the Political Stage

The Greenville News continues it's coverage of the great Frank Eppes' drive to the South Carolina State Senate. Here's my favorite bit:

Democratic candidate Frank L. Eppes said he believes in "putting people in front of politics.

"One of the reasons I'm running for office is that I get so doggoned annoyed with people who just do lock-step stuff for their party that they know is bad because they say, 'Well, if I don't, the party leaders are going to fuss at me.' Well, that's absurd," he said.

"It's not what you're elected to do. You're elected to use your judgment and do what's best."

Frank Eppes. Strongly doggoned annoyed with those that fuss at him. And my hero.

And get a load of the other guy seeking his party's nomination, Charles Winfield (who I'm 99% certain was never on MASH). Just a few short months ago, he seemed pretty certain he was a Republican:

Eppes faces one challenger in the Democratic primary. Charles E. Winfield ran as a Republican in the June primary for the Greenville County Council seat being vacated by Mark Kingsbury, losing to Willis Meadows. Previously, he ran against Tommie Reece in the non-partisan school board elections, finishing third in a three candidate race. Now he has filed to run as a Democrat. The odds would appear to greatly favor Eppes in the primary, but he says he’s taking nothing for granted.

That's right: finished thrid in a field of three for school board. Now that's hot stuff. Surely the future of South Carolina, right there.

If you can legally vote in SC's 5th Senate district tomorrow, do the Right Thing and send Frank one step closer to the Senate. And don't forget to send him some money -- it's what makes campaigns go.

What have I learned from/since 9/11

Monday we celebrate the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks. The media is awash in efforts to mark the occasion with something of meaning. I hear lots of “ordinary” Americans weighing in with how 9/11 affected them. One, not so ordinary, I suppose, is the President, who keeps saying the attacks changed fundamentally how he looked at the world. He says it gave him a new appreciation for the dangers that threaten us (I guess from abroad). The President’s rhetoric on this seems to me to be essentially a mask for the huge wave of guilt that must wrack his bones every day, knowing that this not only happened on his watch, but was in no small part due to his flippant attitude toward this threat. It speaks volumes to me that he shows no trace of humility, just hubris, condescension and thinly-veiled contempt (redirected away from himself, I’ll bet).

I hear other people talk about how 9/11 affected them mostly by making gas more expensive, or their business or jobs less stable or secure. I hear people say they, like the President, have a new-found fear of violence. Others profess a new-found hatred for Islam, or Arabs, or “extremists” or foreigners.

It seems the time has come once again for me to tell you What To Think, so here goes.

9/11 will be seen as a watershed event in both American and world history. (The two strains of history to undoubtedly merge at some distant point, much like Mercian and Cambrian history is now just early British history.) However, the effects caused by the terrorists – the deaths, injuries, damage – are negligible compared to the effects caused by our own fearful response. Perhaps the fate of thousands of Iraqis was sealed in November of 2000 when the US Supreme Court awarded the Presidency to George W. Bush. There’s a considerable body of evidence that he planned a military toppling of Saddam Hussein long before he was appointed to office. It may be that had 9/11 never occurred – had an alert security guard made a lucky call, had an FBI supervisor made an extra call, had a conspirator chickened out and gone state’s evidence – Mr. Bush would have found some other pretext for invading Iraq. And perhaps it was always part of his thinking that Afghanistan would have to be invaded also to ensure their cruel regime was a threat no more. Truly, a what-if scenario ripe for a talented alternative-history author to exploit.

I have learned since 9/11 that many of my fellow Americans can be cowardly, self-centered, childish and utterly rule by fear. I have learned that the deaths of thousands of innocents count for nothing if they are far away, not white, and not presented visually. I have learned just how far Ronald Reagan’s Culture of Me has permeated huge swaths of our society.

I have learned that the fundamental lessons of life – for individuals as well as societies – must be continually relearnt. We have allowed the powerful free rein in ordering our society’s affairs, with the not-too-surprising result that their share of our wealth has risen steadily at the expense of everyone else.

I have learned that powerful and corrupt people can use people’s natural fears as a most unnatural tool to deprive them of their security. And I have learned that resisting these people is a struggle without end.

I have also learned that terrorism is fundamentally a police matter. It is combated not through invasions or rockets or tank battalions. It is fought via intelligence, interrogations, taking precautions.

As grave a threat as terrorism is, it is on a par with other crimes – serious indeed, but no basis on which to organize our society. I write from Lower Manhattan, blocks away from the New York Stock Exchange. It’s fears for its security has led it to turn several blocks around it into an armed encampment. A variety of barricades block the streets and sidewalks. Meantime, the effects of 9/11 in this neighborhood are apparent in the nearly empty sidewalks, many fewer lunch spots, the surplus of seating in the parks.

And the future is being built, make no mistake. Under the guise of “re-building,” the ancient transport infrastructure is getting a face lift and a series of undistinguished office buildings are being built. A huge memorial is planned, that will add even more dead space to a part of our town that is already swimming in memorial spaces. The design of the "towers" says nothing to me so much as “cowering.” Where once the height of an office building was an unabashed metaphor for a society’s dreams, now the height of the office building is a signal that we must not raise our heads above the crowd for fear that a terrorist will lop it off.

In yet another alternative universe, our political or business leaders (remember when captains of industry had moral force in society?) would have stoutly called for defiance in the face of fear. “Letting the terrorists win” would have meant building exactly the kind of demure buildings we are now planning, and not failing to keep your Visa card near it’s maximum, as Mr. Bush has it.

By our ignorance and apathy, we have come, once again, to live in a dangerous time. Politics seems to so many of us an a minor annoyance, kind of like sports but not as engaging. But the truth is the actions of state actors like Mr. Bush and his Russian, British, Iranian, Afghani, Pakistani, Israeli and Iraqi counterparts are the stuff of which conflagrations are made. It is not the actions of murderous crooks like Osama Bin Ladn, or the man who killed Crown Prince Ferdinand almost a century ago, that cause massive devastation and tragedy.

We live in a democratic nation, as do many others around the world. We are often reminded that we have a civic duty to vote and read the paper. It’s kind of like the cajoling to eat healthier and exercise more: it’s undeniably good advice, but failing to heed it has consequences that are quite remote and quite easy to dismiss. But like the oft-ignored health advice, our failure to adequately supervise our government can over time have disastrous, even life-threatening, consequences.

What I’ve learned since 9/11 is that too many of my fellow Americans seem unprepared for the awesome responsibility of self-government. It may be that the ominous storm warnings will be enough to bring enough of them around to create a kind of tipping point. Our history has been, however, that Americans allow the government to get too far away from them before asserting their will, with fairly uniformly disastrous consequences. I’m just not sure that the disaster level is kicked up high enough for enough Americans to reassert their authority. Come this November, we’ll find out.

Frank Eppes for Senate - SC - 5th Dist.

The great Frank Eppes is finally running for office. The fates have smiled on him and given the incumbent state senator a dibilitating condition, forcing his untimely resignation. And creating an open seat. Frank has swung into action and is the favorite to win the Democratic primary, and given good odds in the general. The retiring incumbent switched from "D" to "R" in 2000, so Frank's win would swing this conservative district back into the blue.

I've found some background on Frank's campaign in "Metrobeat," a section of the "Upstate Beat." Political writer and comumnist James Shannon provides good background in this August 22 piece:

According to Ecclesiastes, for everything there is a season – and our eyes and ears tell us this is so. When athletes remain on the field of play as their abilities wane, we suffer along with them. Visions of a hobbled Joe Namath in a Los Angeles Rams uniform or a depleted Willie Mays in the New York Mets outfield were all the more painful because we so vividly remembered them in their prime.

The same holds true in politics. Recall the final years of Strom Thurmond’s career in the US Senate, when as a colleague gently observed, he was “no longer mentally keen.” Another long-running political career ended recently when state Sen. Verne Smith of Greer resigned his seat after a storied career in the General Assembly that began when Richard Nixon was president. This was no long goodbye, however. Through the 2005 legislative session, Smith remained a force in Columbia. 2006 was a different story, as illness kept him away from the daily business of the Senate. Although his term would not expire until 2008, he decided to step down.

A special election will be held to pick his successor, with Democratic and Republican primaries on September 19. The winners will face off on November 7. Verne Smith often said his role in government “was to help the raggedy-ass children and frail elderly.” They can only hope whoever wins the seat has the same commitment to those without access to the corridors of power.

He leaves some big shoesto fill, and not just because he was a large man in physical size. In a political arena increasingly populated by narrow ideologues and self-interested sycophants, Verne Smith was a giant. This lends added importance to the choice voters will make in the Fifth Senate District, and an examination of the candidates reveals some curious undercurrents.

On the Republican side, Rep. Lewis Vaughn would have to be considered the front-runner. He has served in the House since 1989 and chaired the Greenville County delegation when he announced earlier this year that he would not seek reelection. His “retirement” quickly ended, and he announced he would seek the Senate seat on the day Smith resigned. Vaughn’s ambitions for higher office are no secret. In 2003, when Jim DeMint indicated he would give up his seat in Congress to run for the US Senate, Vaughn publicly said he wanted to run but garnered no real support despite a reputation as a rabid GOP partisan.

Expect to hear a lot between now and November about candidates embracing the legacy of Verne Smith, but one area where Vaughn and Smith part company concerns vouchers that transfer public money to private schools. Smith was a strong supporter of public education, while Vaughn was perhaps the leading promoter of “school choice” in the General Assembly. Although the initiative called Put Parents In Charge went down in flames in 2005 and was pulled off the legislative agenda in this election year by Gov. Mark Sanford, it has not gone away. Campaign finance records confirm an avalanche of cash flowing into the Sanford and Karen Floyd coffers from out-of-state voucher advocates, and there is a reasonable expectation that Vaughn will ride that same gravy train. In a district with excellent public schools in Greer, Travelers Rest and Blue Ridge, it will be interesting to watch Vaughn try to convince voters that tax money needs to be removed from those schools in favor of affluent private schools and Christian academies.

The other Republicans running in the primary have taken notice of Vaughn’s presumed front-runner status, and appear to be attempting to move even further to the right – if that’s possible. Kathleen Jennings Gresham describes herself as the first female prosecutor in the Upstate, but she was disbarred in 1996 following numerous allegations including misrepresentation and forging a signature on a document. She is waging an aggressive campaign, taking Vaughn to task for failing to sign a pledge not to raise taxes. This is a gimmick frequently trotted out by ultra-conservative candidates trying to put their opponents on the spot. Gresham’s yard signs contain the slogan “Share the Vision,” although what that vision is remains unclear. Her radio commercials emphasize her gender, asserting she is not part of the “old boy” network. Hey, she’s a woman.

Also on the ballot is Timothy Macko, described as an accountant and graduate of Bob Jones University. It turns out Macko has experience in elective office, serving six years in the New Mexico legislature. On the one hand, the Bob Jones connection should not be discounted, especially in a GOP primary in the Upstate. On the other hand, New Mexico may as well be France to more provincial area voters.

The fourth GOP candidate in the race is Michael Meilinger, reportedly a certified public accountant. Meilinger did not participate in a recent debate of GOP candidates at Greenville Tech, and no further information had surfaced at press time. Beyond Vaughn’s built-in advantage as a well-known incumbent who has secured the support of virtually all the establishment Republicans in the district, the primary race is difficult to handicap. But after 18 years in office, Vaughn has undoubtedly made some enemies. If Jennings or Macko can assemble enough malcontents and wing-nuts to push Vaughn into a run-off, then all bets are off. But Lewis Vaughn looks like a safe bet in the GOP primary.

Things get a little more complicated on the other side of the aisle, not least because Verne Smith was a Democrat until 2001. When he changed parties, the Senate was evenly divided among Republicans and Democrats, with Republican Lt. Gov. Bob Peeler holding the tie-breaking vote. Although many Democrats – reportedly including Smith’s son Jeff – disagreed with the decision, he believed he could more effectively serve the people of his district as a Republican. Verne Smith did not change his beliefs, only the letter after his name.

What makes this discussion interesting is the emergence of a Democratic candidate making his first run for public office who vows to implement a “pro-education, pro-business agenda that shuns partisan, political game-playing and puts people first.” His name is Frank Eppes, a well-known attorney and the son of former Circuit Court Judge Frank Eppes. The funeral of Judge Eppes in 2002 has been described as one of the watershed political events of the decade, as the meek and the mighty gathered in large numbers to pay tribute to a man who touched countless lives. “My father loved people, and he loved helping people,” says Frank Eppes. “If it was in his power to help them, he’d do it whether he knew them well or not. I hope I can live up to that legacy.” The wild card in this election is that voters may have a chance to choose a successor who embodies the core values of the man they seek to replace. “Strom Thurmond and Verne Smith shared one important trait that I always admired,” recounts Eppes. “When someone asked for their help, neither man ever applied any kind of litmus test or asked about political affiliation. An effective legislator shares our values, speaks our language and understands the things that matter most to us. An effective legislator does what is best and right for people because it is best and right. While no one will be able to fill Senator Smith’s shoes, we certainly have the right model to follow.” Eppes faces one challenger in the Democratic primary. Charles E. Winfield ran as a Republican in the June primary for the Greenville County Council seat being vacated by Mark Kingsbury, losing to Willis Meadows. Previously, he ran against Tommie Reece in the non-partisan school board elections, finishing third in a three candidate race. Now he has filed to run as a Democrat. The odds would appear to greatly favor Eppes in the primary, but he says he’s taking nothing for granted.

Should Eppes and Vaughn win their respective primaries, expect the November election to focus on the issues – especially education – to give voters a real choice. According to Eppes, “Public education is the most important function of state government. I support our public schools and the dedicated teachers, principals and parents who serve our children so tirelessly. Using tax dollars to fund private school vouchers steals from our public schools, which hurts our children and our future.”

Eppes is an imposing man, standing 6’10” tall and solid as a rock. But it is the solidity of his convictions that make him a worthy candidate to succeed Verne Smith in the South Carolina Senate. It’s not easy to fill the shoes of a giant.

Digby reminds us that the media are a part of the problem, and asks how do we fix it. My answer?

We ARE fixing it.
The media are easily led. Hell, even dopes like Dick Nixon and Karl Rove can do it.
It starts by constantly calling BS on them. Unfortunately, a bunch of bloggers aren't adequate to the job: we need elected officials to be on board. And that's why, just like the conservatives did starting the in 60s, we progressives are taking over the Democratic party. People like Biden and Clinton and Kerry and Edwards have been called losers so often they've started to believe it themselves. We need a new class of elected Dems who think of themselves as the next generation of American leadership. And they're on the way. (Ned Lamont, I'm talking to you!)
The other thing we have to start is to push a narrative that has nothing to do with the RNC's narrative. If we can get some elected Dems to start pushing our own talking points, the press will come along. How about a press conference with every Democratic governor, where they all pledge to deliver health care access to all their citizens? Or a group of Decocratic senators put out a press release calling for the implementation of a college education tax credit? And that's all they talk about for a while...coverage will come around at some point.
And the good news is that we are doing all these things already! We look around and see darkness and despair. But if we just look ahead a little, there is light and hope. The movement we're building is accelerating fast. The progess we've made -- the blogs, Air America, the tidal wave of smart liberal books, etc., etc. -- is paying off already.
Victory will not long be denied the righteous. Just ask President Lincoln.

The always wonderful Digby posts this today:

I think that until we grapple with the fact that this is the real nub of the problem we will get nowhere.

The question recurs, what will satisfy them? Simply this: We must not only let them alone, but we must somehow, convince them that we do let them alone. This, we know by experience, is no easy task. We have been so trying to convince them from the very beginning of our organization, but with no success. In all our platforms and speeches we have constantly protested our purpose to let them alone; but this has had no tendency to convince them. Alike unavailing to convince them, is the fact that they have never detected a man of us in any attempt to disturb them.These natural, and apparently adequate means all failing, what will convince them? This, and this only: cease to call slavery wrong, and join them in calling it right. And this must be done thoroughly - done in acts as well as in words. Silence will not be tolerated - we must place ourselves avowedly with them. Senator Douglas' new sedition law must be enacted and enforced, suppressing all declarations that slavery is wrong, whether made in politics, in presses, in pulpits, or in private. We must arrest and return their fugitive slaves with greedy pleasure. We must pull down our Free State constitutions. The whole atmosphere must be disinfected from all taint of opposition to slavery, before they will cease to believe that all their troubles proceed from us.

So too, today, we must ask the question, "what will satisfy them?" Will it be to ban gay marriage? Outlaw abortion? Destroy the public schools? Institute mandatory prayer? Deport all non-English speakers? I don't think so. It certainly will not be enough to nominate a conservative, born again southern Democrat. We did that. His name was Jimmy Carter. Here's what they are still doing to him even 25 years later. We nominated a son of the "New South," modern, moderate and pro-business. They impeached his ass.

I think this analysis is wonderful, and parallels my own thinking in many ways. But the premise is not thought-through quite to the most basic level, namely that the reason our Red friends have this overpowering sense of resentment is not because they sense our disapprobation. It is because they sense their errors in themselves. It is they who insisted on the aristocratic electoral college/senate compromise as the price of admission. It is they who brutally oppressed a race of their fellow humans (don't think they were unawares, or believed for two seconds their fig leaf justifications). And now, it is they who don't educate their children, who don't refrain from child-bearing until later, who tolerate crushing poverty amongst their fellow citizens. And they get to be reminded every night when they watch tv or a movie that those of us in Blue America are better educated, have nicer homes, live better, etc. And their entirely understandable reaction is this sense of defensiveness, this way of projecting their feelings of inferiority onto us as a claim that we are lording it over them.
The reason why this is important is that it shows a key -- maybe even THE key -- to a successful strategy of getting them to join us in moving the nation forward. We must show empathy for their challenges. We must never gloat or lord it over them (as so many blog readers seem to). We must never, ever forget that there is no moving forward without these people. They are our friends and our colleagues. They are our loud brother-in-law at Thanksgiving. They are our, at the end of the day, our fellow citizens and our partners in building a national life, and we must respect them.
Which means respecting them enough to call bullshit on those that exploit them -- the Bushes, the Dobsons, the Robertsons. These people are cynical abusers of our fellow citizens, and we do them no favors by either emulating them by pandering, nor ignoring their crimes by being silent.
A successful national progressive candidate does not need to be from the South. He or she simply needs to be 100% free of any sense of condescension, and must demonstrate total empathy for the challenges of all Americans.

The Preznit on Border Security?

Sheesh. The Preznit goes on tee vee to Explain How Immigration Works. And we are treated to what I understand is a RNC infomercial. Shameless mugging for the racist ranks. And many in the press see right through the dog and pony show.

Oh, but not the NY Times' own Elisabeth Bumiller. She has ingested some powerful kool-ade. For her, not an effort to mend fences with the racist base. Oh no. To Elisabeth, the talk "reflected the subtle approach of a man shaped by Texas border-state politics and longtime personal views. reflected the subtle approach of a man shaped by Texas border-state politics and longtime personal views. "

Oh. I see. Not shameless pandering at all. Just reflective talk from the nation's deep thinker.

And here I thought he was an idiot. Thanks to the NY Times and Elisabeth Bumiller for clearing that up.

What To Think on Immigration

The President is a big fat lying faker.

There. I've said it. But how do I know it's true?

"Bush budget scraps 9,790 border patrol agents"

Instead of 2,000 new agents a year, the Preznit decided to cut 1,790 of them in his 2006 budget. And no commitment for the remaining 8,000.

So, sending a few coupla thousand National Guardsmen only partially restores his previous cuts.

Of course, expect plenty of media coverage of this interesting tidbit. (The foregoing statement was intended as a joke.)

So tonight the Preznit will explain to us How Immigration Policy Works. Should be entertaining.

And truthfully, it ought to help with his polling numbers. If it doesn't have much of an impact, or if it impacts him negatively, then Americans is large numbers will have arrived at this place I've been for a long time: they just can't stand the sight of the man.

The Deal on Colbert

All right already, I'll tell you What To Think about Colbert's massive diss of the Preznit. The video is available here.

If you make fun of a fat guy for being fat, it's may be funny-ish, but the yuck is tempered by the awkward feeling. If you make fun of a smart guy for being dumb, we can all enjoy the vitriol and hyperbole. Colbert is an American hero. I hope one day one of my grandchildren graduates from Colbert High. And I'm dee-lighted to say that he was not perceived as funny in the room and was terribly awkward.

He was making fun of the fat guy for being fat -- or, the dumb guy for being dumb. He spoke the truth to these people, and they knew it. They felt ashamed, deservedly so.

It may be that his performance is as close to a Have you no sense of decency, sir? moment as we are likely to ever get.

I do believe, for the 329th time in the last four years, that a corner has been turned culturally. The Preznit's little dog-and-pony show won't work any more. The next scary evil monster -- from Mexicans to a reprise of the evil Ruskies -- is likely to be met with incredulity.

And we can thank the valuable role of ridicule, sarcasm, satire and humor for some of this change in our culture. Dave Letterman banging away at Bush. Stewart, Colbert, the same.

The truth has always been a powerful ally, and we are seeing it in action once again.

Me again...

I've taken a significant hiatus from telling you What to Think, largely due to an overall cooling of the fires of the creative muse. I've been writing other things (none of your business, thank you) which are essentially non-political.

On the great wide swath of Public Affairs, my fires have been cooled somewhat by the apparent scales-falling-from-the-eyes of millions of Americans.

Perhaps the most frustrating newly enlightened Americans are those who voted for Bush in 04, and now regret it. I'm thrilled of course that they now regret supporting these people, but what were they thinking? It's not like there's a whole new side of Bush we've seen since the campaign. His ickiness was on display for all to see. The fact that so many Americans just didn't care enough to pay attention, or thought that Kerry was effete, or really truly believed that Bush was this strong silent type, is plenty troubling. Basically, we're wasting 8 years of our nation's life because some relatively small number of us didn't care enough to pay even the scantest attention. Americans. Sheesh.

So I think the worm has really truly turned. The insupportable foundations of the modern Republican movement are finally beginning to give way. A party can't harbor bigots and those they hate for long, nor practice economic warfare on the vast majority of voters and expect them to never react.

I feel like ranting about the President's cravenness no longer has any point. I am now only interested in things to do moving forward. Like providing health care, economic justice, basic civil rights, genuine concern for the environment, and while we're at it, using the English language in its original, non-Orwellian sense and believing in both science and the separation of church and state.

You know I'm an idea guy. Got a million of 'em. Here's one: there's no question that the first thing a Democrat president would do is call for a new Kyoto accord. (In truth the original had some fairly serious problems, though the right solution was to fix them rather than disparage the entire undertaking). So here's the idea: why wait? Why doesn't the Democratic party organize and sponsor a global conference for government officials from around the world to come together and hammer out a workable solution that we can all sign onto -- and the federal government can sign onto January 21, 2009.

Gotta show the leadership, folks. Can't just play defense.

Comedywise is on the air. In the air. On the internet. Whatever.

A 0:22 clip of train riding with James last summer with Uncle Bob and Uncle Tom in beautiful Lancaster County.

Click the play button to enjoy!

Happy Tuesday Everybody!

Tuesday dawns here in NYC, where it’s a bit cooler and decidedly rainy.

The news continues unremittingly bad. I now have to find office space within the next 30 days or so. Affordable office space in NYC – should be easy. Cheap, too.

But wait, there’s more. Oh, so much more. It turns out I have a new landlord. A very rich company, supposedly from Kentucky, has purchased our building. I’m sure it’ll be a matter of weeks before we’re faced with a rent increase or eviction. Neat.

You’re Shi***ng Me.

I like to think I’m running a family blog here, but now and then there’s something a bit ****** up that gets through.

For all of the harping we do, we spend relatively little time imagining what the future will look like. One of the fun daydreams I indulge is the one where furry-browed Senators are interrogating middle- aged people (white, well-to-do people) about their former association with the Republican Party: “Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Republican Party?”

Here’s another. A tape from Osama bin Ladn is released. It contains a screed against the US and offers to open peace negotiations. A Republican operative is trotted out to comment on CNN, say the Vice President. After having the tape described by the reporter, the Vice President says, “Well, see, what’s sad is that this shows how the Democrats are actually on the same side as al-Quaida.”

At which point, the reporter would utter with dripping disbelief: “You’re sh****ng me.”

And then launch into a tirade to the effect of, “You’ve just seen America’s Most Wanted, the supposed mastermind of 9/11, taunt the US, and what you come up with is how this shows liberals are fools? Come on.”

See, the day that happens is the day the forces of evil will be on the run. Until then, we’ll get Wolf Blitzer saying, “Oh, I see, Mr. Vice President. Why do you think the Democrats are so out of touch with our all-new post 9/11 world?”

Machine Guns!

If we had Dem leadership, we wouldn't have hesitated to have some group turn the Alito nomination into a referendum on guns.

Does anyone think that the Repubs would hesitate to smear our candidate were the tables turned?

Oh my God! Alito is in favor of machine guns!!!

Alito

It's hard not to be depressed over the lame handling of the Democratic response to the Alito nomination. As much as we need to be fighting the good fight against the forces of evil, we also need to fight to reclaim our party from the current moribund leadership.

Alito struck me in the hearings as a nominee squarely in the mold of Bush himself. Deeply conservative, yet reluctant to reveal that conservatism except through pap and meaningless platitudes. Strangely uncurious about the world around him. (Evidently, Mr. Alito seems to be one of the only Americans not to have given the current warrant-evasion scandal any thought.) He seems to specialize in explaining the obvious as a way of avoiding giving any detailed views -- indeed, he seems free of detailed views altogether. His record on the bench suggests that the most complicated set of facts will be reduced by him to a simple, predictable outcome: privileged, powerful interests yes, poor, defenseless interests no. Easy.

While I agree that a woman's constitutional right to choose is a transcendingly important issue, I think there will be many other issues that come before the court where we will see just how conservative the court will have become.

So that's the big picture. Of much more immediate concern is our side's pathetic response. We have succeeded by our efforts in further entrenching our opponents. They have had a chance to show the public that they are putting forth someone who is broadly acceptable, and the only warts on him are that extreme liberals grouse that he isn't sympatheic enough to the plight of the common man, and some beleive he's against Roe v. Wade.

We have shown that we have no point of view with any meaning. We took the nominee's plain dissembling on his membership in CAP and managed to make it seem like a quarrel about a line under "interests and hobbies" on a resume 20 years ago. Instead of making it seem like a brazen act of perjury, which is what is was.

We came off as picyune and petty for chastising Alito for not honoring his previous commitment not to hear Vanguard cases. (Instead of making him seem like someone who didn't take his commitment to the Senate seriously.) We failed to construct a meaningful narrative about this guy that anyone could relate to.

I hope at least the next generation of Democratic leaders will be able to use these proceedings to allow President Boxer the right to choose the most wild liberals imaginable. These days, "shoe on the other foot" comparisons seem to be somehow rude (think farting in an elevator), but the truth is that the more these clowns build up their power, the more power we'll have when we return.

Putzes.

Let's all look forward to Hillary Clinton's heartfelt speech about her serious -- serious, I tell you! -- concerns about the nominee, in which she will concede that he is smart, honorable and distinguished. Heck, maybe she'll even vote against him! Ah! Our leadership in action.

Death of Outrage

I can't get over the gap between the nation's reaction to not only the tragic deaths of twelve miners in West Virginia, but also to the bungling of the communication about those death, all on the one hand, and the death in the last 48 hours in Iraq of almost 150 people. In a country of about 28 million, 150 deaths would translate to 1,500 in the US.

And we can't (and shouldn't, of course) shut up about 9/11.

Iraq suffers a 9/11 tragedy at least monthly. Imagine if they were Swedes or Brits!

Pharo Kids Holiday Pic 2005

 
 

Caption Contest!
My entry: Stop singing!

Hey Republican Friends! Here's an idea

So, from the department of Just One More Clever Idea:

Ya know how the Repubs are so certain that the power of the free market is so potent that it can solve darn near any problem? From incenting poor people not to be so poor to getting low-grade earning students off their lazy butts, there's no problem for which a good Republican can't figure out a market solution for. Damn clever of them.

So, let's look at the way the Repubs have built a market-solution to war. Why, virtually every aspect of modern warfare has been turned over to the private sector.

So doesn't this mean that we've created a market for war? That there are market participants whose livelihood depends on a fairly steady stream of people and things getting blown up, burnt and shot? Won't they be expected to maximize their self-interest by ensuring that we're always at war somewhere, with someone?

So here's the thought: this seems like a very, very bad policy. How about we decide that war is a bad thing, one that ought to be avoided except in the most compelling cases. Which would mean that we should end these market forces, like we have whenever we've had a real war. Anyone remember the War Board telling Ford Motor Company exactly what it would do with its assembly lines, and exactly how much the tax payers would pay, on pain of having the government take it over if need be?

Pretty far cry from the head of Haliburton also being the head of the government and telling the government what it will pay when Haliburton decides we need to invade, say, Venezuela.

Hey MSM: It's a Dem Sweep, pure and simple. Even here in NYC.

It's nice to see the MSM taking a few steps out from behind their mothers' skirts and actually pointing things out.

Still, it irks me no end to hear about Bloomberg representing a Republican brightspot. Here's a guy who was a lifelong dem switching, he says, because the dem primary was too competitive. He governs from left of center -- he strengthens programs for the poor, he invests in our schools, he gave our teachers a sort-of-decent raise (after a tough negotiation with their union -- which by any reasonable measure he won for the benefit of the students). He's pro-choice, pro-gay equality, and anti school prayer.

Yeah, big Republican victory, all right.

Beautiful Friday

Unexpectedly nice November 3d Friday in NYC. High above 70. Nice.

Political news suddenly gone silent. Feels like a re-loading pause. For the moment, Dems have landed a few major blows in succession, and the Repubs are feeling it. A bit back on their heels, perhaps, and Dems leaning in to press their advantage.

Meantime, in the local NYC race for mayor, Bloomberg is starting to shade into "run up the score" territory. Of course he won't (shouldn't) let up -- who knows how much a last-minute stumble might cost him. It is conceivable if unlikely that he could blow through a 40 point cushion. But God bless the man. He is a classic benign dictator, whose only interest is that of the people of his city. God forbid something were to happen -- he's the one I'd want calling the shots. Sorry, Freddie. Maybe after the election Andy Stein, Mark Green, Ruth Messinger, Dave Dinkins and you can all get an apartment together.

Judicial Conservatism

The thing people are forgetting is that until the current conservative movement's ascendency, our judicial heritage, from something like 987A.D., has been one of more or less straight-line progress. Yes, progress.

At bottom, the idea of progressiveism is that once we move forward, we don't go back. We are always improving people's lives. Traditionally, convervatives have been in favor letting people fend for themselves. But the new "conservatives" actually want things to go backwards - judicially, legislatively, economically, socially. It is an extreme recoiling from the specter of ordinary people using the levers of power to improve their own lives.

Don't worry -- at the end of the day, we always win. We are, after all, the good guys.

The Thing Is

This is a link to a completely thoughtful analysis by Jack Balkin of the new SCOTUS nominee Alito.

We know that the new median Justice supports abortion rights claims a little less than O'Connor...supports gay rights claims a bit more than O'Connor...thinks affirmative action is largely unconstitutional..thinks most campaign finance regulation is unconstitutional...[and] has been more likely to permit government endorsements of religion and state financial support of religion than O'Connor.... On federalism, it's a mixed bag[ and o]n Presidential power, the position of the new median justice, interestingly enough, appears to be unchanged.

What I find illuminating is the list of issues in order:

abortion rights
gay rights
affirmative action
campaign finance
government endorsements of relegion
federalism
Predintial power

Certainly these are the hot issues before the Court. But what does it say about the monopolization of our public life by the Forces of Evil that abortion rights and gay rights are at the tippy-top of the list? Two absolutely crucial issues to be sure (and yes, I mean "to be sure" in that pundit-y way of dismissing something as less important as something else coming up). Where are the issues that affect tens of millions of Americans' lives? (And don't start by re-asserting how important and impactful abortion rights and gay rights are -- I already said they are, then did the dimissing "to be sure." So, 'nuff said, right?)

FDR went to the mat with the Court to protect his efforts to help millions of Americans end the cycle of poverty and dispair that his Republican predecessors had set up so devastatingly. He fought to protect the rights of Americans to enjoy safe work places and wholesome foods and drugs. He fought for things that impacted the lives of ordinary Americans. While reproductive freedom (might as well lump it together with Gray since many extra-kooky wingnuts do also), certainly impacts virtually all adult Americans deeply, there are other issues which are also deeply impactful: lack of proper healthcare, inadequate education, lack of support for families, checks on corporate-ism run amok -- in short, a lack of financial security that has gutted for many Americans any sense of hope or stability.

All of which is a long way of saying that let's fight the good fight against the Forces of Evil and their Cold Heartless Judges. But until we open up a strong offensive front of our own choosing -- i.e., without regard to the Forces of Evil's agenda -- we will continue not only to lose, but also to ignore the crying needs of our society. We won't prevail til we have a leader as dedicated and forceful as FDR (or, I hate to say, Reagan), but that's no reason to delay framing our own agenda as professionally and compellingly as we can in the meantime.

Yippie!

Hooray for Alita! Bush has just handed us a wonderful gift -- maybe we should get him a little something.

So, Bible Belt friends, you are about to receive a newsflash: America hates you! An overwhelming majority of Americans think you are buffoons. We think that women should have equal rights with men. We think the decision to have an abortion is no business of the federal government -- and if you get rid of Roe v. Wade, we'll just pass the laws we need. Of course, some of you Bible Belters may find your states in the thrall of religious kooks, so you may have some trouble with reproductive freedom.

Wanna knock down the Commerce Clause jurisprudence of the last 90 years? Fine. We'll still keep the liberal agenda, since it has, and will continue to have, the support of an overwhelming majority of Americans.

Maybe we'll let you pick a state -- Arkansas (sorry, Bill), Alabama, Tennessee -- and just go hog-wild with it: legalize feudalism, slavery, whatever you like. Just let people leave if they don't like it.

I think we are in for some good times, Dems.

Isn't this the Veep?

From today's indictment of Libby:

On or about July 10 or July 11, 2003, LIBBY spoke to a senior official in the White House (“Official A”) who advised LIBBY of a conversation Official A had earlier that week with columnist Robert Novak in which Wilson’s wife was discussed as a CIA employee involved in Wilson’s trip. LIBBY was advised by Official A that Novak would be writing a story about Wilson’s wife.

Didn't Libby learn of Plame's identity from the Veep? Isn't the Veep headed toward an indictment of the Protection of Secret Agents Act?

And now for a laugh...

Enjoy a little funny from Jest.com.



Enjoy a little funny from Jest.com
http://www.jest.com/content.cfm?id=84
http://www.jest.com/images/jestDOTcom_hadji.gif

What It All Means, And Where Do We Go From Here?

The time has come to take a long, hard look at two things of vital imprtance, but that we often overllok. Classic case of thh merely urgent (Delay indictment, e.g.) crowding out the important (say, healthcare for all Americans). So without further ado, here is 1) What It All Means, and 2)Where Do We Go From Here.

What It All Means.
I recently posted a top ten list of current bits of schaudefreude (Delay indictment, Plame-gate, Miers' nomination backlash, the failure of the Iraqi war as US policy, the failure of trickle-down economics (again!), and so on. All delicious tidbits for those of us who feel the Republicans long ago lost any claim on our sympathy.

But these items are powerful for two reasons, one often talked about and the other not. We often talk about the "drumbeat" effect: the idea that a series of negative things are occurring in quick (quickening?) succession for the Republicans. The code words you see in the media are things like, "mounting troubles," and "fresh allegations." (Look too for words like "beset" and "embattled." All code for drumbeat effect.)

The other we don't talk about is that these events confirm our pre-existing thoughts and concerns. Rumors that the President has recently returned to the bottle are unsettling because of concerns that his sobriety wasn't solid. The consternation over Miers plays into fears that the President has often picked people who are underqualified (calling Brownie, calling Bolton!). The Delay indictments give credence to a vague perception that the Republicans (and, sad to say, some Dems) are in an unholy alliance with business interests. And the doom and gloom from Iraq serves as a near-daily reminder that we all had doubts about going into Iraq, so much so that the President and his team had to pretend that we were only 45 minutes away from destruction if we failed to act.

So What This All Means is that conditions in the body politic are generally facorable to Democrats right now. The Katrina aftermath showed Americans that their concerns that starving the government of needed funding could have catatrophic consequences. Were we to experience a terrible financial crisis (a la Clusterfuck Nation), which I personally find a likely scenario, the nation would think, "ah, yes, there were many respected voices who said something like this would happen if we continued our profligate ways." Many of us on the left have been preaching for years the way of truth and light, and the reality-based world is now stepping up to show our positions for what they are: true and right.

Where Do We Go From Here
So if the country is finally headed in our direction, what do we do now? We have for so long been principally engaged in tearing down the edifices of deception and hatred erected by the other side. I often see in the comments here and elsewhere a sort of weariness with the fight and a concern about what we'll do when we don't have Tom Delay and George Bush to kick around any more. And therein lies the most Important Thing.

No one is going to vote for us just becuase we aren't George Bush. Sure, we might win an election or two, as Republicans did by not being Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter. But to re-build a sustainable majority of voters who will support our policies over the long-haul, we need to focus on our constructive vision of a better future. (As an aside, this is again re-inforcing pre-existing perceptions: Democrats are supposed to be good at governing and good at proposing and implementing improvements in our lives through government. Our failure to do just that has been a key part of why voters think of us as weak and useless. The flip side of that coin is that Republicans are supposed to be in charge of criticizing us and tearing down proposals for change. When they act in accordance with those expectations, for example by constantly sneering at big government tax-and-spend liberals, they are acting within those pre-existing expectations. This is also why IOKIYAR exists: people hold the Dems to higher standards because they're supposed to be the good guys. Republicans cheating on their wives is simply par for the course.)

So Where We Go From Here is pretty clear. While some of us will forever be engaged in batting down the evilness of at least some on the right (a special detail will always have to be vigilant to gaurd against future Swift Boat Vets), the bulk of our guys need to go over to offense. That's why Pelosi's "contract with America" is being rushed out early. We need to coalesce around two or three basic, big ideas. And we all know what they are already: healthcare for all, education for all, a fair tax system, and a government allied with the needs of the voters, not the donors. The slogan I prefer is "Community, Opportunity and Responsibility." And there are a 1,000 ways we will show the voters exactly what we mean. We will embrace science. Our administration will be transparent. We will work with our allies overseas. We will invest in new industries to create new jobs. We will protect the dignity of even the poorest Americans.

The only thing missing from the equation is, alas, something that is absolutely necessary, a visionary, charismatic leader. There would have been no New Deal without FDR, no conservative takeover without Reagan. Our national nominee for President defines us as a brand. Mcovern, Dukakis, Mondale, Gore and Kerry all served us poorly in that regard. They were analytical, reserved, low-emotion and nealy charisma-free. Reagan, Clinton, much the other way: intuitive, charismatic, empathetic, etc. The lesson to be drawn is quite clear. No more Bidens, Clarks, Hillarys or, God forbid, Kerrys. What we need to find, and find yesterday, is someone more like Edwards (at least as he seems to be on occasion): someone who is empathetic, emotive, can speak plainly, is free of condescension, and in this televsion age, looks handsome. If someone has a better choice, I'm all ears. Carville said some time back that this mysterious person probably isn't even in politics at the moment, and that may be true. But wherever this person is (and wouldn't it be wonderful if it was a woman), we need him/her if we're going to get back to the promised land.

And now you know What To Think.

Jest.com

More Jest.com funny.



You really should check out the whole site.

Big Picture Round-Up

Time to give you the view from 50,000 feet up.

There are signs that the Great Republican Crack-Up is underway. I think the turning point was the media coverage of the hurricane Katrina.

Before we get all full of schadenfreude, let's remember that it seems to be the legacy of every lame duck presidential administration that the rest of the party -- the part that still has to face the electorate -- quickly realizes that ditching the lame duck is in their interests. So some of the conservative backlash we're seeing is simply regular Republicans distancing themselves from the lame duck W has certainly become.

But having been all cautious and everything, let's at least sample some of the Schadenfreude, vintage fall 05.

1. Katrina Aftermath
2. Iraq Quagmire
3. Record gas prices
4. Idiotic Supreme Court Nomination
5. Pending indictments in Plame-gate
6. Delay indictments (!!)
7. Stalled Economy
8. Social Security Privatization Blow-Up
9. Evidence of W's return to the bottle
10. Crony-ism (giving a hand to oil refiners, e.g., leave no billionaire behind, etc.)

OK, that's enough. But really, it IS enough. Even the slow-to-think press is starting to realize that these things all sort of add up to a story.

Here's my story:

The end is near for the corporate-ist party. The American people may be slow to catch on, but catch on they will. And I think we are seeing the beginning of that.

But all the tricks that the Repubs have used to get power are still there. They may be down but they are by no means out. There are a lot of smart and ambitious people on their side, and so far we are lacking the one necessary ingredient.

To put these guys down once and for all, we need a charismatic Democrat to lead the way. In fact, we probably need more than one. But we need someone who is muscular, who is positive, who is likable, and who has a positive vision for our country. Communications skills are a must, of course.

Without that person, we will continue to wander around in the wilderness. This person must be our nomineee in 08. Right now, the closest I see to the right person is Edwards.

And let's define what success looks like. I want the word Republican be like the word Communist was in McCarthy's day, as in, "I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Republican party." Or, "Isn't it true, madame secretary, that for many years you were an open and avowed member of the Republican Party, and even had dinner on more than one occasion with impeached President Bush?" "Good heavens, no. I never even met the man!" "Thank you, Secretary Rice."

And so on.

This is Funny.

This is funny.
Check out the rest of the site, too.

Been A While...

It's been a while since I posted here. No particular reason, just didn't hear the muse.

Are we witnessing a watershed event in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina? I think the jury's still out, though there is some basis for thinking it might be true this time. Of course, it's hard not to be gun-shy, given how many times the right-wing has given cause for rejection. Tax cuts for the rich. Failure to re-build ground zero. Not really caring about catching Bin Ladn. Running huge budget deficits. Ignoring the UN. Invading a country that posed no threat to us or others. Spurning our allies. Destroying any chance of a good outcome in Iraq. Placing ideology above every other consideration. So, it's easy to see how adding one more to this list is going to make a difference.

And indeed it may not. This list may yet have room to grow, even though it seems obvious that the Right's grip on power seems aberrational.

Katrina has caused many voters to stop and think, without question. The initial news reporting was devastating -- local officials decrying the lack of support from the federal government, actually begging on-air for help. The WH spin machine finally sprung into action, laying the feds' failure as part of a broader governmental failure that knew no party ideology. (An effort reminiscent of blaming the intelligence for the failure to find WMD's in Iraq: it's not that we messed up, it's more that our mess up was caused by other people's failings. )

The good news here is that for years liberals have been saying that the Right does not care about government. The Right has been largely in agreement with this, preaching the gospel that the government is nothing more than a leach on the pocketbooks of decent hardworking people.

Katrina threw into high-relief the proper role of government as a life saver. And the dollar costs of the disaster -- a few billion in levees, etc. -- seem trivial compared to what we're spending in Iraq. It's hard to escape the conclusion that we're far more committed to rebuilding in the Middle East than we are in the Gulf.

The biggest impact of this on politics may well be the effect on the press. A lot of news people got an education that what the politicians say is happening and what is actually happening may not be the same. I think, sadly, for a lot of news people, the experience of seeing for themselves what was happening, and then having Bush lackeys say that what they saw happening wasn't happening, turned on a light which is not easily shut off. I think from here on out the press' credulity won't be quite so freely given, which cannot but lead to a better outcome in politics for Americans.

James in Philadelphia 

The Most Chilling Story

Today's NY Times has a long-ish piece about the ex-urbs which is nothing short of bone-chilling. Here's the bits that popped out at me:

In its most recent survey of Tampa home buyers, KB asked people what they valued the most in their home and community. They wanted more space and a greater sense of security. Safety always ranks second, even in communities where there is virtually no crime. Asked what they wanted in a home, 88 percent said a home security system, 93 percent said they preferred neighborhoods with "more streetlights" and 96 percent insisted on deadbolt locks or security doors.

...

So KB Home offers them all. "It's up to us to figure out what people really want and to translate that into architecture," said Erik Kough, KB's vice president for architecture. And the company designs its communities with winding streets with sidewalks and cul-de-sacs to keep traffic slow, to give a sense of containment and to give an appearance distinctly unlike the urban grid that the young, middle-class families instinctively associate with crime. "I definitely feel safe here. I feel protected," said Lisa Crawford, who moved to New River about a year ago with her husband, Steve, and their two children.

These communities are ballooning all over the US. They are based on an appeal to fear. Look at how these communities are designed: locks, security systems, a "sense of containment," an appearance that repels the notion of crime-y urban grids, etc.

And of course, these areas are way Republican. What I'm finding so scary is I am at a loss to figure out what to say to these people. These folks have voted with their feet, saying, "we want out. You diverse society is too scary for us, and we want no part of it. We want to hole up with poeple like ourselves and be left alone."

How do you respond to that?

Plame-gate

Is it possible that the WH is really in trouble? It seems that the prosecutor is fixin' to issue some indictments.

But of course, it's not like the WH is new to this game, or suddenly stupid or something.

Little said the Senate committee would also review the probe of special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who has been investigating the Plame case for nearly two years.

So there it is then. When the prsocecutor starts to sling the slime, the WH will point to the ogoing investigation of the investigation to throw up its traditional smear-the-messenger defense.

I suspect that in their usual fashion they will say Americans had enough of politicially charged special investigators with Bill Clinton, and want no more Clintonian scandal mongering. In other words, it'll all be Bill Clinton's fault. Again.

Guess I Better Post Something

I've been busy posting on other sites, but not here. But the nomination of a S.Ct. Justice is a big enough deal to cross-post here.

My thoughts on Roberts are the same as Leader Reid's: seems OK on paper, let's see what we learn. Open mind.But I can't help but look at this politically. I am offended to the core that Bush's pick is touted on the front page of the NYT as being based on Roberts' "fairness and civility."

My problem is not with Roberts as much as it is with Bush's ongoing lack of candor. If Bush was looking for fairness and civility, I've got dozens of liberal jurists who would fit the bill. In conflating his real reasons for picking Roberts (really conservative, really reliable, really thin record, past confirmations) with these fake reasons (man of character, fairness, etc.), he is making a not-too-subtle rebuke to us libruls: we lack civility, lack fairness, don't know from character, etc.

All of which, I suppose is to be expected from this punk. But why oh why must our press go along with this nonsense? They bear a heavy responsibility for the terrible road we're now on.For ourselves, let's not lose sight of the victory we can make if we're smart.

Forget filibustering. They've got the votes. Period. Roberts is in.

Let's make sure that we use this process to let the American people know first that even a conservative kook like Roberts largely subscribes to the basic liberal core of our modern jurisprudence, and secondly, where he is out of the American mainstream, let's make sure people know just how he is out of step, and what it will mean for our fellow citizens.

The Intrepid Travellers in the Badlands 

Just a Few Short Months Ago 

"Where are you going, Grandpa?" 

Handsome Boys.