Oh, The Humanity

http://www.narconews.com/images/schoen-poll.jpg

The reptilian and oleaginous Fox News “Democrat,” Doug Schoen, has taken to the Daily Beast fainting couch, and I for one couldn’t be more delighted.  Deeply alarmed that some annoying facts might be seeping into the rhetoric if not the actions of the presidential candidates, Schoen hyperventilates that “Occupy Wall Street Has Seized Control of This Year’s Political Debate.” Predictably, he sees this as a bad thing. Well boo f*cking hoo.  Here’s Schoen, channeling Aunt Pittypat:

And in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine this week, the president openly embraced Occupy Wall Street as “just one vivid expression of a broader anxiety.”

These remarks illustrate an important, but largely unrecognized, point about why and how the Obama campaign has retooled its message and strategy. Put simply, President Obama has effectively made class warfare the central organizing strategy of his reelection campaign.

Oh, noes…  Teh Class Warfare.  I think I saw Supply Side Jesus crying, on a piece of toast.  But wait, it gets even worse:

Moreover, it is becoming increasingly clear that Occupy Wall Street (OWS)—while less visibly active in recent months following clashes with the police, infighting, and eviction from its flagship encampment in New York’s Zuccotti Park last November—is nonetheless seizing control of the political debate in America this election year.

OWS already has had a clear and demonstrable impact on both the Obama and Romney campaigns–arguably becoming the most important outside influence so far in this year’s election campaign dialogue.

Despite semiliterate Schoen’s pathetic attempt to begin every other paragraph with “moreover,” which he evidently considers a suitably scary word for such commie effrontery, the very idea that #OWS is, “arguably” or not, having more of an influence than, say, the Koch brothers on the current election is so astonishingly dumb it bears no further comment.  But, Schoen being Schoen, he has a bunch more “moreovers” to go.

Moreover, the themes and rhetoric that Occupy Wall Street introduced have captured enough attention to go beyond the political hemisphere, to influence Wall Street itself.  Nowhere was this clearer than last week when for the first time in Wall Street history, Citigroup shareholders united in opposition to a proposed $15 million pay package for its chief executive, Vikram S. Pandit.  The shareholder vote, which comes amid a rising national debate over income inequality, suggests that anger over pay for chief executives has spread from Occupy Wall Street to influence actual behavior on Wall Street as well.

Can you imagine?  Stockholders, who by definition aren’t hippies, getting pissed off about slovenly, ineffective looters stealing money from them eight ways to Sunday?  Where will it end?  Moreover?  But for a 1% toady, it isn’t enough to write unintentional humor off the cuff; you see, unlike most hacks of his political persuasion, he’s got science on his side:

Occupy Wall Street’s rhetorical dominance of Democratic messaging fulfills one of the clear goals its followers articulated last October, when my firm, Douglas E. Schoen, LLC, conducted a survey of OWS protesters.  At that time, a clear plurality (35 percent) of the Occupy Wall Street protesters interviewed said their top goal was for Occupy Wall Street to move the Democratic Party distinctly and boldly left.

They have largely succeeded.

Says who?  Anyone capable of fogging a mirror knows that what Obama says and what Obama means are, as Mammy put it, “two diff’ent things.”  Despite all of his “research,” Schoen appears to be the only American who doesn’t grasp this.  Thus, whoring his firm so blatantly is unlikely to lead to more business, especially when he channels Sean Hannity’s dumber twin like this:

The president has also emphasized time and again the need to redistribute wealth and income, and the need to protect all Americans from rapacious oil companies, banks, insurance companies, and the wealthy in general. Calling economic fairness “the defining issue of our time,” he went on to proclaim,  “Now, you can call this class warfare all you want … But asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as his secretary in taxes? Most Americans would call that common sense.”

Indeed they would.  Those Americans, on the other hand, who would soil their Depends over such crazy talk are relegated to the Fox News green room, like Schoen, who then gasps:

A new follow-up survey conducted recently by my firm on Occupy Wall Street goals and objectives shows that the movement has new and bolder aspirations to use the rhetorical influence it has already won to fundamentally alter government policy and change American politics and society in ways that were previously unimaginable.

By “previously,” he must mean, oh, thirty years ago, when America was enjoying a rare moment of peace and prosperity.  Time for some more “science:”

The survey results show that OWS believes it has vocalized frustrations shared by a broad mass of the American people (65 percent), and is now controlling the national dialogue (77 percent) and influencing both President Obama and the Democratic Party (54 percent)—at least in terms of strategy and rhetoric.

Which is about as surprising as the discovery that snow is white, or, more appropriately, that shit is brown.  Time for another “moreover,” methinks:

Moreover, we found that the view that the movement has become quiescent is fundamentally wrong.

If anything, OWS has become even more radical since our October poll—when respondents said they were ready and willing to use civil disobedience (98 percent) and violence (31 percent) as a means of achieving OWS’ agenda.

Well, since voting for a Democratic President has come a crapper, that’s hardly surprising.  Earth to Schoen:  the Founders were pretty friendly to civil disobedience, as I recall, and as for violence #OWS was far more often victim than perpetrator.  You really ought to get out more.  But then he really goes all Bill O’Reilly,  but minus the charisma:

They seek nothing less than a fundamental overhaul of American society, going well beyond the policy prescriptions of many European and Scandinavian social democratic societies.

Really?  How so?

The activists we interviewed made it clear that they oppose American-style capitalism  (53 percent), and believe in massive redistribution of wealth (71 percent), dramatically higher taxes (85 percent),  and greater government regulation and control over the economy (79 percent).

Seventy-nine percent say that government has a moral responsibility to guarantee health care, a college education, and a secure retirement for all, no matter what the cost—a 14-point increase from 65 percent who gave this answer in our fall survey.

Three-quarters (74 percent) would like to see our health-care system replaced by a government-run single-payer system.

Schoen may have some sterling qualities, but understanding of current realities is apparently not among them.  This scary list of goals would bring us closer to those dreadful commies across the pond, but hardly “well beyond” them.  Consider the starting point: we live in a corrupt oligarchy wherein the top 1% have more wealth than the bottom 70%, we have the highest poverty rates in the developed world, the wealthy pay the lowest tax rates since the 1920′s, and more than 50 million people have no health care at all.

None of those things bother Schoen (and his paymasters) one little bit.  This, however, does:

Occupy Wall Street is now gearing up to reengage in 2012 with an aggressive program of protests designed to mobilize progressives with a reinvigorated effort to promote radical redistribution of wealth, greater government regulation and control of the private sector, and a massive new set of social and economic initiatives to guarantee government-subsidized health care, education, and retirement security for all–no matter what the cost.

Those horrifying “costs” being, slightly higher taxes on the wealthiest and some semblance of a game that isn’t completely rigged for the least productive, but most rapacious, members of society.  Ooh, I’m soo fwightened.  I’m also awfully grateful that I’m not Doug Schoen, for obvious reasons.  Seemingly out of moreovers for the moment, he goes down fulminating and poo-flinging:

Occupy Wall Street is now organizing a powerful block of collective (!) progressive (!!) interests—collaborating (!!!) if not partnering (!!!!) with other leftist (!!!!!) groups including but not limited to labor unions, environmentalists, and independent community organizers.  On Tuesday April 24, thousands of people risked arrest by attempting to shut down the Wells Fargo annual shareholder meeting in San Francisco—demanding Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf and other executives address the concerns of the 99 percent.

Including but not limited to?  What other bloodthirsty hordes will man the guillotines?  Professors?  Bloggers?  Vegetarians?  I wish I could be as worked up about these apocalyptic developments as Schoen so dramatically pretends to be; I wouldn’t be in such a bad mood all the time.

 

6 Comments

  1. econobuzz says:

    “I think I saw Supply Side Jesus crying, on a piece of toast.”

    I bet he looked just like Herbert Stein, former economic adviser to President Nixon.

    • cocktailhag says:

      Funny you should mention Tricky Dick; I just finished a piece for FDL tonight that features him prominently. Don’t get excited, though; it’s not funny. Working weekends dampens my sense of humor.
      I couldn’t find a picture of Herbert Stein, even with my extensive Watergate library, but I’ll look some more after dinner.

  2. avelna says:

    So he’s the token DINO now? Where do they find these guys? I guess any number of dems would fit the ticket but most of them don’t want to openly sully the brand by actually being officially associated with Fox.

  3. loretta says:

    I rarely read anything on the daily beast, just skim the cheat sheet and glance at insufferable Andrew Sullivan who, fortunately, is too lazy to write anything most of the time in his insufferable, unedited, sloppy, lazy prose; however, he’s all chuffed that Obama reads him.

    I remember when Sullivan had his own crappy website/blog and he held a fundraiser essentially threatening everyone that unless they ponied up, he wouldn’t write anymore. This is back in the 2003-2004 days when he was an insufferable chickenhawk.

    As far as the idiot above, I can’t help but notice the impending doom he tries to impart with “no matter what it costs….no matter what it costs!!…lions and tigers and bears, oh my!”

    Does anyone in that mindset ever think about what it costs to self-insure? What it costs to pay your own paving fees for the street you live on? Or pay for private sewer/police service? Or stay home and teach your children enough to give them the skills to be productive members of society? Do any of those short-sighted dicks ever think about what it costs to pay for 50 million uninsured people to go to the ER or have the states pay for burials? Seriously?

    Do these people ever consider the cost of ignorance?

    Stupid question.

    • cocktailhag says:

      They’ve counted the cost of ignorance one too many times, if you ask me. Ignorance only costs the ignorant, so what’s the problem?