2010: The “Who Cares?” Election
Among the punditocracy, which bears so much responsibility for the current disaster in which we find ourselves, the current consensus is that the Democrats are set to lose, and lose big, in November. Of course, since this is the same bunch that bathed Karl Rove’s “Permanent Republican Majority” in the flattering amber glow of inevitability and waxed infatuated over each and every “bold” Bush move, no matter how stupid or horrendous, one must take what they say with a rather large grain of salt. They also proudly and loudly announced each development that inexorably led to the Democratic routs of 2006 and 2008 as “trouble for the Democrats,” from Sarah Palin to the Glorious Surge. Still, even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and although the reasons they cite and the prescriptions they proffer are as dumb and counterintuitive as anything that went before, they have a point.
You see, to the permanent beltway elite, what politicians actually do once elected is irrelevant, for which reason they studiously never bother to find out what that might be. All that matters is how the spin and flim-flam are playing in their imagined Peoria of the polls, nudging befuddled voters this way and that, since everyone knows that nothing will change, no matter how the little people cast their votes, if they even bother. In the mirrors into which they constantly gaze, all this democracy business is nothing but a game, theater of the absurd put on because, well, surely no politician cares any more about his fellow Americans than does, say, David Gregory or Joe Lieberman, but TV News is still big business, and they can’t just run a test pattern and be done with it.
The “consensus,” which like all others, is as unanimous as it is absurd, floats above reality; since politics to them is both nothing and everything, a cardboard simulacrum to lull the rabble into thinking they matter when they don’t, motives must be conjured out of thin air to explain the fickle nature of the great unwashed. Poll results are cited that show that Democrats are unmotivated and Republicans are writhing in fervor, and such tea leaves are read to mean Obama is pushing the country “too far to the left.” This is something Bush was never accused of as he pushed the country further to the right than ever imagined, and a patent absurdity that nonetheless leads the powdered and pampered denizens of the green room to declare, natch, that people like them must never be taxed to pay for the wars they champion, the lower orders must be in need of more suffering, and not enough brown people abroad and at home are being tortured, killed or tossed onto the streets. Their guests, whether CEO’s, religious charlatans, racists, or war profiteers, not unexpectedly nod eagerly in agreement.
Of course, no one ever explores the glaringly obvious reasons for such shifts in public opinion since 2006, namely, that the Democrats have systematically abandoned every principle they ever held since at least 1900, and the Republicans have co-opted the media and relentlessly assaulted the lately defeated right with unadulterated fiction for thirty years, creating one party whose voters actually expect results, and another whose addled followers can be satisfied by whatever spews out of Fox News or Rush Limbaugh all the way to the bread lines, even when no bread is offered. President Kennedy once fretted that, at some point, personal comfort and prosperity would drive a Democrat in the hands of the Republicans, Democrats have since ably fixed that annoying problem by impoverishing everyone equally, so no one has a reason to be a Democrat in the first place.
Now, Democrats have come up with a neat idea for 2010, really the only one left after summarily tossing out the New Deal coalition of unions, minorities, educated people, and the poor that carried them for nearly a century, and it’s as pathetic as it is revealing: At Least We’re Not Bush. Though they’ve embraced his militarism, his coddling of the superrich, his disdain for labor, and indifference if not hostility to gays and other minorities, they really don’t have anything else concrete to offer, so it’s worth a try, I guess.
Harry Truman, who was lucky enough to have a political career before the advent of Fox News and the infection it caused within the elite media, probably put it best, “when people are given a choice between a Republican and a Democrat who acts like one, they’ll choose the Republican every time.” Today, those are the only choices. Good luck, Democrats.
What we have here is the perfect time for third-party candidates. Anyone want to run for office? I’d do it, but I think my scandalous past and commie ideas might be too radical for the district in which I live. It’s a (shhhh….) really red area.
But, if I lived someplace less stuffy, I’d run.
I’d love to see a corporate Dem get clobbered by a real one in a primary, and then go up against a teabagger… Politics might get interesting again.
Bill Clinton had a lot to do with creating too many corporate Dems. He is a great politician, but his economics may have been mostly illusion and collusion with the corporate who took full advantage of him.
The Clintonites were wrong: The “new economy” was an illusion. Neoliberals have to admit that before they can stop the bleeding
http://www.salon.com/news/us_economy/index.html?story=/opinion/feature/2010/01/04/new_economy
I’ve read at least one of Lind’s books, and he is right about the “New Economy,” which Mike Davis more accurately termed “Globaloney,” back in the day. Like Obama now, Clinton’s stupid theories only legitimized the right’s hoary garbage about the “free market” by willfully ignoring the evidence and reinforcing righty memes. And here we are.
On the other hand . . .
Three articles by Nathan Newman:
*** 1. ***
http://tpmcafe.com/2009/11/30/progressives_and_obama_are_doing_better_than_we_th/
*** 2. ***
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/30/the_stimulus_was_not_a_tiny_win/
*** 3. ***
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/01/easing_the_burden_on_unemployed_in_this_recession/
*****
And then there’s stuff (LOTS of stuff) to keep reminding us what “acting like a Republican” means, nowadays, for the current GOP.
Stuff, like, for instance, this article on the front page of tomorrow’s NYTimes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/science/earth/05satellite.html
* * * * *
Mmmm. That half, maybe more like a quarter or a loaf is tasting better and better. Yes, it’s nice not to have more open fascists on the Supreme Court, and a few other things, but digging ourselves out of the hole we’re in seems well nigh impossible at this point. Change measured in pennies.
I came across this interesting article which if true, could go a long way explaining the huge number of soon-to-happen conservative deaths by apoplectic fit.
http://tinyurl.com/yl3sqgr
The Democrats however, so well known for screwing up good things, and so sure this will solve all their problems, haven’t considered just how unhappy Americans really are, and just how far this move will finally elevate third parties in the U.S. I’m heartened that there may be a glimmer of hope for this lousy country after all.
It isn’t every day I read stuff on righty blogs, and that was an eye-opener. The sheer number of blatant lies, smears, and doctored quotes makes the mind reel. No wonder righties are always so pissed off; they’re being tormented with inflammatory BS all day. The difference is, as usual, righties are pissed off about things that never happened, won’t happen, and are unlikely ever to happen.
The “At Least We’re Not Bush” thing already worked for Obama. I’m convinced that was the basis of his Nobel Peace Prize.
True, but I suspect that’s wearing thin now. Would that the Nobel Committee had previewed his acceptance speech first…..
Still, the “at least we’re not Bush” strategy isn’t even factual anymore; the righties going nuts notwithstanding. He should have given them something to go nuts about.