And now available in four parts for download!
Friday, December 31, 2010
Thursday, December 30, 2010
RSS Feed update
I know that many of our listeners use the RSS feed to automatically download new episodes of the podcast so here is exciting news for you. The original feed will now provide you with each episode broken up into roughly 20 minute segments. You will also download the entire show as a single file until Febuary. Next week we will introduce a second RSS feed that will only download the entire show so you will need to switch if that is your preferred listening method. Me, I'm on the fence on this one. Though the show is usually an hour and a half, I tend to listen to podcasts while I'm working so it's no big deal. On the other hand, if it were broken up into segments it would make it easier for me to come back to the podcast or to simply fast forward past Dave droning on about sports... or me frothing about how much cops suck or vice versa. Regardless, it's not going to happen with our year end special (not really special and recorded Tuesday via telephone) but next week the second RSS feed will be here for you and when January is over you will have to choose between segments and full. We hope you've had a great year and that 2011 will be better.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
MOpod Wishes You and Yours a Happy Whatever
This time of the year, the beginning of winter, is a time of celebration and reflection across the northern hemisphere. No matter how you observe whatever you observe we hope you enjoy whatever it is.
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Modus Operandi Podcast episode 43
Show Notes:
This week the show starts off with Alan going over the links from the last couple of weeks and then he is joined after the first break by Dave calling in from Colorado where he arrived after traipsing around Vancouver and other places while blowing off last week's recording time. I guess he thinks he's better than everybody else now that he's the MOpod International Correspod-ent. Clever, eh?
Friday, December 17, 2010
Linky Dinks
"Six months into Obama's term, most Americans told pollsters they preferred socialism to capitalism. In early 2010 one in five Republicans said they have a positive view of socialism." - Ted Rall
This is kind of like the U.S. Marines claiming the peace symbol is theirs.
Keep an eye on the sky 'cause the gubment is watching you, and maybe not even your own gubment.
Birther deserter gets a mere 6 months in prison. During WWII he would have been shot.
"By the way, I have chosen Sarah Palin Person of the Year. And the year is 1641." - Andy Borowitz
What we need is more guns.
Ever wonder why wingnuts still doubt climate change? Thought it might just be the "mainstream media's" tendency to put one legitimate scientist up against a doubter as if that was an even match (It should be nine and a half scientists and one doubter)? Yeah, that's part of it, but this is probably much more a cause.
Top 5 problems with the tax deal: 1. The deal is a stealth attack on Social Security. 2. For nearly one in three workers, it's a tax increase. 3. The deal has not one but TWO millionaire bailouts. 4. Unemployment help is insufficient and inadequate. 5. Tax giveaways to the rich are a terrible way to create jobs.
Atheists don't commit as much crime as the religious. Only the religious are surprised.
Full transcript of the complete 8 hour filibuster here.
Surprise. Fox News deliberately slanted news coverage of health care.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Bernie Sanders Speaks His Mind
For almost nine hours today, an actual filibuster over this tax "compromise." I watched the last couple of hours and it was really fantastic.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Linky Dinks
Shocking News! Fox News Intentionally Slanted to the Right!
Talking Points Memo has obtained e-mails that show Fox News in the act of deliberately parroting GOP talking points and language during the health care debate. Surprise.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Modus Operandi Podcast episode 42
Show Notes & Links:
Alan & Dave are back from the road and come at you with a ride on the Ogrevator. But now you have the opportunity to hop off the Ogrevator and hop on the MOpod! The Ogrevator only takes you to the Ogrefest, but the MOpod takes you everywhere you want to go! ...or something like that.
Wikkileaks came up but so much has happened since we recorded the podcast I'm going to ignore it.
MOpod is going to lead the protest against the "accepted mythic nightmare" of endless war.
Please adopt Buddy the kitten. He's sweet, beautiful, and a ball of soft purr:
Ogreball: Iroquois high v Brown 111-20.
Alan On the Spot:
Kentucky v North Carolina: N.C. wins by less than ten
Will Korean peninsula still exist? Yes
Saints will win.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Ogrefest Themes from Episode 42
As the MOpod 42 works its way through the editing mill, we give you these three versions of the Ogrefest theme to whet your appetite. Enjoy!
[Player plays all three themes]
[Player plays all three themes]
download:
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Bat Shit Crazy Report - Loudoun County Board of Supervisors representative Eugene Delgaudio
Nothing is quite as pathetic as repressed homosexual evangelicals. Meet Eugene Delgaudio who is very upset that he gets a boner when thinking about another man caressing his balls and running his finger over his anus. The firm, open palm of a uniformed man stroking over his nipples causes Mr. Delgaudio to gasp for breath and worry he might ejaculate so it is obvious that this "enhanced pat down" must be the work of the homosexuals trying to make him gay. The TSA is part of the "Gay Agenda." Come out of the closet you sad little man.
Friday, December 3, 2010
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Modus Operandi Podcast episode 41 - Road Show
Show Notes:
[In case you can't tell from the audio, MOpod was recorded on the highway in my artcar, in the dark, with a video camera. Sorry for the roar of my little, insulation free car. - A]
We've been dealing with a fake Taliban leader in Afghanistan, paying him huge amounts of money.
Finally we settle with the "Ground Zero" workers after a "seven year battle."
Costa Rica invaded thanks to Google maps.
Record profits for major corporations in the last year while poverty level highest since New Deal.
Battle of Dutton Hill
Pulaski County possibly driest county in the country.
127 sale, world's longest yard sale.
Alan on the Spot
Kentucky v Tennessee football: Kentucky loses (maybe by five) [UK lost]
Kentucky in Maui: Kentucky will win but it will be clumsy [UK lost]
Saints v Cowboys: Saints will win [Saints win]
How long 'til someone will run over a bicyclist in NYC? Next Tuesday (11/30) [none killed so far]
Linky Dinks
Tom Tomorrow on Bi-Partisanship
Focus on the Family decides to keep teaching kids to hate fags.
The U.S. now in Afghanistan longer than the U.S.S.R. We're number one!
Candorville reveals GOP strategy.
Despite convictions for two felonies (pretty much for fucking Democracy like a dead whore), Tom Delay probably will not do any prison time. There is no justice in the USA.
Yes, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and that's the way they like it.
Rush Limbaugh hates Thanksgiving (or at least when Obama says anything about it).
Willie Nelson arrested for possession of pot. What a stupid country this is.
58% of Republican voters say their newly elected representatives should refuse public health care.
TSA continues to waste our time and money: a few examples of how awful and stupid the pat downs are.
Focus on the Family decides to keep teaching kids to hate fags.
The U.S. now in Afghanistan longer than the U.S.S.R. We're number one!
Candorville reveals GOP strategy.
Despite convictions for two felonies (pretty much for fucking Democracy like a dead whore), Tom Delay probably will not do any prison time. There is no justice in the USA.
Yes, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and that's the way they like it.
Rush Limbaugh hates Thanksgiving (or at least when Obama says anything about it).
Willie Nelson arrested for possession of pot. What a stupid country this is.
58% of Republican voters say their newly elected representatives should refuse public health care.
TSA continues to waste our time and money: a few examples of how awful and stupid the pat downs are.
The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Exclusive - Philip K. Howard Extended Interview | ||||
| ||||
Value of economic-recovery bonds sold by Louisiana since Katrina: $5,900,000,000; percentage spent on New Orleans: 1%; on lower 9th Ward: 0; amount spent on the oil industry: 29%
Full body scanners waste of money says Israeli expert.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Ogre-oids, 29 November
Escalation between North and South Korea: The latest sign that America's military build up and constant war-mongering over the last three decades is the most effective way to bring about long-term peace and good relations among the nations of the world. North Korea, which has nuclear capability, and South Korea, supported by America, are on the brink of war, with the North already striking fatally an island near the border. America's dependence on Chinese intervention demonstrates its weakening power in an era of unrelenting belligerence.
Taliban Imposter: American military and NATO (a difference?) officials admittedly paid a six-figure salary for years to someone they thought was high in the Taliban command who turned out to be someone else, e.g. an imposter. Just goes to show you that you don't need to have a high literacy rate to fool an enemy who does.
The Miami Heat: One month into the NBA season, the posers of dominance are 9-8, having lost four out of their last five. Over-rated LeBron James and the overpaid Heat have the 14th best record in the NBA. It's still early, but by now dominant teams are clearly separating themselves from the rest of the league, a la the Celtics in 2008. From a cultural standpoint, the Heat are the latest example of an inverse ratio between hype and performance characteristic of post-Sept. 11 America. Eight teams in the Western Conference have a better record than the Heat, and five teams in the East have a better record. That'd make the Heat a No. 6 seed in the playoffs. Here's another way to think about it: one month into the season and the Heat have one loss less than the 72-9 1998 Chicago Bulls, a team with a player people recognized as great because he won, not because how great everybody said he was.
Louisville Orchestra on Verge of Bankruptcy: Another example of how a bailout economy rigs the arts to fail. What did the Louisville Orchestra do wrong? Be an orchestra, that's what. They didn't put together the Abacus investment package, the didn't pawn the euro on Europe, and their string section does not foreclose on families, the poor, or the handicapped. They get punished for being good at music, while the banks get rewarded for sucking at finance. What does the American mob say? Encore!
Taliban Imposter: American military and NATO (a difference?) officials admittedly paid a six-figure salary for years to someone they thought was high in the Taliban command who turned out to be someone else, e.g. an imposter. Just goes to show you that you don't need to have a high literacy rate to fool an enemy who does.
The Miami Heat: One month into the NBA season, the posers of dominance are 9-8, having lost four out of their last five. Over-rated LeBron James and the overpaid Heat have the 14th best record in the NBA. It's still early, but by now dominant teams are clearly separating themselves from the rest of the league, a la the Celtics in 2008. From a cultural standpoint, the Heat are the latest example of an inverse ratio between hype and performance characteristic of post-Sept. 11 America. Eight teams in the Western Conference have a better record than the Heat, and five teams in the East have a better record. That'd make the Heat a No. 6 seed in the playoffs. Here's another way to think about it: one month into the season and the Heat have one loss less than the 72-9 1998 Chicago Bulls, a team with a player people recognized as great because he won, not because how great everybody said he was.
Louisville Orchestra on Verge of Bankruptcy: Another example of how a bailout economy rigs the arts to fail. What did the Louisville Orchestra do wrong? Be an orchestra, that's what. They didn't put together the Abacus investment package, the didn't pawn the euro on Europe, and their string section does not foreclose on families, the poor, or the handicapped. They get punished for being good at music, while the banks get rewarded for sucking at finance. What does the American mob say? Encore!
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Bat Shit Crazy Report - Minn. State Rep. Tom Hackbarth
So, some guy gets out of a pick-up in the Planned Parenthood parking lot with a pistol strapped to his leg and then slips into the alley. The security guard spots him and calls the cops who arrest him. In the truck they find binoculars, maps, and more ammunition. The guy claims he is "checking up on" his "girlfriend." "What's her name?" ask the police. He doesn't know, he met her on line and has only had coffee with her once. No, he doesn't have her phone number. No, he can't remember the name of the dating site. When he asked her for a date she turned him down saying she was eating with a friend in the neighborhood but he thought she was lying so now he's "checking up on her." This guy does have a concealed carry permit for his gun. Who is this guy? Rep. Tom Hackbarth (R), from the same district that brings us the queen of bat shit crazy, Michelle Bachmann. Is he just a really creepy and dangerous stalker or was he about to do something involving the Planned Parenthood clinic (Hackbarth is a rabid anti-abortion activist)? I don't know the answer but I do know he is bat shit crazy.
via
via
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Modus Operandi Podcast episode 40
96:47
Show notes:
We crank along for about 41 minutes bouncing smoothly from subject to subject, most of which is on the blog, but some new personal stories and philosophical musings until we start talking about the TSA. I have new information as to who is blowing whom when it comes to these full body scanners and it makes it all the more obvious that Obama is just a continuation of the Bush/Cheney clusterfuck:
Former Department of Homeland Security Head (and utter goddamned failure) Michael Chertoff is the lead lobbyist for the company that makes the machines that are suddenly required everywhere. AND Former chief security officer of the Israel Airport Authority Rafi Sela says, "I don't know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines. I can overcome the body scanners with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747."
And as long as we're on TSA stupidity:
Jim Morrison indecent exposure pardon?
We end with sports and I think Dave calls college sports Aryan Idealism or something that might cause us to apologize to the Anti-Defamation League or somebody. Jeez, dude.
Special Ogre-fest theme way at the very end for you dedicated listeners.
Bat Shit Crazy Report: Bachmann Still Reining Queen
I'm kind of afraid to try to keep this recurring element of the blog going with the crop of incoming teabagger Congressional freshmen. It might require creating an entire new blog... just as soon as someone will pay me to do it. So, on to the insanity:
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Modus Operandi Podcast episode 39
Alan On The Spot:
Saints win (They didn't play so THEY WIN!)
Cardinals win LOSE
UK v Vanderbilt: Vanderbilt win by between 3 & 6 (UK WIN)
UofL v Butler @ Yum! Center [puking noises]: Butler by 15 (UofL by 15)
(The conversation that comes from this UofL game leads me to wish Dr. Overbey would put the same amount of brain space into remembering who and what of politics that he puts into remembering basketball players' names. - AM)
Friday, November 12, 2010
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Linky Dinks
Rand Paul pledged to end earmarks. Seconds after victory he declares he will defend earmarks for Kentucky.
Lou Reed co-directs video for Susan Boyle. Sign of the end times.
Joyce Kaufman, Allen West's Chief Of Staff, Advocated Hanging Illegal Immigrants Who Commit Crimes
AZ Tea Partiers oppose garbage collection plan that will save city of 25,000 a million dollars a year because it's "socialist."
A new species of clone lizard (they are all female, genetically identical, and they reproduce via parthenogenesis) is found thanks to being a common ingredient in Vietnamese cuisine.
John Shimkus: 'Global warming won't destroy planet because God promised Noah'
Ogre-oid: Fred H. Bartlit, Jr.
The prominent trial lawyer appointed as lead investigator of a presidential panel examining the BP Gulf oil disaster issued a statement this week saying, "to date we have not seen a single instance where a human being made a conscious decision to favor dollars over safety," the NY Times quotes Bartlit, Jr. He continues, "They want to be efficient, they don't want to waste money, but they also don't want to see their buddies killed." Apparently, testimony after testimony that establishes that BP used only six centralizers instead of the recommended 21 to stabilize the well casing that gave way to gushing gas and oil does not have any relevance to "conscious decisions," just bad ones, I guess.
The fact that Bartlit, Jr. treats these two priorities as equals betrays his callous bias toward the inverted value system of industry. What I can't figure is why "55 days" Obama would appoint a lead investigator so ostensibly sympathetic to industry to make an assessment of BP's liability. It's almost like Obama is just another big-money, big-oil conservative, with Bartlit, Jr. as the point man for a Harvard law hair-splitting legal discourse where everything BP did wrong still doesn't amount to the evidence necessary to point to liability. In other words, the investigation is likely to criticize BP for lots of things, up until the point such criticisms could amount to grounds for liability. As Americans, we can use our freedom of speech to blame BP all we want--we just can't make them pay for the immeasurable damage they've caused. I don't suppose the idea of negligence--where there is no "conscious" sinister decision to harm but absence of sensible decisions that should have been made--would apply here. And I certainly don't think that an explosion, eleven dead bodies, or a dead ocean floor qualify as evidence that anyone did anything wrong. Only a hot-headed liberal would get worked up over that.
The fact that Bartlit, Jr. treats these two priorities as equals betrays his callous bias toward the inverted value system of industry. What I can't figure is why "55 days" Obama would appoint a lead investigator so ostensibly sympathetic to industry to make an assessment of BP's liability. It's almost like Obama is just another big-money, big-oil conservative, with Bartlit, Jr. as the point man for a Harvard law hair-splitting legal discourse where everything BP did wrong still doesn't amount to the evidence necessary to point to liability. In other words, the investigation is likely to criticize BP for lots of things, up until the point such criticisms could amount to grounds for liability. As Americans, we can use our freedom of speech to blame BP all we want--we just can't make them pay for the immeasurable damage they've caused. I don't suppose the idea of negligence--where there is no "conscious" sinister decision to harm but absence of sensible decisions that should have been made--would apply here. And I certainly don't think that an explosion, eleven dead bodies, or a dead ocean floor qualify as evidence that anyone did anything wrong. Only a hot-headed liberal would get worked up over that.
Old McConnell
Old McConnell had a farm
eey-aye-eey-aye-ooh
And on that farm he had an Obama
eey-aye-eey-aye-ooh
With compromise here and a concession there
Here a waste, there a waste
Everywhere a waste, waste
eey-aye-eey-aye-ooh
And on that farm he had an Obama
eey-aye-eey-aye-ooh
With compromise here and a concession there
Here a waste, there a waste
Everywhere a waste, waste
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Health Care Chart
A recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll shows some interesting things about Americans' opinions about the health care reform bill. It came in as the fourth most important reason people were voting (at 17%) but when you break it down into against some/all or for some/all people seem to come up about 50/50 with a slight advantage to the against side. But if you dig in just a little bit about this there's really only one thing people are totally opposed to: the individual mandate to purchase health insurance.
The KFF's charts pack (.pdf format) is a really interesting study of the health care issue's impact on the last election and of American's opinions on it. Well worth studying the entire poll and the questions asked, if you're the kind of person that like to know what he/she is talking about. I know this will not affect our conservative friends as they will have stopped reading at the first line above that opposes their world view.
The KFF's charts pack (.pdf format) is a really interesting study of the health care issue's impact on the last election and of American's opinions on it. Well worth studying the entire poll and the questions asked, if you're the kind of person that like to know what he/she is talking about. I know this will not affect our conservative friends as they will have stopped reading at the first line above that opposes their world view.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Monday, November 8, 2010
Modus Operandi Podcast is on Vacation
Now that the elections are over we've decided to take the week off from the podcast. Dave has been doing some kind of play, so he says. I think he's doing stand-up at a titty club but I could be wrong. I have been allowing the echoes of the monumental upheaval of last Tuesday settle into my brain tissues, hoping they will become coherent. -A
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Historical?
Very bad but not unusual.
The 65 seat loss in the House is pretty awful and puts Obama slightly better than Grant, Harrison, Cleveland (-116!), Harding, and FDR. Still, there have been 8 other Presidents that have lost more than 45 seats (including Clinton) and since the House grew with the country's population until 1963 the percentage of seats lost (which I can't find in a nice, neat, chart done by someone else) of 435 is a smaller number today than it was under, say, Taft in 1910 with 57 of 386 seats. But it's still horrible.
Somehow Dems managed to keep control of the Senate but their majority is now wafer thin. The historical average loss of Senate seats has been four and eight isn't very far off that mean on a bell curve. That being said the Dems have taken a trouncing.
Now here's an odd thing: the swing has been "independents" that voted for Democrats last time but went Republican this time. We have an enormous chunk of the population that will simply vote against the people in office because nobody seems to know what they're doing. But one has to wonder about the person that would vote back in again the same bunch of thieves and fools that has run this country's government and economy into the ground. Only 12% of Americans said we should let it play out, around 30% wanted it repealed but over 40% said it didn't go far enough and for reasons I cannot explain people from both ends of the spectrum voted against Democrats because of it.
Is this continuous yo yo effect of American voting because we're a nation of idiots, because we have no third (or more) party, or because of the wild imbalance created by the staggering influence of the vast right wing propaganda machine (Fox et. al.) and gazillions of dollars sprayed on the elections by corporations and the ultra wealthy? What is the Tea Party movement and where does its money come from? How can Sarah Palin be jetting back and forth across the country continuously? 4% of Americans are actually members of the "Tea Party" but 40% of Americans "agree with" the Tea Party. How can this possibly square with the fact that only 12% of Americans approve of the Republican Party, fewer than the pathetic 21% that approves of the Democrats?1 Something is very off-kilter in the system, especially considering there is no other party to step up and fill the gaping hole of Americans that despise all of our leadership. People vote against the people in office but to do this they have to vote for people they hate more than the ones they've already got. Is this the snake eating its own tail or is the snake being force fed by the true Powers That Be?
There is only one thing I am sure about: this election has made me sick to my stomach. After this week's podcast I think I'm going to take a month off of following politics to work on art and music.
With only four exceptions, EVERY single President since Lincoln has lost seats in the House in the midterm elections. The only ones to buck the trend were the Roosevelts (TR because he was the mostly popular President EVER his first term, FDR because of the Depression), Clinton (because of Republican miscues during the Impeachment) and Bush '43 (because of 9/11). [freerepublic]
The 65 seat loss in the House is pretty awful and puts Obama slightly better than Grant, Harrison, Cleveland (-116!), Harding, and FDR. Still, there have been 8 other Presidents that have lost more than 45 seats (including Clinton) and since the House grew with the country's population until 1963 the percentage of seats lost (which I can't find in a nice, neat, chart done by someone else) of 435 is a smaller number today than it was under, say, Taft in 1910 with 57 of 386 seats. But it's still horrible.
Somehow Dems managed to keep control of the Senate but their majority is now wafer thin. The historical average loss of Senate seats has been four and eight isn't very far off that mean on a bell curve. That being said the Dems have taken a trouncing.
Now here's an odd thing: the swing has been "independents" that voted for Democrats last time but went Republican this time. We have an enormous chunk of the population that will simply vote against the people in office because nobody seems to know what they're doing. But one has to wonder about the person that would vote back in again the same bunch of thieves and fools that has run this country's government and economy into the ground. Only 12% of Americans said we should let it play out, around 30% wanted it repealed but over 40% said it didn't go far enough and for reasons I cannot explain people from both ends of the spectrum voted against Democrats because of it.
Is this continuous yo yo effect of American voting because we're a nation of idiots, because we have no third (or more) party, or because of the wild imbalance created by the staggering influence of the vast right wing propaganda machine (Fox et. al.) and gazillions of dollars sprayed on the elections by corporations and the ultra wealthy? What is the Tea Party movement and where does its money come from? How can Sarah Palin be jetting back and forth across the country continuously? 4% of Americans are actually members of the "Tea Party" but 40% of Americans "agree with" the Tea Party. How can this possibly square with the fact that only 12% of Americans approve of the Republican Party, fewer than the pathetic 21% that approves of the Democrats?1 Something is very off-kilter in the system, especially considering there is no other party to step up and fill the gaping hole of Americans that despise all of our leadership. People vote against the people in office but to do this they have to vote for people they hate more than the ones they've already got. Is this the snake eating its own tail or is the snake being force fed by the true Powers That Be?
There is only one thing I am sure about: this election has made me sick to my stomach. After this week's podcast I think I'm going to take a month off of following politics to work on art and music.
OBAMA MUST RESIGN
Nov. 2, 2010: The Day America Officially Became Hopeless
Let it not be said that Barack Obama did not achieve anything amazing in his first two years in office. Somehow, incredibly, in that short time span, he made possible the revival of a conservative Republican party reeling from large-scale political freefall. President Bush was historically unpopular, the war in Iraq was (and still is) a quagmire, and the only thing falling harder and faster than the G.O.P. was the economy--on the brink of total collapse thanks to a runaway, debt-driven system that amounted to a financial version of Russian roulette.
How can you have a record turnout of supporters turning out on a freezing day, ignoring their bladders in the cold just so they can get a glimpse of you and maybe shake your hand, while your predecessor sits--quiet, isolated, ridiculed--in ceremonial exile, and two years later find yourself right there, taking his place as the icon of rejection en vogue. How does that happen?
Because Obama has spent most of his first two years in office mimicking the policies of his predecessor and pandering to his political enemies who have made it no secret they wish to erase him from the political power game. As puzzling as yesterday's election and the resurgence of a seemingly has-been G.O.P. is, there are two pretty simple explanations: America's chronic conservatism, and Obama's reticence in attacking that conservatism--a symptom of his symptomatic conservatism.
How in the world could anyone want more conservatism after 2000-2008 and larger post-1980 Reagan Era? The social inequality, oppression, and malaise that come with conservative policies can't even be rationalized anymore by a booming economy based on a rejection of Soviet-style government regulation, not when the American economy fell apart precisely because it has been driven by subsidies, bailouts, and prohibition--all forms of government control of the economy--during the Reagan era.
So the American people elected Obama because they were tired of conservative policies that didn't work. Obama then gave Americans a similar version of the same programs, they still don't work, and now Americans have voted again for the same party they voted against two years ago when they voted for Obama, presumably because they now want the G.O.P. to continue the same policies that don't work instead of Democrats.
This knot of self-destruction is a vicious spiral of societal collapse, and Obama the conservative is clearly clueless that he is calmly paddling at the front of a sinking boat. When failure is systemic, no options work to correct and stabilize serious problems. The available options simply do not correspond in type or proportion to the problems that need to be stabilized. More mayonnaise doesn't help when the cupboard is bare. Obama and the Democrats have been rejected by voters who want a return to the very politics responsible for the mess they blame Obama for--yet as crazy as that is, the voters are right, since his policies have not made a measurable departure from the failed policies of the conservative era he was presumably elected to usher the country out of. The economy remains stagnant not simply because Obama has not had enough time to make it better but because it is just another version of trickle-down economics. That explains why GM, the banks, and the insurance companies are rolling on while the non-rich remain mired in a state of growing despair and desperation. Trickle down concentrates wealth at the top of the economic hierarchy, so that's where it stays. And as long as some version of that policy remains intact, that's what you'll get. You can have all the time in the world (which real people in the real world do not have) and your policies won't work if they are re-hashed versions of policies that have already been shown to fail. Simply putting someone from the other party in the White House and switching from a foolish conservative to a smug conservative doesn't change anything. Incredible, the American people associate Obama with an agenda that deviates too far from the policies that were in place before him, when a) one would think people would embrace such a mode of governing when it's obvious the old policies have failed and were never designed to work in the people's interest and b) when Obama's policies have failed not because they deviated too far from what came before but because they mimic them too closely and don't boldly move away from them. The voters are both wrong about why Obama has failed and wrong to fault a significant departure from prevailing policies, because those policies are failures. Hence the continued failure.
Taken as a whole, this is an ideological traffic jam: a dead end. By now, Obama has no one to blame but himself for failing to fight back against those who have attacked him and alienating those who supported him because they did rightly want him to change the policies that have led us to this present state of failure. In two short years, Obama has become the Louise Ridgeway of American politics, the doomed heiress in Agatha Christie's "Death on the Nile" who, in the observant eyes of detective Hercule Poirot, "makes enemies of them all." Obama, like America, is his own worst enemy, squandering a historical political moment and the opportunity of a lifetime simply because his own complacent, conservative motives have been in the way. It is apparent from the way he acts, talks, and governs that everything is more or less OK from where he sits. The only time he gets antagonist and goes on the offensive is when he's being interviewed by John Stewart. He lectures and condescends to the nation's smartest and most politically active demographic, one without which he would have never gotten to be President.
Obama is another Bill Clinton, a conservative who wanted to be President and got what he wanted thanks to the progressive, non-rich population, and then ignored them, instead favoring the pro-corporate, pro-war, pro-police state policies of what came before him. When things are bad and nothing ever changes, one thing is for certain: they've gone from bad to worse. Clinton's daughter goes to Stanford and has a world-famous celebrity wedding while we're supposed to believe he, Obama, and the rest of the Democrats actually care about the people of this country and have some coherent, unified agenda other than to make sure as many of them can stay in office for as long as they can. And they continue to operate this way even though they no longer can make credible claims that the conservative policies they effectively have supported in the Reagan era.
Social oppression can't be worth economic prosperity when there is no economic prosperity. But you can forget about any kind of intelligent conversation interested in explanations of how and why economies succeed or fail in this country, no matter how urgent the need for it is. As with yesterday, we'll get more of the same: "the economy goes in cycles," "the Lord will provide," "low taxes," and "deregulate" are beliefs and policies, not explanations. You can't operate something you don't understand, and if you can't explain how it works, you don't understand it, no matter how many times you go back and forth between two conservative parties and their chronically conservative candidates. That's the really troubling thing about Obama--by now he seems as clueless and conservative as the people who have supported him and rejected in two years because they have no interest in doing anything besides beating up on the punching bag of the day, a la Tea Party.
In early 1968, after a disturbingly narrow victory in the New Hampshire primary, when LBJ realized he had lost all support, he announced that he would not run for re-election. Obama must do the same. There can be no break from the conservative policies that are ruining this country as long as he remains the only option to those policies. Two short years ago he had off-the-charts popularity, widespread support, and an opposing political party on the ropes. Yet somehow, here we are today.
And that's just it: two years ago, who would have thought anyone could have done worse than the previous administration? Indeed, for Obama to have been bad enough at being president to make him even worse than what came before him is indeed quite amazing . . . especially for someone who's only been in office two years.
Let it not be said that Barack Obama did not achieve anything amazing in his first two years in office. Somehow, incredibly, in that short time span, he made possible the revival of a conservative Republican party reeling from large-scale political freefall. President Bush was historically unpopular, the war in Iraq was (and still is) a quagmire, and the only thing falling harder and faster than the G.O.P. was the economy--on the brink of total collapse thanks to a runaway, debt-driven system that amounted to a financial version of Russian roulette.
How can you have a record turnout of supporters turning out on a freezing day, ignoring their bladders in the cold just so they can get a glimpse of you and maybe shake your hand, while your predecessor sits--quiet, isolated, ridiculed--in ceremonial exile, and two years later find yourself right there, taking his place as the icon of rejection en vogue. How does that happen?
Because Obama has spent most of his first two years in office mimicking the policies of his predecessor and pandering to his political enemies who have made it no secret they wish to erase him from the political power game. As puzzling as yesterday's election and the resurgence of a seemingly has-been G.O.P. is, there are two pretty simple explanations: America's chronic conservatism, and Obama's reticence in attacking that conservatism--a symptom of his symptomatic conservatism.
How in the world could anyone want more conservatism after 2000-2008 and larger post-1980 Reagan Era? The social inequality, oppression, and malaise that come with conservative policies can't even be rationalized anymore by a booming economy based on a rejection of Soviet-style government regulation, not when the American economy fell apart precisely because it has been driven by subsidies, bailouts, and prohibition--all forms of government control of the economy--during the Reagan era.
So the American people elected Obama because they were tired of conservative policies that didn't work. Obama then gave Americans a similar version of the same programs, they still don't work, and now Americans have voted again for the same party they voted against two years ago when they voted for Obama, presumably because they now want the G.O.P. to continue the same policies that don't work instead of Democrats.
This knot of self-destruction is a vicious spiral of societal collapse, and Obama the conservative is clearly clueless that he is calmly paddling at the front of a sinking boat. When failure is systemic, no options work to correct and stabilize serious problems. The available options simply do not correspond in type or proportion to the problems that need to be stabilized. More mayonnaise doesn't help when the cupboard is bare. Obama and the Democrats have been rejected by voters who want a return to the very politics responsible for the mess they blame Obama for--yet as crazy as that is, the voters are right, since his policies have not made a measurable departure from the failed policies of the conservative era he was presumably elected to usher the country out of. The economy remains stagnant not simply because Obama has not had enough time to make it better but because it is just another version of trickle-down economics. That explains why GM, the banks, and the insurance companies are rolling on while the non-rich remain mired in a state of growing despair and desperation. Trickle down concentrates wealth at the top of the economic hierarchy, so that's where it stays. And as long as some version of that policy remains intact, that's what you'll get. You can have all the time in the world (which real people in the real world do not have) and your policies won't work if they are re-hashed versions of policies that have already been shown to fail. Simply putting someone from the other party in the White House and switching from a foolish conservative to a smug conservative doesn't change anything. Incredible, the American people associate Obama with an agenda that deviates too far from the policies that were in place before him, when a) one would think people would embrace such a mode of governing when it's obvious the old policies have failed and were never designed to work in the people's interest and b) when Obama's policies have failed not because they deviated too far from what came before but because they mimic them too closely and don't boldly move away from them. The voters are both wrong about why Obama has failed and wrong to fault a significant departure from prevailing policies, because those policies are failures. Hence the continued failure.
Taken as a whole, this is an ideological traffic jam: a dead end. By now, Obama has no one to blame but himself for failing to fight back against those who have attacked him and alienating those who supported him because they did rightly want him to change the policies that have led us to this present state of failure. In two short years, Obama has become the Louise Ridgeway of American politics, the doomed heiress in Agatha Christie's "Death on the Nile" who, in the observant eyes of detective Hercule Poirot, "makes enemies of them all." Obama, like America, is his own worst enemy, squandering a historical political moment and the opportunity of a lifetime simply because his own complacent, conservative motives have been in the way. It is apparent from the way he acts, talks, and governs that everything is more or less OK from where he sits. The only time he gets antagonist and goes on the offensive is when he's being interviewed by John Stewart. He lectures and condescends to the nation's smartest and most politically active demographic, one without which he would have never gotten to be President.
Obama is another Bill Clinton, a conservative who wanted to be President and got what he wanted thanks to the progressive, non-rich population, and then ignored them, instead favoring the pro-corporate, pro-war, pro-police state policies of what came before him. When things are bad and nothing ever changes, one thing is for certain: they've gone from bad to worse. Clinton's daughter goes to Stanford and has a world-famous celebrity wedding while we're supposed to believe he, Obama, and the rest of the Democrats actually care about the people of this country and have some coherent, unified agenda other than to make sure as many of them can stay in office for as long as they can. And they continue to operate this way even though they no longer can make credible claims that the conservative policies they effectively have supported in the Reagan era.
Social oppression can't be worth economic prosperity when there is no economic prosperity. But you can forget about any kind of intelligent conversation interested in explanations of how and why economies succeed or fail in this country, no matter how urgent the need for it is. As with yesterday, we'll get more of the same: "the economy goes in cycles," "the Lord will provide," "low taxes," and "deregulate" are beliefs and policies, not explanations. You can't operate something you don't understand, and if you can't explain how it works, you don't understand it, no matter how many times you go back and forth between two conservative parties and their chronically conservative candidates. That's the really troubling thing about Obama--by now he seems as clueless and conservative as the people who have supported him and rejected in two years because they have no interest in doing anything besides beating up on the punching bag of the day, a la Tea Party.
In early 1968, after a disturbingly narrow victory in the New Hampshire primary, when LBJ realized he had lost all support, he announced that he would not run for re-election. Obama must do the same. There can be no break from the conservative policies that are ruining this country as long as he remains the only option to those policies. Two short years ago he had off-the-charts popularity, widespread support, and an opposing political party on the ropes. Yet somehow, here we are today.
And that's just it: two years ago, who would have thought anyone could have done worse than the previous administration? Indeed, for Obama to have been bad enough at being president to make him even worse than what came before him is indeed quite amazing . . . especially for someone who's only been in office two years.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Modus Operandi Podcast episode 38
Show notes:
[Kind of edited this one in a hurry but hope to fill things in a little in the next couple of days. - Ed]
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Yes, We Got Fooled Again!
As mid-terms approach, here's an appraisal of Obamerica, 2008-present:
The Good: George W. Bush stopped being President.
The Bad: January 21, 2009 - Present.
The Ugly: Afghan surge, 55 days of silence on the Gulf Oil Disaster, opposition to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," opposition to Prop 19, scapegoating teachers, empowering Republicans, condescending to the American people (for the sake of personal sanity and organization, I will stop there).
Two years ago the big worry was that Obama would lose to McCain-Palin, or that if he won, he'd get Martin Luther King-ed (assassinated). As these epic nightmares subsided, they deferred to a more realistic, insidious, and chronic nightmare.
The Agenda Remains the Same.
No, that's not the echo of Robert Plant from 1971, that's me, today, and you know I'm right. No matter what happens, what approach is taken, bold or patient, working within the system or rebellious activism, America is the land where nothing changes, where nothing good is ever going to happen again.
Let me skip around now since I'm too angry to be systematic about this. Last week, a front-page NY Times article reported gross discrepencies in arrests for marijuana possession for Black males compared to whites, even though statistics show whites use marijuana as much if not more than Blacks. So what does attorney general Eric Holder do? His best Bush-Cheney hardass authoriarian imitation, declaring that the White House will, by god, prosecute marijuana offenses in California, the democratic process be damned. May I ask how such a move is either politically practical or socially desirable? One, such a position is conservative, and Americans voted for Obama presumably because they were tired of conservatism and the widespread misery, failure, and destruction it has left in its wake in the name of abstract principles, like morality, "small government" and patriotism. But conservatives hate Obama's guts, and no matter how much he tries to mimic them or "work with" them, their undying mission in life is to live to see the day he is no longer President, period.
Okay then. Sometimes politicians do things knowing the consequences will work against them politically, but such moves are socially desirable, e.g. "the right thing" to do. LBJ has been quoted as saying that he was turning over the entire South to the Republicans when he signed the Civil Rights Act into law during the 1960s. He knew both he and his party would suffer politically as a consequence of formally endorsing Civil Rights by using his executive powers to make civil rights the law, but it was (and still is) the right thing to do.
The NY Times article on racist enforcement of marijuana laws likened them to Jim Crow laws, and the comparison is not only valid but impossible to ignore. The law, generally speaking, is a menace to society more often than it is an asset; the law and justice are not the same thing, and the law undermines justice more often than the law upholds justice. Any rebuttal to this point amounts to circular reasoning. As King wrote in "Letter from Birmingham Jail" there are just laws and unjust laws. The former apply to everyone equally, the latter only to a specific group.
Cannabis prohibition is an unjust law on at least two levels. As the NY Times article makes clear, its enforcement effects discrimination against blacks. It also discriminates against all recreational cannabis users, who unlike those who indulge in alcohol, nicotene, gambling, and "vices," cannot do so without risk of arrest and the attendant punishments and disgrace. So we have a legal system that says the drinker can drink, the nicotene-head can blaze down nicotene joints, the gamblers can blow their life savings out on the river boat, but cannabis users can't light up. Thus, cannabis prohibition is an unjust law because it's a law that apply only to one group and not everyone. Either vices are legal or they aren't. It prohibits indulgence in one group's vice but says it's OK for the other groups to indulge in their vice. If we really want to stop drugs, we have to stop all of them, and end all drug use, not just the drug use that drunks aren't interested in while they pour more money into slot machines and puff on nicotene joints.
Opposing Prop 19, then, obviously alienates liberals, progressives, and whatever other social groups that overlap in the venn diagram of people who are fans of the herb. But it also is NOT the right thing to do. Prohibition works against civil rights, equality, fairness, and justice. It is a bad law, driven by racism, perpetuated by a welfare system for police and the criminal justice system, and sustained by hate-mongering ignorance and hypocrisy.
The height of this hypocrisy is Obama himself, a (half-) black man who wouldn't have come within light years of a public water fountain, muchless the Oval Office, if the previous generation of Black leaders (King, et al.) had the conservative, status quo mentality Obama lives and governs by. The country is in economic dire straights. We have an overcrowded, overflowing prison system into which we put way more money than we do our failing and underfunded education system (see Kristoff's NY Times piece, 2010, Oct. 28 (and no, my failure to provide the link isn't because I'm stoned and unmotivated. If you don't want to find the article yourself, what have you been smoking? I'm a writer, not a filing cabinet.)).
Perpetuating Prop. 19 is neither socially desirable, nor politically practical. Continuing cannabis prohibition has no justification in either democratic principles or empirical study of its effects on individuals and society when compared with the effects of the above mentioned legal vices. The only rationale for opposing Prop 19 is to posture for the arch-conservative establishment that thinks Obama is a Kenyan socialist cousin of both Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, and perpetuate the hate-mongering strong-arm police state we have lived in for the last thirty years. Perpetuating the status quo seems a puzzling politicial move for a President who got elected on the platform of "change."
From the standpoint of the institutional racism prohibition perpetuates, Obama's opposition to Prop 19 is a disgrace not even his White House predecessor could match. This political move betrays the essence of conservatism: not wanting for others what you want for yourself. Obama is where he is today thanks to the passionate progressive politics of the previous generation. But unlike the icons of that era, Obama does not want the next generation of Americans in general and Blacks in particular to live in a more just, equal, and democratic world than the one he came of age--and rose to power--in. Yet, in taking this position, he achieves nothing poltically pragmatic--he will never be conservative enough for the conservatives who hate him. Thus, his tenure as President is marked by perpetuating socially undesirable oppression, discrimination, and fiscal blindness with no political pragmatism to reap. When you're failing as both an idealist and pragmatist, it might behoove you to consider that adhering to some ideals--like the social courage that made it possible for a (half-) black man to be President--is a practical thing to do, especially in politics.
Equally puzzling and bigoted is the Obama administration's opposition of a court ruling overturning "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the military. What good does this achieve? Again, this move is neither socially desirable nor politically pragmatic. It perpetuates discrimination and degrading treatment of the LGBT community--which supported Obama in 2008--and alienates a demographic that it would seem politically pragmatic to keep in good favor.
And what has been the political gain of Obama's betrayal of his own race and the other progressive, oppressed groups that ardently supported him in 2008? Mitch McConnell's pledge that the top priority for the next Congress will be to make sure he is a one-term President.
Meanwhile, Obama and his cronies just issued a statement to educators, reminding them that they are required by federal law to intervene in the kind of bullying that recently drove a Rutgers student to commit suicide, a nationally-publicized tragedy that has brought to light other instances of suicides by young gay people hanging themselves. The vitriol of homo-haters -- and haters in general -- points to the futility of Obama's attempts at pragmatism, and the great cost in suffering Americans incur because of his inability to put his words and ideas into action. Regardless of his intentions, those of us who need to see the results the most are not seeing any results that would come from a socially desirable agenda. Thus, his pragmatism is a lost cause, and social progress has been stalled for yet another two years of human existence -- maybe not a long time if you're Obama, but certainly a long time if you're a gay teenager, or a black man in jail for a joint.
I'm sorry to tell you, but Obama is a smug jerk. He has used all of these people -- progressives and oppressed groups of all sorts -- to catapult him to realize a personal dream, and now that he's a member of the club, these people aren't cool enough to hang with him anymore. What does he tell John Stewart? "Change takes time. It doesn't happen overnight." Well now, that's inspiring and insightful isn't it? The country is stumbling through the aftershocks of thirty years of conservatism, and Obama wants to cater to the conservative establishment that hates him while telling the rest of us that the change we haven't seen for those thirty years takes time. What does he think we think "thirty years" is? The temperature? As always, Obama's demenour on the Daily Show was smug and reserved, a personality that in no way reflects either the passion of progressives or the urgency of people who's lives teeter on the edge of desperation. He was on the Daily show for one reason and one reason only: his own political interest. As soon as he walked off that set, everyone connected to the Daily Show ideology instantly became useless to him.
Society does not go in cycles like a washing machine. Society is organic. Like anything organic, societies can and do grow old and die. The telltale sign of anything dying is something that cannot recover from what ails it; it cannot revitalize itself; it cannot change because it has become exhausted and thus resigned to being set in its ways, never to go beyond its current status.
I wish I had a pragmatic political strategy for what to do about Obama's betrayal. Maybe it would be worth the short-term agony of deliberately working against the Democrats who have betrayed us and letting the Republicans regain power as a means of conditioning the Democrats to realize that if they ever want to get elected and hold onto power again, they must be a liberal party. The only reason anyone votes for them is they don't want a conservative party in power.
But I think 2000-2008 was already enough suffering and humiliation for a lifetime, so here's a somber thought: there may be no winning move. It's checkmate, and unless you're the King, you're fucked . . . no matter what.
That bit of nihilism aside, whatever approach you take to this coming Tuesday's elections and the American era that continues to unfold at this grim point in history, I would say that you can't expect change from others until you demand it from yourself.
The Good: George W. Bush stopped being President.
The Bad: January 21, 2009 - Present.
The Ugly: Afghan surge, 55 days of silence on the Gulf Oil Disaster, opposition to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," opposition to Prop 19, scapegoating teachers, empowering Republicans, condescending to the American people (for the sake of personal sanity and organization, I will stop there).
Two years ago the big worry was that Obama would lose to McCain-Palin, or that if he won, he'd get Martin Luther King-ed (assassinated). As these epic nightmares subsided, they deferred to a more realistic, insidious, and chronic nightmare.
The Agenda Remains the Same.
No, that's not the echo of Robert Plant from 1971, that's me, today, and you know I'm right. No matter what happens, what approach is taken, bold or patient, working within the system or rebellious activism, America is the land where nothing changes, where nothing good is ever going to happen again.
Let me skip around now since I'm too angry to be systematic about this. Last week, a front-page NY Times article reported gross discrepencies in arrests for marijuana possession for Black males compared to whites, even though statistics show whites use marijuana as much if not more than Blacks. So what does attorney general Eric Holder do? His best Bush-Cheney hardass authoriarian imitation, declaring that the White House will, by god, prosecute marijuana offenses in California, the democratic process be damned. May I ask how such a move is either politically practical or socially desirable? One, such a position is conservative, and Americans voted for Obama presumably because they were tired of conservatism and the widespread misery, failure, and destruction it has left in its wake in the name of abstract principles, like morality, "small government" and patriotism. But conservatives hate Obama's guts, and no matter how much he tries to mimic them or "work with" them, their undying mission in life is to live to see the day he is no longer President, period.
Okay then. Sometimes politicians do things knowing the consequences will work against them politically, but such moves are socially desirable, e.g. "the right thing" to do. LBJ has been quoted as saying that he was turning over the entire South to the Republicans when he signed the Civil Rights Act into law during the 1960s. He knew both he and his party would suffer politically as a consequence of formally endorsing Civil Rights by using his executive powers to make civil rights the law, but it was (and still is) the right thing to do.
The NY Times article on racist enforcement of marijuana laws likened them to Jim Crow laws, and the comparison is not only valid but impossible to ignore. The law, generally speaking, is a menace to society more often than it is an asset; the law and justice are not the same thing, and the law undermines justice more often than the law upholds justice. Any rebuttal to this point amounts to circular reasoning. As King wrote in "Letter from Birmingham Jail" there are just laws and unjust laws. The former apply to everyone equally, the latter only to a specific group.
Cannabis prohibition is an unjust law on at least two levels. As the NY Times article makes clear, its enforcement effects discrimination against blacks. It also discriminates against all recreational cannabis users, who unlike those who indulge in alcohol, nicotene, gambling, and "vices," cannot do so without risk of arrest and the attendant punishments and disgrace. So we have a legal system that says the drinker can drink, the nicotene-head can blaze down nicotene joints, the gamblers can blow their life savings out on the river boat, but cannabis users can't light up. Thus, cannabis prohibition is an unjust law because it's a law that apply only to one group and not everyone. Either vices are legal or they aren't. It prohibits indulgence in one group's vice but says it's OK for the other groups to indulge in their vice. If we really want to stop drugs, we have to stop all of them, and end all drug use, not just the drug use that drunks aren't interested in while they pour more money into slot machines and puff on nicotene joints.
Opposing Prop 19, then, obviously alienates liberals, progressives, and whatever other social groups that overlap in the venn diagram of people who are fans of the herb. But it also is NOT the right thing to do. Prohibition works against civil rights, equality, fairness, and justice. It is a bad law, driven by racism, perpetuated by a welfare system for police and the criminal justice system, and sustained by hate-mongering ignorance and hypocrisy.
The height of this hypocrisy is Obama himself, a (half-) black man who wouldn't have come within light years of a public water fountain, muchless the Oval Office, if the previous generation of Black leaders (King, et al.) had the conservative, status quo mentality Obama lives and governs by. The country is in economic dire straights. We have an overcrowded, overflowing prison system into which we put way more money than we do our failing and underfunded education system (see Kristoff's NY Times piece, 2010, Oct. 28 (and no, my failure to provide the link isn't because I'm stoned and unmotivated. If you don't want to find the article yourself, what have you been smoking? I'm a writer, not a filing cabinet.)).
Perpetuating Prop. 19 is neither socially desirable, nor politically practical. Continuing cannabis prohibition has no justification in either democratic principles or empirical study of its effects on individuals and society when compared with the effects of the above mentioned legal vices. The only rationale for opposing Prop 19 is to posture for the arch-conservative establishment that thinks Obama is a Kenyan socialist cousin of both Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, and perpetuate the hate-mongering strong-arm police state we have lived in for the last thirty years. Perpetuating the status quo seems a puzzling politicial move for a President who got elected on the platform of "change."
From the standpoint of the institutional racism prohibition perpetuates, Obama's opposition to Prop 19 is a disgrace not even his White House predecessor could match. This political move betrays the essence of conservatism: not wanting for others what you want for yourself. Obama is where he is today thanks to the passionate progressive politics of the previous generation. But unlike the icons of that era, Obama does not want the next generation of Americans in general and Blacks in particular to live in a more just, equal, and democratic world than the one he came of age--and rose to power--in. Yet, in taking this position, he achieves nothing poltically pragmatic--he will never be conservative enough for the conservatives who hate him. Thus, his tenure as President is marked by perpetuating socially undesirable oppression, discrimination, and fiscal blindness with no political pragmatism to reap. When you're failing as both an idealist and pragmatist, it might behoove you to consider that adhering to some ideals--like the social courage that made it possible for a (half-) black man to be President--is a practical thing to do, especially in politics.
Equally puzzling and bigoted is the Obama administration's opposition of a court ruling overturning "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the military. What good does this achieve? Again, this move is neither socially desirable nor politically pragmatic. It perpetuates discrimination and degrading treatment of the LGBT community--which supported Obama in 2008--and alienates a demographic that it would seem politically pragmatic to keep in good favor.
And what has been the political gain of Obama's betrayal of his own race and the other progressive, oppressed groups that ardently supported him in 2008? Mitch McConnell's pledge that the top priority for the next Congress will be to make sure he is a one-term President.
Meanwhile, Obama and his cronies just issued a statement to educators, reminding them that they are required by federal law to intervene in the kind of bullying that recently drove a Rutgers student to commit suicide, a nationally-publicized tragedy that has brought to light other instances of suicides by young gay people hanging themselves. The vitriol of homo-haters -- and haters in general -- points to the futility of Obama's attempts at pragmatism, and the great cost in suffering Americans incur because of his inability to put his words and ideas into action. Regardless of his intentions, those of us who need to see the results the most are not seeing any results that would come from a socially desirable agenda. Thus, his pragmatism is a lost cause, and social progress has been stalled for yet another two years of human existence -- maybe not a long time if you're Obama, but certainly a long time if you're a gay teenager, or a black man in jail for a joint.
I'm sorry to tell you, but Obama is a smug jerk. He has used all of these people -- progressives and oppressed groups of all sorts -- to catapult him to realize a personal dream, and now that he's a member of the club, these people aren't cool enough to hang with him anymore. What does he tell John Stewart? "Change takes time. It doesn't happen overnight." Well now, that's inspiring and insightful isn't it? The country is stumbling through the aftershocks of thirty years of conservatism, and Obama wants to cater to the conservative establishment that hates him while telling the rest of us that the change we haven't seen for those thirty years takes time. What does he think we think "thirty years" is? The temperature? As always, Obama's demenour on the Daily Show was smug and reserved, a personality that in no way reflects either the passion of progressives or the urgency of people who's lives teeter on the edge of desperation. He was on the Daily show for one reason and one reason only: his own political interest. As soon as he walked off that set, everyone connected to the Daily Show ideology instantly became useless to him.
Society does not go in cycles like a washing machine. Society is organic. Like anything organic, societies can and do grow old and die. The telltale sign of anything dying is something that cannot recover from what ails it; it cannot revitalize itself; it cannot change because it has become exhausted and thus resigned to being set in its ways, never to go beyond its current status.
I wish I had a pragmatic political strategy for what to do about Obama's betrayal. Maybe it would be worth the short-term agony of deliberately working against the Democrats who have betrayed us and letting the Republicans regain power as a means of conditioning the Democrats to realize that if they ever want to get elected and hold onto power again, they must be a liberal party. The only reason anyone votes for them is they don't want a conservative party in power.
But I think 2000-2008 was already enough suffering and humiliation for a lifetime, so here's a somber thought: there may be no winning move. It's checkmate, and unless you're the King, you're fucked . . . no matter what.
That bit of nihilism aside, whatever approach you take to this coming Tuesday's elections and the American era that continues to unfold at this grim point in history, I would say that you can't expect change from others until you demand it from yourself.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Modus Operandi Podcast episode 37
Links and notes:
We start with a continuation of the Facebook argument. [UPDATE] Dave has taken the plunge and is on Facebook (as is this podcast and Alan)!
eBook sales in general and by title (Kindle). (Free downloads: #2 Sherlock Holmes, #7 Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, #9 Pride and Prejudice, #28 The Art of War, #31 Common Sense, #37 War and Peace. Paid downloads were pretty much a match with the NY Times bestseller list.)
Even Kitty Hates new t-shirt coming soon.
Juan Williams fired for not following the rules that all NPR employees must follow.
Fox News gives Juan Williams a three year $2 million contract.
NPR has a code of ethics and an ombudsman. Fox News does not.
MOpod zoo:
The new kitten, Ida:
The Rangers advance to the World Series proving that once W is gone things get better.
The Pot Book on Science Friday.
Fort Knox was burning explaining the smoky quality of the full moon.
"Grandma Got Run Over by a King Float"
Alan On The Spot:
Kentucky v Georgia: Georgia win by 3Rangers v Yankees: Texas win by 2
Giants v Phillies: Phillies go to the World Series
Murray High v whoever: Murray will lose by two.
Calloway High v whoever: CCHS destroyed.
Auburn v LSU: LSU by six.
True Colors: Tea Baggers Assault Move On Activist
How long until there are Tea Party arm bands worn by bands of wandering thugs?
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Linky Dinks
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Friday, October 15, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)