Seen at a towing company near New Hampton, Iowa...
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Another Glimpse Into Republican Economic "Thought"
The travails of Wall Street, and subsequent massive Federal bailout, that dominated the week's news cycle bring to mind a couple of thoughts:
1. "Taxation and regulation are counterproductive and immoral." That's the mantra that has been chanted at us by supply-siders for the last quarter-century-plus, and it has come to dominate the economic debate (to such extent as it exists) in our electoral politics. With it comes the explicit assertion that, if we just leave the ultra-wealthy to their own devices, it'll bring shared prosperity to us all.
The past week's events have quite clearly and effectively refuted that argument.
2. "Government isn't the solution, it's the problem." So they tell us... Except, apparently, when government can be manipulated into rescuing plutocrats from their own foibles, at the expense of the rest of us.
That's the dirty little secret of modern Movement Conservatism. Despite the rhetorical nobility of its supposed belief system, it is really just a well-organized and well-funded attempt to undo the egalitarian gains of the New Deal -- to return wealth solely into the hands of those who truly deserve it.
That deeply-held, laissez-faire conviction of Conservatism is readily abandoned when it is inconvenient, thus exposing the sad reality: Conservatives actually believe in nothing, other than their own right to hold power, both economic and political, over others.
1. "Taxation and regulation are counterproductive and immoral." That's the mantra that has been chanted at us by supply-siders for the last quarter-century-plus, and it has come to dominate the economic debate (to such extent as it exists) in our electoral politics. With it comes the explicit assertion that, if we just leave the ultra-wealthy to their own devices, it'll bring shared prosperity to us all.
The past week's events have quite clearly and effectively refuted that argument.
2. "Government isn't the solution, it's the problem." So they tell us... Except, apparently, when government can be manipulated into rescuing plutocrats from their own foibles, at the expense of the rest of us.
That's the dirty little secret of modern Movement Conservatism. Despite the rhetorical nobility of its supposed belief system, it is really just a well-organized and well-funded attempt to undo the egalitarian gains of the New Deal -- to return wealth solely into the hands of those who truly deserve it.
That deeply-held, laissez-faire conviction of Conservatism is readily abandoned when it is inconvenient, thus exposing the sad reality: Conservatives actually believe in nothing, other than their own right to hold power, both economic and political, over others.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Sunday, September 14, 2008
What This Election Is Really About
Son Number Two -- that'd be Tristan, for those of you scoring at home -- has been working at fundraising for the Obama campaign for the better part of a year. And damn near every time that I see him, he recounts another phone call in which he is berated for being a "nigger lover," or some other such ignorant and ridiculous statement.
It makes me despair for the state of the Union.
Since more than 80% of voters believe that the Republicans have our nation heading in the wrong direction, but the presidential polls are virtually a dead heat, what does that say about our nation's electorate?
All of you readers who so fervently (and so irrationally) oppose Senator Obama's candidacy: just think about the stereotypes, both overt and covert, with which you're being bombarded... and the types of persons with whom you're crawling in bed, politically.
With what type of person do you want to be aligned?
It makes me despair for the state of the Union.
Since more than 80% of voters believe that the Republicans have our nation heading in the wrong direction, but the presidential polls are virtually a dead heat, what does that say about our nation's electorate?
All of you readers who so fervently (and so irrationally) oppose Senator Obama's candidacy: just think about the stereotypes, both overt and covert, with which you're being bombarded... and the types of persons with whom you're crawling in bed, politically.
With what type of person do you want to be aligned?
Sunday's Quick Hits
My Minnesota Golden Gophers are 3-0 after beating the mighty Montana State Bobcats yesterday. Can you say, "Rose Bowl?" (Irony alert.) Rose Bowl, baby!
*****
It was quite amusing this week to hear Sarah Palin tout her foreign-policy credentials to ABC's Charlie Gibson: Gee whiz, you can actually see Russia from some places in Alaska! By that "logic," my coworker, Keith, who travels up to within a couple miles of the Canadian border on his weekly route, is eminently qualified to be Secretary of State.
*****
Also amusing was the reaction of the right-wing punditry to Palin's incoherence concerning The Bush Doctrine: "Why, 90% of Americans don't know what that doctrine is!" True enough. But what ever happened to the idea that we're supposed to be electing people who are actually more capable and better-informed than the average Joe? (And, since an ignorant truck driver like me knows what The Bush Doctrine is, I think it's fair to expect, at the very least, the same level of knowledge from a vice presidential nominee.)
*****
Does the McCain campaign believe that, if you repeat a lie (Palin "stopping the bridge to nowhere") endlessly, then it becomes true? Are they counting on the Liberty Valance Effect?
More importantly, is the American electorate stupid enough to believe it? I keep saying it, but only because it's true: If you continue to vote for this shit, then you get exactly what you deserve. (I just wish you wouldn't keep inflicting it upon those of us who are actually paying attention.)
*****
It was quite amusing this week to hear Sarah Palin tout her foreign-policy credentials to ABC's Charlie Gibson: Gee whiz, you can actually see Russia from some places in Alaska! By that "logic," my coworker, Keith, who travels up to within a couple miles of the Canadian border on his weekly route, is eminently qualified to be Secretary of State.
*****
Also amusing was the reaction of the right-wing punditry to Palin's incoherence concerning The Bush Doctrine: "Why, 90% of Americans don't know what that doctrine is!" True enough. But what ever happened to the idea that we're supposed to be electing people who are actually more capable and better-informed than the average Joe? (And, since an ignorant truck driver like me knows what The Bush Doctrine is, I think it's fair to expect, at the very least, the same level of knowledge from a vice presidential nominee.)
*****
Does the McCain campaign believe that, if you repeat a lie (Palin "stopping the bridge to nowhere") endlessly, then it becomes true? Are they counting on the Liberty Valance Effect?
More importantly, is the American electorate stupid enough to believe it? I keep saying it, but only because it's true: If you continue to vote for this shit, then you get exactly what you deserve. (I just wish you wouldn't keep inflicting it upon those of us who are actually paying attention.)
Friday, September 12, 2008
Give Me That Old-Time Religion
I have a weakness that I must confess to you: During my travels about the countryside, I love occasionally listening to religious radio. I find it entertaining and downright hilarious! Whether it's James Dobson advising a wife that she should sex her husband up whenever he demands it, or Jimmy Swaggart verbally tiptoeing around his... er... working girl incident, or the self-righteous pronouncements of any of dozens more holy hucksters, it's always good for a laugh.
But there is a disturbing thing that I have noticed over the years: Even though these people call themselves "Christians," they really don't give much of a damn about Jesus.
Oh, sure, there are plenty of references to "Christ, crucified," but the things that Jesus is supposed to have actually said and done while he was here, in the flesh, on planet Earth, are routinely ignored. There's just not much reference to Matthew, Mark, Luke nor John; instead these folks are overwhelmingly consumed by a love for the writings of Paul - a guy who didn't even meet the historical Jesus. They ought to call themselves "Paulians" rather than "Christians."
Jesus the man? He was too concerned with ideas like social justice and forgiveness and turning the other cheek (the man dined with tax collectors, for the love of God!). I mean, jeez, that sort of thing takes introspection and hard work! Paul, on the other hand, was far more into being a self-serving moralistic prig -- just the kind of red meat that Evangelicals can really sink their teeth into. No, for them, Jesus is much more safely experienced through the amorphous ambiguity of the Holy Spirit, where he can be reduced to a cypher, a symbol, and then ignored when he is inconvenient.
I've watched the growth of this sort of "Christianity" (and the slow dwindling of older, more dignified churches) over the course of my life, and have come to believe that this phenomenon is strongly tied to demographic trends; I see it as a natural outgrowth of the narcissism of the Baby Boom generation. Churches are now something that I shop for to find the "right" one for me. I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal savior.
And to hell with everyone else (just ask the fans of the "Left Behind" series). Even Jesus, the man.
But there is a disturbing thing that I have noticed over the years: Even though these people call themselves "Christians," they really don't give much of a damn about Jesus.
Oh, sure, there are plenty of references to "Christ, crucified," but the things that Jesus is supposed to have actually said and done while he was here, in the flesh, on planet Earth, are routinely ignored. There's just not much reference to Matthew, Mark, Luke nor John; instead these folks are overwhelmingly consumed by a love for the writings of Paul - a guy who didn't even meet the historical Jesus. They ought to call themselves "Paulians" rather than "Christians."
Jesus the man? He was too concerned with ideas like social justice and forgiveness and turning the other cheek (the man dined with tax collectors, for the love of God!). I mean, jeez, that sort of thing takes introspection and hard work! Paul, on the other hand, was far more into being a self-serving moralistic prig -- just the kind of red meat that Evangelicals can really sink their teeth into. No, for them, Jesus is much more safely experienced through the amorphous ambiguity of the Holy Spirit, where he can be reduced to a cypher, a symbol, and then ignored when he is inconvenient.
I've watched the growth of this sort of "Christianity" (and the slow dwindling of older, more dignified churches) over the course of my life, and have come to believe that this phenomenon is strongly tied to demographic trends; I see it as a natural outgrowth of the narcissism of the Baby Boom generation. Churches are now something that I shop for to find the "right" one for me. I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal savior.
And to hell with everyone else (just ask the fans of the "Left Behind" series). Even Jesus, the man.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Why Does John McCain Piss Me Off So Much?
...It's a question I ask myself. What is it about his candidacy that makes me see red?
I guess that it's really about disappointment. A year ago, I could easily have seen myself voting for John McCain. He is, after all, a genuine American war hero; he's a very likable public figure, capable of rare self-deprecation; he had shown an ability to learn from his own mistakes (can you say "Keating Five?") by co-authoring campaign reform legislation; he had refused to pander to the crazy religious right, correctly calling them "agents of intolerance;" he had been more pragmatic than doctrinaire on numerous policy positions, including climate change and progressive taxation.
But, in the last year, much about John McCain has changed for the worse; the man has turned against much of what made him worth believing in. He started taking his economic outlook from the Republican orthodoxy (in the persons of Phil Gramm, et al) rather than from Main Street; he began kowtowing to the likes of Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and James Dobson; he abandoned policy for personality, honesty for obfuscation, straight talk for double talk.
As a proud independent, I have been let down by the Senator. Look, I understand the reality that he had to win the Republican nomination, and honesty doesn't fit into that equation. But these seemingly endless inconsistencies make me wonder if John McCain has any beliefs at all.
And that's something I can't waste a precious vote upon.
I guess that it's really about disappointment. A year ago, I could easily have seen myself voting for John McCain. He is, after all, a genuine American war hero; he's a very likable public figure, capable of rare self-deprecation; he had shown an ability to learn from his own mistakes (can you say "Keating Five?") by co-authoring campaign reform legislation; he had refused to pander to the crazy religious right, correctly calling them "agents of intolerance;" he had been more pragmatic than doctrinaire on numerous policy positions, including climate change and progressive taxation.
But, in the last year, much about John McCain has changed for the worse; the man has turned against much of what made him worth believing in. He started taking his economic outlook from the Republican orthodoxy (in the persons of Phil Gramm, et al) rather than from Main Street; he began kowtowing to the likes of Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and James Dobson; he abandoned policy for personality, honesty for obfuscation, straight talk for double talk.
As a proud independent, I have been let down by the Senator. Look, I understand the reality that he had to win the Republican nomination, and honesty doesn't fit into that equation. But these seemingly endless inconsistencies make me wonder if John McCain has any beliefs at all.
And that's something I can't waste a precious vote upon.
She Will Destroy Us All
No, not Britney Spears, nor Paris Hilton, nor Kim Kardashian, nor even Sarah Palin. She's the Kinetico girl... and I see her damned image everywhere:
I must admit, she freaks me out. Part of it, I suppose, is the fact that she's a prepubescent girl, all dolled up, JonBenet-style. The creepiness factor is through the roof.
But there's more to it. Look into her eyes. Really look. They are pools of inky darkness. She is Damien's little sister, and she is here to devour my soul.
An empty, formless void looms.
I must admit, she freaks me out. Part of it, I suppose, is the fact that she's a prepubescent girl, all dolled up, JonBenet-style. The creepiness factor is through the roof.
But there's more to it. Look into her eyes. Really look. They are pools of inky darkness. She is Damien's little sister, and she is here to devour my soul.
An empty, formless void looms.
Friday, September 5, 2008
The MILF Speaks! Republicans Hear What They Want To.
Listening to Sarah Palin speak Wednesday night at the RNC, I couldn't help but be unimpressed. Her speech said essentially nothing, and certainly nothing new; it was just the same old cultural warfare, decrying us "elites" who believe in crazy notions like evolution and gravity. A couple of convenient lies, some snarkiness, but no substance. No policy. Nothing.
Others, though, seemed much more impressed. In part, this is probably because I always listen to speeches, rather than watch them; I do not wish to be distracted by empty images when I could actually be hearing the words. So, while most people were immersing themselves in Palin's warm MILFiness (and, doubtless, seeing the TV cut to adoring looks from the party faithful), I was left with her tired phrases, delivered in that high-pitched, nasal Alaskan whine.
But there is more to it than just imagery. In post-speech interviews, party delegates were utterly, over-the-top effusive in their praise, some even calling her the next Ronald Reagan. So why this wide gap between my perceptions and theirs? The answer, I feel, lies in what Sarah Palin is not.
You see, each of John McCain's other potential running mates was, to a greater or lesser degree, more of a known commodity. And each had some potential difficulty looming with one or another of the GOP's core factions. Palin, by contrast, is not burdened with much of a national reputation. She is a blank canvas upon which Republicans of every stripe can project all of their fondest hopes and dreams. And that is just what they're doing.
Now, in order to be elected, all McCain and Palin need to do is keep us (and especially the press) distracted for the next two months with red herrings -- you know, stuff like endless discussions of pregnant teenage daughters -- and we'll never have to think about pesky things like her record, nor who she really is.
Others, though, seemed much more impressed. In part, this is probably because I always listen to speeches, rather than watch them; I do not wish to be distracted by empty images when I could actually be hearing the words. So, while most people were immersing themselves in Palin's warm MILFiness (and, doubtless, seeing the TV cut to adoring looks from the party faithful), I was left with her tired phrases, delivered in that high-pitched, nasal Alaskan whine.
But there is more to it than just imagery. In post-speech interviews, party delegates were utterly, over-the-top effusive in their praise, some even calling her the next Ronald Reagan. So why this wide gap between my perceptions and theirs? The answer, I feel, lies in what Sarah Palin is not.
You see, each of John McCain's other potential running mates was, to a greater or lesser degree, more of a known commodity. And each had some potential difficulty looming with one or another of the GOP's core factions. Palin, by contrast, is not burdened with much of a national reputation. She is a blank canvas upon which Republicans of every stripe can project all of their fondest hopes and dreams. And that is just what they're doing.
Now, in order to be elected, all McCain and Palin need to do is keep us (and especially the press) distracted for the next two months with red herrings -- you know, stuff like endless discussions of pregnant teenage daughters -- and we'll never have to think about pesky things like her record, nor who she really is.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Identity Politics Or Bust!
One need not wonder what John McCain was thinking when he named MILF Sarah Palin as his running mate. It is as utterly transparent as it is insulting.
In the aftermath of Joe Biden's announcement as the Democratic vice presidential candidate, it was mildly amusing to watch members of the right-wing media feign sympathy for the plight of poor, poor Hillary Clinton. After nearly two decades of using her as one of their favorite punching bags, did they now truly feel that Senator Clinton had been unfairly slighted? I think that both you and I know the answer to that question.
And now, with the choice of Palin, we see what all those distributed talking points were leading up to: The GOP believes that cranky, stridently Clinton-supporting PUMAs* will now flock to the Republican ticket because, like Hillary, Alaska's first-term governor happens to have a vagina. That is, apparently, all it takes -- never mind the fact that Palin has roughly the same worldview as Strom Thurmond.
Once, not long ago, John McCain didn't believe in pandering to identity politics. But how quickly things change. I sincerely hope that those who are targets of McCain's cynical maneuverings still have enough of their wits about them to know when they are being treated like idiots -- and to be appropriately angry.
*PUMA = Party Unity, My Ass
In the aftermath of Joe Biden's announcement as the Democratic vice presidential candidate, it was mildly amusing to watch members of the right-wing media feign sympathy for the plight of poor, poor Hillary Clinton. After nearly two decades of using her as one of their favorite punching bags, did they now truly feel that Senator Clinton had been unfairly slighted? I think that both you and I know the answer to that question.
And now, with the choice of Palin, we see what all those distributed talking points were leading up to: The GOP believes that cranky, stridently Clinton-supporting PUMAs* will now flock to the Republican ticket because, like Hillary, Alaska's first-term governor happens to have a vagina. That is, apparently, all it takes -- never mind the fact that Palin has roughly the same worldview as Strom Thurmond.
Once, not long ago, John McCain didn't believe in pandering to identity politics. But how quickly things change. I sincerely hope that those who are targets of McCain's cynical maneuverings still have enough of their wits about them to know when they are being treated like idiots -- and to be appropriately angry.
*PUMA = Party Unity, My Ass
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
