Good news for now, not so much for later (or: The blame game)

November's elections showed that the country is getting increasingly politically divided. Unlike the big GOP win in 1994, Republicans this time around won back the House without any real help from metropolitan areas, which remained largely Democratic. The GOP gains came mostly in districts "that were older, less diverse and less educated than the nation as a whole," notes the Washington Post. The good news for Democrats is that they continue to win among minorities and whites with more education, but they are increasingly losing working-class voters. While that's good news for Republicans it's also a shrinking percentage of the electorate. "Republicans do the best in areas that are typically not growing very fast and don't look like the present, or certainly the future, of the country," one Democratic strategist said.

--from Slatest.

Can you blame those enraptured in the Beck-ian fears that have taken hold of "white" (whatever that means) America (or Europe for that matter)? Yes. Is it understandable? Yes as well.


Fear is often the result of ignorance; however, this is not the case here. Whether by first-hand experience of whites who have indeed seen the number of non-whites increasing in their lifetime or who, living in less "progressive" areas, get it indirectly from the assertions by the Right (see Beck/Limbaugh/McCain even) or the Left (see above and social science), they are aware of the demographic changes going on around them. So they aren't unaware, ignorant; they just aren't smart enough to use that knowledge to be unafraid of its consequences.


To be sure, as the the percentage of non-whites increases, so will their share of the economic--and political--pie. But that's as it should be, logically if not ethically. Only, if one conflates the natural evolution of society's statistical balance, a process that takes time and shifts only gradually, with their own immediate circumstance--the non-smart part--than we can understand how they arrive at fear; they become reactionary.

Certainly there is a part of "middle"/"white" America who are looking at the long-game and don't like what they see--again, not ignorance but stupidity. Stupid because they are fearing the loss of something that never existed--surely not in any of our lifetimes--of a "white" culture, of the "real" America for which the pine for so dearly. (Even if true, no love-loss here.) It's simple prejudice; once again, a mere manifestation of stupidity.


But here's the thing: despite the slight tilt in electoral politics this fall--slight in what it says about the psychology of the country despite the exaggerated affect on our somewhat antiquated political system and the horse-race media mentality that spins its coverage--doesn't mean we're mostly stupid. It doesn't even mean that most who voted Republican are dumb. There's plenty of reasons to vote the bums (whoever they happen to be at time) out besides straight race-based fear. Mostly just that: whatever their persuasion, there are a whole lot of bums. Most of the old blood was blue and the new blood is red.


If anything, it says more about our increasing impatience, perhaps due in part to our decreasing attention span, and lack of faith in politicians to get anything done. I say perhaps about the attention span thing because at this point there isn't the data to back it up. But also because, in all the blame the 24hr news cycle has been receiving for this apparent circumscribed mental faculty, maybe something has been missed. Has the exponential media coverage of the politics so revealed the inherent inertia and seediness of the process that our reaction--abhorrence, frustration, and, yes, fear; from the Right and Left (see displeasure (ha!) with Obama)--is justified? Perhaps even a good thing? Perhaps.


Can anyone say WikiLeaks? For whatever diplomatic muck has been stirred up so far, can anyone say that, in the end, it isn't a public good? Not me. In the face of almost a million released documents, the best a tow-the-line general on The Daily Show this week could muster was that it might cause a national security problem--might?--while at the same time saying Assange is a bigger--not just as big, but bigger--threat to America than Al Qaeda. Sorry cool-general-that-is-fairly-progressive-on-other-issues-of-foreign-policy--though not on DADT, which Stewart gave him a good drumming for--but I call bullshit.


I'm sticking with my homeboy Robert Gates on this one:

Let me just offer some perspective as somebody who’s been at this a long time. Every other government in the world knows the United States government leaks like a sieve, and it has for a long time. And I dragged this up the other day when I was looking at some of these prospective releases. And this is a quote from John Adams: “How can a government go on, publishing all of their negotiations with foreign nations, I know not. To me, it appears as dangerous and pernicious as it is novel." …

Now, I’ve heard the impact of these releases on our foreign policy described as a meltdown, as a game-changer, and so on. I think -- I think those descriptions are fairly significantly overwrought. The fact is, governments deal with the United States because it’s in their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust us, and not because they believe we can keep secrets.

Many governments -- some governments deal with us because they fear us, some because they respect us, most because they need us. We are still essentially, as has been said before, the indispensable nation. So other nations will continue to deal with us. They will continue to work with us. We will continue to share sensitive information with one another. Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest.

Keep speaking power to truth, brother!

Just because you're critical of a country doesn't mean you're an anarchist.
--Paraphrase of Daniel Ellsberg on WNYC talking about WikiLeaks

Stupid, stupid conservatives.

I was raised on the supposed stupidity of liberals and the glory of the conservative movement, born in the 70’s and a child of the 80’s. But as I age so does the conviction that, although there might have been some truth to that reality (while Clinton didn’t help, the sex-capades-impeachment was a early warning signal of the neo-con-absurdity to come), it certainly isn’t the case anymore. In fairness to conservatives whom I respect (family members included), this is mostly in regards to the rise and proliferation of the conservative media.

Cases in point:

Fox front man Bill O'Reilly was beside himself over the handshake, indignantly claiming that former President Richard Nixon never met with Chinese leader Mao Zedong. Perhaps O'Reilly would benefit from a refresher in Political History 101, because it's a well-established fact that Nixon met with Mao in 1972, a point Keith Olbermann drove home in naming O'Reilly "Worst Person" on Thursday for his historically challenged comment.

Conservative leader and radio host Rush Limbaugh asserted, "If you look at what we are calling torture, you have to laugh," said that "if somebody can be water-tortured six times a day, then it isn't torture," and claimed that "appeasers" have "water[ed] down" definition of torture like "NOW gang" did with definition of domestic violence.

County Fair, the official Media Matters blog, last week called out the conservative Washington Times for its bizarre, fact-free editorial that claimed President Obama's job approval ratings were "in the basement" and that he was historically unpopular. True Alice-in-Wonderland stuff since recent polling data suggest the exact opposite about the president's popularity. Well, it took a whole week, but the Times finally walked back that nonsense retracting the entire editorial noting, "We hereby retract our April 28 editorial 'Barack's in the basement' because we misapplied several polling comparisons of various presidents after their first 100 days in office." That's being generous when you consider the entire piece was completely made up.

[W]hen Gov. John Baldacci (D) signed a marriage equality law, Maine became the fifth state to allow legal same-sex marriage. On the Christian Broadcasting Network today, Pat Robertson responded by claiming that the “ultimate conclusion” of legalizing same-sex marriage would be the legalization of polygamy, bestiality, child molestation and pedophilia. “You mark my words, this is just the beginning in a long downward slide in relation to all the things that we consider to be abhorrent,” said Robertson.

Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Rush Limbaugh Show guest host Mark Steyn criticized the president as an elitist because he ordered a burger with "spicy mustard" or "Dijon mustard." Hannity claimed that Obama ordered a "fancy burger" with a "very special condiment," while Steyn asserted Obama is trying "to enlighten us" through his order. Ingraham asked of Obama: "What kind of man orders a cheeseburger without ketchup but Dijon mustard? ... The guy orders a cheeseburger without ketchup? What is that?" In their discussions of Obama's burger order, Hannity, Ingraham, and Steyn all referenced a Grey Poupon commercial featuring actors portraying wealthy British men expressing desire for the mustard.

David Feherty, in an essay for a Dallas magazine wrote, "From my own experience visiting the troops in the Middle East, I can tell you this, though: despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

As Olbermann has explained, the point would not be to watch Hannity suffer. Rather, it would be to prove to him — and perhaps his viewers — that waterboarding is in fact “cruel, inhuman” torture — that it is what an adviser on terrorism to the departments of Homeland Security, Special Operations, and Intelligence called “slow-motion suffocation.”

Indeed, the 2005 torture memo written by Steven Bradbury required the CIA to have a tracheotomy kit on hand to revive a detainee who had effectively drowned:

[A] detainee could suffer spasms of the larynx that would prevent him from breathing even when the application of water is stopped and the detainee is returned to an upright position. In the event of such spasms, a qualified physician would immediately intervene to address the problem, and, if necessary, the intervening physician would perform a tracheotomy. …we are informed that the necessary emergency medical equipment is always present - although not visible to the detainee — during any application of the waterboard.

A footnote to the memo warns, “for reasons of physical fatigue or psychological resignation, the subject may simply give up, allowing excessive filling of the airways,” and “aggressive medical intervention” may be required to restore breathing. And yet Hannity continues to insist, “It’s not drowning.”

Indeed, the fact that conservatives and the Task Force in particular feel the need to lie about the history and traditions surrounding the NDP [National Day of Prayer—ew!] suggests that they are less concerned with promoting prayer in America than they are with taking every possible opportunity to “slam Obama” for political gain.

I wish it were true that Obama was in some way—any way—anti-religious, but unfortunately that’s just not the case. In fact, as I suggested about Bobby Jindal’s necessary conversion to an Anglo-religion, so too did Obama need the sanctification and protection of J.C. to win the White House. Half black? Sure. Absentee father? Well, OK. Muslim absentee father? Ummm… Community organizer. What’s that? But (god forbid) had Obama ever waiver in his devotion to some imaginary Father and his ghost-Son—not to be confused with “Ghost-Dad,” the ridiculously horrible Bill Cosby movie—he could have forgotten about the presidency.

Why? Because the equally ridiculously horrible reality in this country, indeed most the world, is that, even as religion slowly ebbs from humanity and even the transgendered get civil rights, atheism remains a pox in our houses.

I guess I was right, an update.

Not too long ago, I wrote a post titled "Enemies at the Gates." In it I warned the robust loud-mouth, and his ilk, not to be too quick to hope for the worst just to have your "principles" (I can't stress those scare-quotes enough, here, people) be proven right:
Rush, you'd better hope it works--or yours will be one of the first gated compounds overrun by the evicted, out of work and hungry.

Okay, so I wasn't completely right--the "gates" were actually in Connecticut. And they weren't Rush's (damn). But a bunch of folks in buses did go to AIG executive's houses and made a scene. So that's pretty rad. Unfortunately, there were more reporters there than protesters. Or maybe not unfortunate: who'd you have standing in your front yard, peaceful protesters or the news media? Exactly.

(Thanks to The Economist for the above KAL cartoon of an AIG-angry mob.)

Enemies at the Gate

Limbaugh said this week that White House officials are "targeting" him because "they need a demon to distract and divert from what their agenda is." He said Obama aides are "going after private citizens" in a manner reminiscent of Richard M. Nixon's "enemies list." He also challenged the president to a debate on his show.

- Howard Kurtz, Washington Post

Oh lord, here we go with the "agenda" again. Though not as damning as "conspiracy," the word does bring up images of sneaky, back-door, misrepresented--and that's the problem (for the right), there is no subterfuge: Obama was actually voted in to do almost exactly what he's doing; for the big ticket items like the economy, health care, and Iraq, anyway.

If, other than the current credit crisis, the long-term economic time-bomb ticking is health care, and that finally there is a real want (seems to be) for a system with everyone covered, how doesn't it make sense to attack the two together? There's no other way, they're inextricable.

Obama's inheritance is two-fold: one of incompetence, the other negligence; a failing economic system and an inefficient and morally outdated health care system. So, sure, there's an agenda. It's called "Clean Up the Mess." And, Rush, you'd better hope it works--or yours will be one of the first gated compounds overrun by the evicted, out of work and hungry.

Besides, the Administration doesn't need to target you: you're a walking, screaming bulls-eye. They're not in need of a demon; you have been giving them (the left) one for some time now.

To compare Obama to Nixon is like... well, it's just plain stupid. If you want to make the point that Rahm came after you with barred teeth, the Tricky Dick-allusion is bunk--who doesn't have an enemies list? You? Of course you do.

And one name does not an "enemies list" make.

Really, how is this coming after you? Saying that you're now the voice of the right? Wasn't that already the case for years? Maybe I've just been overly cynical before now.

Anyway, isn't that what you want to hear, Rush? Aren't you pleased? I bet you do, and know you are.

Born to Hulu

FYI, folks, in case you didn't know: today is a new era. An historical landmark, a new beginning, a breathe of fresh air has swept through the land--and it smells good. I'm talking about the change that has finally come, before our very eyes, and the hope engendered by the progress made on a journey started long ago. Of course, I'm talking about, none other than the freedom to watch The Daily Show with Jon Stewart without cable hookup, online, for nothing, and with even less commercials than there are normally. And who is to thank for this day to rejoice? No, not President of the United States, one Barack Hussein Obama (although something this good must have had him involved somehow), but something called Hulu. What does it mean? Who the hell cares. Now, you can watch the best fake news around. Yep, The Colbert Report, too. Happy day, oh happy day!

BTW: The first black president was inaugurated yesterday to much fanfare. That's right, a black guy is now the Man. These are indeed confusing times we live in. I heard Public Enemy's "Fight The Power" has become Rush Limbaugh's new theme song. I can die happy now.

That bitch is crazy! #62

Iran’s parliament sacked the interior minister, Ali Kordan, an ally of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, for falsely claiming to have an honorary degree from Oxford University. --The Economist

"How much of a fraud is Bozell? In 1998, Bozell claimed the media weren't paying enough attention to Monica Lewinsky -- at a time when there were 500 news reports a day on the topic. Now he's alternately claiming Obama is a "socialist" and a "Reaganite." And in his column last week, he complained that a recent Project for Excellence in Journalism study overstated the extent of negative coverage of Obama by including "talk-radio hosts from Rush Limbaugh to Randi Rhodes" who are supposed to "express an opinion." But that complaint is completely false. The study in question specifically excluded talk radio. It's right there in the study's methodology: "Talk radio stories, which are part of PEJ's regular NCI, were not included in this campaign study of tone." If Brent Bozell tells you the sun is shining, you better grab an umbrella." --Media Matters for America