Tuesday, January 03, 2012

The Monster In Me


One of the first times I learned I was a fraud and a monster as a blogger was back 1,500 years ago when I opted to support the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama over the candidacy of Senator Hillary Clinton.

At the time I said that I would, of course, support Senator Clinton in the general election if she emerged as the candidate, but not in the primary.  I did a lot of posts, graphics, and so forth.

Probably even said "fuck" once or twice.

Which of course meant that I was a clearly a misogynist, the dupe of the something-or-other Chicago something and several other horribles. (Sorry that don't remember every detail, but it sure was a lot of fun! Also I'm still waiting for that damning "Whitey tape". Did I miss it? I know I missed "The Love Guru", so it's guess it's possible.)

At the time I said -- repeatedly and to no effect -- that I would support Senator Clinton in the general elections because presidential elections always comes down to a choice between two deeply flawed major candidates.  Each deeply flawed candidate will garner tens of millions of votes in 50 states, while a scattering of minor candidates will pull in a fraction of a fraction here and there.  But because we have a winner-take-all system -- which no amount of wishful thinking will make otherwise -- sometimes those few million or few thousand or few hundred votes are just enough to permit the candidate the protesters hate and fear the most to win.

Ironic, no?

Easier by far to insist that there is no difference in any way whatsoever on any issue of importance between the two major Parties or their candidates and then blast away in every direction.  Anyone who has been around the block more than once knows this is a cheap, lazy fraud, but it is also an easy fraud to perpetrate because both of the deeply flawed candidates major party candidate will almost inevitably be products of the American political system -- both recipients of bushels of tainted corporate dough, both dogged by positions and compromises their supporters will gag on.

Just as it is would be easy and accurate to say that there isn't a dime's worth of difference or distance between the Earth and Mars...so long as you compare them using your naked eye from the vantage point of Alpha Centauri.

Or if you are a noble-public-advocate-turned-egomaniac-spoiler-for-hire named Ralph Nader.

Or if you are a Republican-who-tried-to-overthrow-the-Clinton-Administration-by-criminalizing-blowjobs-turned-Libertarian named Bob Bar.

 


Or if you are an oozing-racist-slug-turned-Paleolibertarian named George Wallace.


Me, I'm just a regular, grubby carbon-based life form.  I go around the Sun once a year and the difference between a "habitable" and an "uninhabitable" planet is extremely important to me.

For example, I'd like to keep Social Security and Medicare intact forever because more and more of us will get old while fewer and fewer of us will get rich.  I'd like to keep programs for the poor -- from Head Start to WIC to Medicaid -- intact forever because the poor will be with us always.  I'd like developers and drillers to keep their fracking hands off of my national parks and forests.  I'd like well-educated professionals to be paid excellent, tax-payer funded salaries by the government to make sure no quick gigabuck artists can get away with poisoning my water, air, food, medicine and planet. I'd like women to go right on owning their own bodies.

It's a long list of things I would like to continue to have, and which one Party has pledged itself -- openly and publicly -- to taking away from me by election, litigation or fraud.  One Party, which loathes me so profoundly for merely existing and believing what I believe that it built an entire, vertically-integrated industry around hating me and telling me exactly how hostile their coming fascist state will be to me, 24/7/365 from coast-to-coast, at the tops of their lungs for the last 30 years.  One Party which has done more premeditated violence to our capacity for self-government in a shorter period than I would have ever believed possible back in the good old days when I blew my vote out the airlock by giving it to John Anderson.

And once they finish doing have said they will do to my country, I don't really give a fuck whether what's left is called a College of Corporations, a theocracy or a Libertarian Thunderdome where what they do to women or minorities or gays in Alabama or South Carolina or Arizona is supposed to be none of my fucking business because I have a 217 area code.

Because it won't be my country anymore.

Of course it's hardly my country now, but unless you are a member of the Professional Indignation Caucus, there is still a big of difference between "dead" and "mostly dead".

Then again, I am a hardened, serial offending recidivist who has already been convicted by the Supreme Bloviet of counterrevolutionary obstreperism and deviationist stoogery so many times it barely registers anymore.

Hell, Dick Cheney is probably standing over my shoulder right now, dictating this to me, spelling errors and all.

So what do I know.


26 comments:

lockswriter said...

I agree with you, Driftglass.

But I'm kind of glad that we're still willing to criticize Obama. Look at the feast of fail that is the Republican field of candidates. That could be our side if we ever developed their habits of authoritarian followership.

I suspect all the people who were calling you a foreign-baby-blower-upper in the last thread will be voting for Obama in November. But they'll do so grudgingly.

Phil said...

As long as I have one feeble breath left in my body, I have your back.

The pendulum keeps swinging.
Stick around long enough and weep with joy when you see the current crop of fascist motherfuckers go swirling down the drain.

Happy New Year to ya dude.

Mal said...

Good response. How the bloody buggery does anyone with a conscience think that they can get away with promoting the likes of Ron Paul and the Republicans.

John said...

Let us not forget the other "spoiler for hire," Ross Perot, who made possible the election of our previous "best Republican President," one W.J. Clinton.

Also note that Gore's problem was not Nader but Gore's own inability to carry his home state of Tenn.

John Puma

RonzoniRigatoni said...

"...there is still a big of difference between "dead" and "mostly dead"."

Ah, Drifty, I well remember a penned inscription inside a (used) philosophy text I bought many many years ago:

"The living are much less alive than the dead are dead."

So true.

Retired Patriot said...

Drifty,

Great post. At least we still get to bitch about those that get elected.

At least for now.

As for the current incumbent, it is a good thing that he squares off against a nominee from a party that loathes [us] so profoundly for merely existing and believing what [we] believe that it built an entire, vertically-integrated industry around hating [us] and telling [us] exactly how hostile their coming fascist state will be to [us], 24/7/365 from coast-to-coast, at the tops of their lungs for the last 30 years.

Otherwise, he'd be losing any shot at my vote for his complete and total embrace of illegal (now legal) Star Chamber-ish powers over us citizens.

Perhaps the sane vs insane fight we're witnessing now is by design? When my tin-foil hat is up, I certainly think so. No doubt the spectacle diverts our gaze from those at the very tippy top who seem able to call every single shot in their direction.

Without a doubt though, the lackluster performance of the past 3 years, especially as matched against the soaring rhetoric and hope manipulation of a confused electorate in 2008, leaves a very bitter taste in the mouths of many. And while I predict no lack of enthusiasm from and for the "One Party" (despite the ritualized, televised and corporatized cannibalism underway at present), I suspect there will be far, far less action in this next dance. Certainly, I myself can hardly bear to listen to the music anymore.

RP

Retired Patriot said...

BTW.

Supreme Bloviet of counterrevolutionary obstreperism and deviationist stoogery

Absolutely Brilliant!

RP

Blotz said...

I think you should consider yourself lucky Drifty, The GG fans called us much worse things over at Slacktivist when Fred Clark had the temerity to disagree with Mr. Greenwald. Much more like Ron Paul drones than they would like to admit.

damaged goods said...

i'm sorry for being so obtuse, but please explain the difference between:

1) teh stupid who abused you four years ago despite your stating upfront that you would support clinton in the general if she won the nomination; and

2) your previous post ridiculing greenwald for stating upfront that while he discussed ron paul's candidacy he was not endorsing or expressing support for it?

for me this ends here -- and by this, i mean the back and forth over whether it's okay to bash greenwald or anyone else you care to. of course it's okay; it just seems misguided and pointless.

i'll still keep reading you, and agree with you the vast majority of the time, and enjoy your finely edged outrage and admire your capacity to fillet. i'll just hope that you mostly apply your expertise on the rump roasts that are far worthier targets for your skills. here's to a better than expected 2012.

blackdaug said...

As a fellow "regular, grubby carbon-based life form", I concur with your Islamohippyfacist observations, and I believe, already subscribe to your news letter / bulletin.
If only we could present alternative realities, in the form of History Channelesque documentaries, to those who think the current temp occupant of the big White House is merely a different side of the same coin.
For instance:
"President McCain addresses an anxious nation on our new "Pencil and fruit stand based Economy!"
....or
" President McCain's famous fireside chat: "Rocks: The "almost radioactive free" dietary supplement!"
or....
Judging Gore's Second Term: "Are peace and prosperity ruining our culture?"
Not as entertaining as "Swamp People", but slightly more thought provoking.

Tom Allen said...

"I'd like to keep Social Security and Medicare intact forever"

Then perhaps you shouldn't vote for someone who wants to negotiate it away in a Grand Bargain, and has pledged to do so repeatedly?

"I'd like developers and drillers to keep their fracking hands off of my national parks and forests."

See above.

"make sure no quick gigabuck artists can get away with poisoning my water, air, food, medicine and planet. "

See above. (example: EPA smog regulations)

"I'd like women to go right on owning their own bodies."

Oh, sorry, no Plan B for women. But you were saying?

You can keep making excuses for why Democrats have to go rightward, ever rightward, or you can take a principled stand and become, I don't know, a Socialist or something. And I can see already which choice you've made.

I mean, when the President of the US is secretly bombing other nations and interning people without trial -- and you defend him -- how are you not John Dean?

Fran / Blue Gal said...

One comment: Tom's right. We've got to stop pretending that the White House is MORE important than the Congress. It isn't. 50 State Strategy, and giving my fifteen dollars this year to progressive House challengers. Blue America has a list. If I do that RATHER than sneer at Obama I know I'm failing the revolution, but I doubt the sneering would be quite so loud if unemployment were at 4%. Hunger does that to all of us.

Also, PlanB isn't illegal, you just have to ask the GIRL behind the counter for it. I have to ask her for a LOT of things, including meds for my kids, every month. Many pharmacies put condoms behind the counter purely because they're the most shoplifted thing in the store. Santorum wants a world without contraception. There is more than a dime's worth of difference there. Politically, Obama absolutely cannot afford to die on the altar of abortion and plan B, and every single realistic analyst knows that. "The Abortion Pill President" will LOSE in the general election to a Republican. He made that decision based solely on poll numbers in Florida, bet.

Anonymous said...

"You can keep making excuses for why Democrats have to go rightward, ever rightward, (where? when?) or you can take a principled stand and ....."

ensure the elections of..Ronald Regan (twice), George Bush Senior, George Bush Jr.(twice)and ..Mitt Romney or Ron Paul, and guarantee the destruction of social security, medicare, the national parks, the middle class....

Rehctaw said...

Until they outlaw Freak Flag Flying under the auspices of homeland sekricy, I know you'll keep flying yours. I count on it.

Keep touchin' dem nerves until the squatters can't sit still. When the rabble emerges from the rubble, there'll be plenty of work to be done.

When it's asked who tried to avert the nightmare, your words will stand.

WV: mendede
indeedy!

Ebon Krieg said...

We do what any psychotic would do. Go to the polls, hold our noses and pull the lever for the not-GOP.
The two times (other than Carter) that the not-GOP won we got Clinton (Mr. FTA) and Obama (Mr. Keep the war-drones humming and I'll keep the Constitution burning) to be our saviors. This has not instilled a lot of confidence in me as my psychosis worsens with each pull of the lever. But, then again, I do expect a different outcome from my patterned behavior.

Anonymous said...

Waa, Waa, Waaaahh. I'm right and I know it, and it's so obvious to anyone with half a brain an' if you can't see it you must be a dinosaur Trotskyite or something.

Screw yew guys; Ah'm Goin' Heuum...

Gettin' so's you can dish it out but you can't take it no more, see?

alise said...

If the 2010 midterm elections taught us anything, it was that to stay home in protest or worse yet, vote Republican to express our disgust and disappointment, spells doom for our cause. That's how most of these deranged sociopaths got elected to Congress and now we're seeing the results. I agree with Blue Gal, we have to re-take the House and retain the Senate and the White House.

I've been pissed off at Obama for the last 3 years, and for cause, but seriously, would anyone really want to see Rick Santorum in the White House? The very thought gives me chills.

Zipperupus said...

Jesus, Drift. I have delurked after years of reading your work to try and spray some citronella in your comments.

You have offended the forces of nature! And now you are going to have your nits picked!

I want to say that I am enthusiastically voting for Obama in spite of his obvious flaws. The notion of "holding my nose" and being emopants is such a silly pose that it is a wonder that most hipster progressives haven't broken a leg tripping over their clown shoes.

We are living under the consequences of the passage of the Civil Rights Act. Full stop. The right appealed to all the disaffected whites using Jefferson Davis' ideology cloaked in coded language. The GOP invited the flying monkeys into their tent and now wonder why it looks a cross between a Klan rally and a Lemon Party.

President Obama, in spite of stuff that drives me batshit, has changed the rules of the game. His ascencion is perfectly timed for the long term demographic changes that are going to isolate the flying monkeys unless they can institute Pax Americana.

Long game. Long game.

Anonymous said...

What that dude said ^^^

steeve said...

You were for Obama over Hillary?? Sorry, that's just dumb. When presented with a choice between two conservadems, pick the one that isn't campaigning on being nice to republicans.

Anonymous said...

@Ebon Krieg. It could be argued that Bill Clinton was pushed to the right by the huge win of the republicans in the 94 midterms.

It seemed to me that in the two years preceeding that he did some good things as president. Raised taxes on the rich, cut taxes for the middle class, tried to implement healthcare reform and introduced the family and medical leave act. All fairly progressive causes.

After the midterms where the republicans gained such a huge majority it signalled to the president that the country didn't want a liberal presidency and it was a right wing nation. So he introduced right wing policies such as the repeal of Glass Steagal. Which has gotten us in such a fine mess.

I just don't know what he was supposed to think. The country signalled they want right wing policies so he might as well provide them. Within reason of course.

I think Obama was in a similar situation. His first two years was quite progressive but most of it with the exception of healthcare was blocked by republicans and their sooo democratic 60 vote senate rule.

The republicans gain a large majority in the house which essentially signalled to Obama that the public was not happy with his policies. As in the case of Clinton back in 94, Obama has to ask himself why the hell would I pursue a liberal agenda if the public does not support it?

blackdaug said...

Clinton didnt "introduce" the repeal of Glass Stegal. He signed off on it as part of an Omnibus spending bill that was being rammed through by Phil Grahmm in the midst of the "great blow job hunt".
A lot of dem congressman threw themselves on their swords to get those tax increases on the rich though as well.
Clinton like Obama didnt move to the right because the vast public signaled their disapproval of a liberal agenda...he did it because of the continuous loud and dirty trick filled opposition by his political opponents on the hill....so that he could get any part of his agenda though cesspool of right wing corporate backed opposition.

Anonymous said...

@Blackdog With all sincerity I apologise for saying that Clinton introduced the repeal of Glass-Steagal. That was wrong.

My problem is that he may have been able to stop it if he had a mandate from the electorate. Not necessarily in the form of his '96 win of 49.2% of the electorate but rather his congressional mandate. The president leads the party but can only do so much. If he doesn't have congressional support then he is effectively useless. With the exception of the veto, which he failed to use for Glass-Steagall.

My point is the public is to blame. In moments of great reform eg. Roosevelt and LBJ, a large congressional majority was required to pass these reforms. In the case of Clinton and Obama they only have the congress that the public provides them.

I remember in an interview with Jon Stewart, before the 2010 midterms, Obama saying please come out and support the dems us so we can continue the slow and hard progress that we are trying to achieve. What happens? The public almost overwhelmingly supports the republican fuckwits that got us into the mess in the first place.

So the public is to blame. If they wanted Obama to succeed in his liberal and reforming agenda they would give him the tools (ie. the congressional support) to do so. They didn't. So now he can only go with what the republicans (elected by the stupid public) give him.

I've heard your point often regarding the vast right wing conspiracy towards Clinton in the 90's and how right wing corporate interests were doing their best to screw up his agenda. At the end of the day this is still a democracy and the electorate, even though giving Clinton huge approval ratings, did not get rid of those right wing idiots in congress that were trying to destroy him.

Same shit is happening to Obama now. The american public is letting him down. He can only do so much

alise said...

@ anynomous: This is my point exactly. The midterm elections of 2010 is what lost us the House and weakened us in the Senate, due to the low voter turn-out of liberals and the massive voter turn-out of the right wing. That's how we got the laundry list of lunatics who now hold public office.

My main issues with Obama has been his willingness to bend over backwards to appease the Republicans, supposedly in the name of bi-partisanship and his failure to counter the avalanche of mis-information and out-and-out lies that the right-wing has been spewing since January 2009.

The failure to counter the mis-information and lies contributed in no small part to the "shellacking" of 2010. People who depend on the MSM for their information will believe what they hear and what they heard was a constant stream of right-wing propaganda, with virtually no push-back at all.

Obama's propensity for appeasement of the Republicans also angered and alienated his base. Anyone who knows anything about negotiating knows that when what you really want is a puppy, you go in asking for a pony, and negotiate down from there. Obama gave away everything before he even got to the negotiating table, and further angered his base by calling us "professional lefties" and telling we should just stop whining when
we voiced our legitimate concerns. Condescension never plays well.

However, the stakes are too high now to let these things matter anymore. I voted in 2010 and urged everyone I knew and many I didn't to vote Democratic in 2010 and 2012 is just as vital. Anyone who has any doubts about the existence of a vast right wing conspiracy should read "The Hunting of the President" by Gene Lyons. These people were after the Clintons since before he was governor of Arkansas and they most certainly have not gone away. If anything, they have learned more effective ways of sabotage and subterfuge.

blackdaug said...

I would point out that the rights gains of 2010 may also be a function of a much less telling yet hopeful bit of demographic trivia: The large turnout of young people who showed up to vote for Obama in 2008, did not vote in the midterms of 2010. They never do. Young voters for whatever reason do not turn out to vote in midterms....but they turned out in record numbers for 08.
After the last two years of complete asshatery by the right, perhaps the young will turn out for 2012 and push the house back over to the dems....and with the blue dogs out of the way, it is possible that Obama could end up with the calculus needed to actually get a progressive agenda through. ...Just sayin

Anonymous said...

@blackdogg
I would like to hope that the young people do get out and vote for Obama and the dems the way they did back in 2008. Unfortunately the 60 vote super majority it now takes to get anything passed in the senate will make sure that nothing changes.

Democracy in action!

Unless Obama is given that mandate from the public that I was so not very eloquently saying earlier we're gonna end up with the government this country deserves, a shit one.