Meanwhile, in local treachery…

(Given the situation with the Edwards campaign, this seems especially timely.)

Chicago is a political town in both the capital “P” and little “p” sense. “Who sent ya” is our unofficial motto, and so it was inevitable that we be blessed and cursed with a relative abundance of local programs about subject.

Sunday mornings before the national Mouse Circus airs, we have a lineup of local political news that during any given week will feature whatever is cookin’ locally. We also have an evening roundup of local events almost always served with a political course on the PBS affiliate.

So for example, Senator Obama has appeared on the local Sunday shows, as have candidates for Governor when the gubernatorial race was on. We just finished an embarrassment of a Cook County Board President race (Cook Country, for those who don’t know it, is Chicago and several suburbs. Cook is, I believe, the 2nd largest county in the nation with an annual budget of around $3 billion dollars and responsibility for a police force, prisons, hospitals and clinics and the parks among other things. By way of comparison, the 2007 budget for the entire state of Montana is a little over $1.4 billion. So it’s a big deal, and it’s run like a fucking banana republic.) and it played wide on these shows.

We’re having aldermanic and mayoral election in a few weeks, and although there will be no major power realignments in the City, those are getting a fair amount of air time too, election Chicago Aldermen.

We also have a creature of the late Sunday evening called “Beyond the Beltway”. It is basically a radio talk show with call-in guests, part of which is televised. It can be modestly entertaining and informative, but it’s also got a distinctly old-guys-in-sweaters/public-access/regional flavor that I don’t usually write about, and it trends more conservative than I like.

However last month it puked up a specific genre of wingnut crazy in a way which I found both particularly poisonous and particularly instructive, especially in light of the very public treachery that ambulatory insult to Christ -- William A. Donohue -- and his Konservative Knights of Katholicism are trying to get away with.

It is that particularly fanatical, malicious gibberish that Conservatives seem to come with these days right out of the box. Like some kind of Fucktard Firmware, there isn’t even any pretense of give-and-take anymore from those dotty homunculi that still cling to their fatally failed Preznit and their dreams of a White, Christian, post-Islamicide world.

A place where Fatherland Security finally gets those fucking teenagers off their lawn, and the dirty hippies have all been drafted, buzz-cut and sent off with a sack full of Lunchables on cardboard Hummers as cannon fodder in the Dubya’s Forever War.

No these days they just open their mouths and the most a-mazingly poisonous, unfiltered bile just comes rocketing out of their rotting hearts and rickety souls.

Such was the case on “Beyond the Beltway” on January 28th. And what was instructive is just how cartoonishly stereotypical the players were. How unapologetically absolutist and nuts the Conservative was. And what a completely ineffectual Alan Colmes-esque “rebuttal” the Lefty turned in.

That’s what’s nice about local media: by using third and fourth string pundits, they often wonderfully and accidentally distill issues down to their blunt constituent elements.

This is not the entire show, but this particular exchange (a rush transcript, but very close to verbatim. With emphasis added by me) is one of the clearest and most utterly contemptible demonstration to-date of exactly what the Sekrit GOP Iraqi exit strategy is:

Loudly blame the press for being traitorous and the Democrats who “want us to lose”.

The dramatis personae are:

Bruce DuMont – Moderator
Marty Geraghty - Conservative
James Wall – Liberal
Brian Boyer - TV Producer & Documentarian.

Geraghty:

“I think that we are now seeing the Democrats getting themselves into a position where, if ya didn’t know it before you know it now: They do not want success in Iraq. The last thing the Democrat…the…the organization…the powerful Democrats need is for the United States to achieve some form of victory in Iraq.

“Because if they do, just as they expect Bush’s war to end in disaster and it would be a great thing for them, if Bush’s war turns out to be a success, it’s a disaster for the Democrats as we now know they simply cannot afford to have that success occur.”

Geraghty, speaking of the people who gave Bush the Iraqi Study Group report:

“That generation of tired old men who got us into this mess in the first place.”

And any clear-eyed analysis of Iraq that doesn’t involve jumping down the GOP rabbit hole and covering their reckless, despicable Iraqi Ponsi Scheme by shoveling more men and women and treasure into the meatgrinder is Geraghty: describes as “…a way forward that guarantees the death of more American troops.”

Geraghty:

“When you start saying to the Iraqi people, if you work with the United States, you’re gonna lose, because they’re gonna pull out, those Iraqis – who might be inclined to work with us – they won’t do it…it…its…they know who the H’Mong are. They know what happened to people in Vietnam who cooperated with the United States. They went to “re-education camps”, if they were lucky they didn’t die.”

Geraghty:

“That’s what the Democrats in Congress are doing today. They are saying to those people “Don’t work with my country because my country is going to betray you.” And when they [Democrats] say that, they make it a self-fulfilling prophecy, which is what they want. Because that is what they see as a route to victory in 2008.”

Wall (weakly):

“…You seem to assume there is some sort of end-goal of ‘Victory’ against one side or the other, or both sides of a civil war. There is no victory.”

(Wall then shakes head sadly, like a librarian confronted by surly young toughs who won’t shush)

Boyer:

What they are referring to is the tragic buildup of American troops in Vietnam…And while our military did OK there, there was never a chance of a Pax Americana in Vietnam. And the fear is, the United States will repeat that same, stupid tragedy.

But what Marty is saying is absolutely true: when the American troops pulled out, there was absolute slaughter. And the situation in international relations is the same as going into an antique shop: You break it, you own it.

driftglass: I agree. Using lies and fearmongering and a propaganda campaign that would have made Joseph Goebbels weep with envy, the Republican Party – spearheaded by Dick Cheney and George Bush – have ruined Iraq. They absolutely own that failure.

But anyone of honor or value has long been centrifuged out of Jerry Falwell’s Clown Car, leaving behind a viscous heap of cowards, traitors, morons and moochers who have once again created a bloody mess that Democrats must now staunch and clean up as best we can. What we absolutely do not need is more council from the same liars and lunatic that drove Iraq off the cliff in the first place.

Dumont asks Wall (The Democrat):

What is the temperature inside the Democratic Party?

Wall:

That is hard to measure, but most Democrats are closer to John Edwards’ position. It was a futile effort. It was a mistake. It was a defeat. It is a loss. Get out. And do what you can to protect people behind you, especially your own troops and people over there that worked with us.

But Dumont then asks Geraghty (The Republican) a very different question:

“I don’t know how many Democrats you hang out with, but what is your sense of the mood of the people… The American people clear said they wanted some change…You could argue that they wanted thing to drastically change. In the wake of that for the President to add troops – even he thinks its his policy and he thinks it’s the way out. The end’s to a greater means. What is your sense of the tone of the American people right now. How intense are they?”

Notice the sleight of hand.

The world, according to Dumont’s construction, is divided into ‘Democrats’ which he will ask the Liberal about, and ‘the American people’, which he will ask the Conservative about, and then lean back and give the house nutjob all the unchecked latitude in the world to warp that question into a lying, broadside attack on Democrats.

Geraghty:

I think they’re very worried. I think that they don’t support the President in what he is doing. I think he says I know more about this than they do. They have been misled by a media that has been against me from the start.

They have been misled by a Party that wants us to lose in Vietnam…uh…um…in Iraq.

Dumont:

But the Democrats say they were misled by the President.

Again, Dumont dishonestly slants the discussion. The Liberal is asked to opine about Democrats and then the Conservative is asked to opine about… Democrats.

And now listen to the raw sewage this lumpen prick just firehoses into the air.

Geraghty:

But they lie about that. You know we don’t want to get into that, but basically every intelligence agency in the world agreed – wrongly as it turned out -- all of these things about Saddam Hussien. But let’s get back to the future.

The Democrats and the media have created a situation where the President is fighting against a rising tide and he needs success in Washington…in…in…Iraq. And if he gets it…if it should work…if Bush’s War turns into Bush’s Victory, it’ll be the death of the Democrats who said ‘We’ve gotta lose.” What Jim just said. ‘It’s a defeat.’

The Democrats have already announced…you know, interestingly enough, in 1864…

Dumont:

I want to make sure I’m getting the intensity of your tone. Are you suggesting that Democrats are cheering for a loss in Iraq?

Geraghty:

Absolutely. They need it. If there is no loss – if Jim is wrong, and its not a defeat – then the Democrats are electorally crushed in 2008.

It’s…it’s…horrible to say but it’s time to bell that cat because the cat’s there.

Wall the Democrat peers over his glasses and in his best aggrieved librarian tone, says:

“It is horrible, because you are implying that the Democrats are looking forward to another 1,000 deaths over the next two years

.

Geraghty:

I’m asserting that. I’m not implying that.

Wall:

Well, you’re saying that.

Geraghty:

If you took that as a mere implication [you’re wrong.]

Wall:

Well, I don’t think you really want to say that about the Democratic leadership. I know they don’t want to see another [1,000 deaths].

Geraghty:

How do you know that? What are they doing to make you think that?

driftglass: And in that moment, Wall loses his sac entirely. Notice, kids, what Geraghty has done. Made a reprehensible and entirely fabricated imputation about the motives of people he obviously hates and then demands that Wall disprove it.

Have Democrats stopped beating their wives yet?

The proper response is to stand up and call Geraghty a fascist cocksucker to his face and then read him the riot act.

Does Wall do that?

Of course not.

Wall:

Well I grant you they’ve done a poor job, but I don’t think I know any of them that would eagerly and happily vote to see more people die…

Geraghty:

Tell me this. If you think that is this scenario I am talking about – Victory in Iraq – can the Democrats hope to win an election in 2008? If there is a HUGE success for Bush and his plan…

driftglass: And if Jesus returns leading a cavalry of Viking on unicorns all carrying signs that say “Vote Republican”, don’t you think then the Democrats would lose? And isn’t that why Democracts are objectively anti-unicorn, anti-Jesus, anti-Viking and pro-terrorist?!

Wall (seeming to be slowly awakening from his stupor):

The problem I’m having with your argument is that I can’t imagine what you mean by “success”.

And of course what happens once the Democrat finally finds some remnant of nads and starts pushing back?

Dumont (Moderator):

Let…let…let…let me…let me put it another way. If you had a situation where the President moves forward. 22,000 troops go into Baghdad. Things have subsided, and if we’re not totally out, the level of violence decreases. And life in Iraq becomes less violent. Let’s say that. We’re sort of redefining what success is.

And then we drift back into the politics of “victory” and what Mr. Wall has failed yet again to do and see is that this is not a fucking debate.

In debate there are two sides and a judge. Each team takes one position on a proposition. They make their best case – pro or con – based on evidence, logic, and rhetorical skill. Then the judge rules.

That’s a debate.

But this thing we are having with the Right?

This Donahue thing?

This Malkin thing?

This Coulter/ Hannity/ Limbaugh/ Savage/ Brooks/ Gingrich/ DeLay/ Cheney/ Bush/ Kristol/ Krauthammer/ Hume/ Wallace/ Halperin/ D’Souza/ O’Reilly thing?

This Geraghty thing we are having?

This is not a debate.

Our adversary’s motives are despicable or perverse or simply insane. Based on twenty years’ of overwhelming evidence, they clearly feel no compunction about lying. About slandering. About cheating. And there is clearly no penalty when they lie and cheat and slander.

Because their ideology is not a lamp unto the world or a road winding towards greater enlightenment and compassion. Their ideology is a Beast God they worship, and in it’s service all things are permitted.

As a Conservative, Geraghty sat there and slime and lied and shrugged off the ocean of blood on his hands without batting an eye.

As a Conservative, Geraghty clearly felt unfettered by facts or conscience, because it was all done in service to his smutty dogma, and because against the Dirty Hippy all excesses are allowed.

As a Conservative, Geraghty was allowed to do this because there was no price exacted.

The “moderater” sat there with his dick in his hand while Geraghty called Democrats traitors.

The “Liberal” sat there Brodering and tut-tutting and said “I don’t thing you really mean that” while Geraghty methodically blamed Evil Media and Evil Democrats for the war His President lied us into and His Party has clusterfucked beyond repair.

Dumont and Wall – both weak, tired old men -- failed not only the test of public duty but the test personal integrity by continuing to pretend this was a debate on the square long after Geraghty made abundantly clear it was not.

It was combat. And all the fire was coming from the Right.

Now some fine day when all the Bill Donohues and to Bill Kristols to Marty Geraghtys are cast down and laughed out of the GOP, we can go back to the gentle rules of forensics, but as long as lumpen pricks like these are allowed to spread their despicable lies on the air, we can no longer tolerate leaders and spokespeople who do little more than roll up and beg for civility and compromise with people who are calling their mothers whores and kicking their teeth out.

Unfortunately the only “solution” to the likes of Marty Geraghty is, the minute they start running their dime-store McCarthy patter, to rhetorically reach into their chests and rip out their hearts.

You oratorically gouge out their eyes and skull fuck them.

What you never do is argue on their terms. You do not, as Gilly said, let lunatics set the agenda for Democrats:

“People are just fucking sick of it. Why are you beholden to crazy people. They aren't Dems, and the reek of cowardice comes off you when you bend to this bullshit.”

Instead you turn to Dumont and demand to know what his mental or moral defect is that he lets lying fascists on his show?

You demand to know why he thinks the preening imbeciles who destroyed our country’s good name, bankrupted our treasury and have let 3,100 Americans die behind their lies should be allowed to say one fucking word about anything.

You say – louder and louder and over and over – that if George W. Bush were the paid agent of a foreign power he could not have done more long-term damage to this nation than he has done. That at this late date, those who still stand with him and cheer him on are clearly either retarded or insane or for some reason just get off on seeing soldier die.

That our foreign policy has become nothing more or less than the cowards and sociopaths who run the GOP making one wild, reckless gamble after another with other people’s lives.

That when their bloody wagers don’t pay off they insist on doubling down – again, and again, and again – with other people’s money and children. And now – like every stone, vicious drunk I have ever met -- these cornered rats have the fucking nerve to say that if we don’t let them continue to shoot drunken craps with our blood and treasure forever that somehow we are to blame for their catastrophe.

Republicans have become the political equivalent of the Soviets of the 21st century: a decadent and failed anti-democratic ideology clinging to power by the drastic magnification and manipulation of fear of external and internal enemies, brute force and lies. And whose increasingly unhinged ravings only make “sense” to fellow Kool Aid chugging inhabitants of their hermetically sealed ideological Bell Jar.

One good push and down they’ll go, but finding, funding and keeping those who can do the pushing is now the job at hand.

In the past, Steve Gilliard has despaired of the Left’s spotty and miserly funding of its own intellectual infrastructure when compared to the Right. He has also called, in effect, for a new media which favors the rigorous pursuit of Truth over an absurd doctrine of artificial balance and a castrating objectivity.

I would go further and say we need to fund and staff Speaker’s Bureaus along exactly the same lines and using the same principles Civil Rights movement employed when training their organizers and foot soldiers for what to expect and how to cope when in hostile territory.

Because we are very definitely in the enemy's back yard these days, and while our message is good and getting better, our messengers at the national, state and local levels need one helluva lot of work.