Monday, December 31, 2018

Best of 2018?


I dunno.  None of them are going to win a Sidney Award -- certainly not the rare Sidney Doble -- but a lot of people read 'em and passed 'em around like dirty postcards, so I guess that's something...

  1. The Candidate Who Has Fallen Under the Weight of Her Stone
  2. Never Turn Your Back on a Never Trumper
  3. The Madness of Mercy
  4. This Week on "Tone Cop!": Bret Stephens
  5. Magic Ruralism (tm)
  6. Today In Both Sides Do It: Advice From The New York Times On The Proper Use Of "Fuck"

This was the year I launched a new publication which, if I could just keep the smirk off my face and play it straight, bids fair to make me rich as Croesus:



This was the year when Mr. Glenn Greenwald took his mad fighting skillz to his new home at Fox News --


-- while most of his Spleenwald Horde and his celebrity hangers-on (who had spent years making quite merry slagging the shit out of Landru critics like me for not being Of The Body) suddenly got reeeal quiet.


And this year Mr. David Brooks completely shook off his brief, post-2016 election flirtation with introspection and came roaring back with columns of such pure, Brooksian Pecksniffery that they will surely be studied by Historians of Tomorrow:

Happy 2019 everyone!


Behold, a Tip Jar!

Sunday, December 30, 2018

Both Siderism Remains The Last Refuge...

Image result for erick erickson


...of the worst people in America.
As we know from the Kavanaugh witch trials, Mr. Erickson likes to say horrid things on Twitter and then scrub them when they become inconvenient.  So here, future generations, is the screen shot:



And as we know from the plain text reading of modern political history, Republican Christopaths like Erick Erickson also always have permanent reserved seating at the national media table and you do not.




Behold, a Tip Jar!

Friday, December 28, 2018

Professional Left Podcast #473


“There are no right answers to wrong questions."
-- Ursula K. Le Guin, writer

Don't forget to visit our new website -- http://www.proleftpod.com -- for all of the sweet bells and whistles:  there are links to donate to our podcast work at that site, as well as links to our swingin' Zazzle merch store,  our respective blogs, Twitter, Facebook, Kittehs! and much more. Many thanks once again to @theologop for building it all for us!


Links:

The Professional Left is brought to you by our wholly imaginary "sponsors" and real listeners like you!




Thursday, December 27, 2018

The 2018 Jon Swift Roundup Is Here!

Image result for fireworks gif


Many thanks to Batocchio who does yeoman's work every year putting together the best of the Small Blogs as chosen by the bloggers themselves.  Great, incisive, funny, touching reads await you!  A cool drink in the desert of arid internet stupid to slake your thirst.  

What are you still doing here?


Glenn Greenwald Asks: Have You Stopped Beating Your Jewish Mother Yet?


I have no interest in traversing the same territory that got me dis-invited from the Communion of Liberal Saints so long ago, except to say that Bolshie Freedom Troll Glenn Greenwald really has only one trick in his bag.  Specifically, If you disagree with him, you are obviously arguing in bad faith, either because you're a drooling DLC Hoplite (the "Charlie" referenced here is Brother Charlie Pierce) --
-- or you're a Sekrit Anti-Semite (whether you know it or not!)

In this brief interlude between the end of unified Republican rule and the beginning of the bare-knuckle barroom brawl that 2019 is shaping up to be, the same "Obama was worse than Boosh!" goofs with deep pockets and large megaphones who worked so hard to kneecap the Clinton campaign because something something "K'rupt Duopoly!" something something "Disrupt!" are regrouping to try to set fire to anything on the Left that falls short of the pure, proletariat uprising of their dreams.

This time around I'll not be wasting my time and talent writing 100 posts that will get me slagged by my so-called allies and that, 4-5 years later, will turn out to have been absolutely correct.

Instead I will patiently await for Mr. Greenwald's next appearance on Fox News where I'm sure The Truth will be made so clear that even a jackbooted Obot like me will not fail to see the light.



Behold, a Tip Jar!

Friday, December 21, 2018

Professional Left Podcast #472


“Chaos is a friend of mine."
-- Bob Dylan

Don't forget to visit our new website -- http://www.proleftpod.com -- for all of the sweet bells and whistles:  there are links to donate to our podcast work at that site, as well as links to our swingin' Zazzle merch store,  our respective blogs, Twitter, Facebook, Kittehs! and much more. Many thanks once again to @theologop for building it all for us!


Links:


The Professional Left is brought to you by our wholly imaginary "sponsors" and real listeners like you!




David Brooks Discovers The Center! Again!




From today's New York Times:
A New Center Being Born
This time, the Mr. Brook's ideal "Center" appears to be about 20 degrees to the Left of Barack Obama, and for people who live on the outside of the Walled Garden of Elite Drivel wherein Mr. Brooks dwells, this might seem very confusing.

You see, like the physics behind time slowing down and mass increasing as you approach the speed of light, the way Mr. Brooks' "Center" has continuously skittered all over the political landscape over the past 20 years seems to defy common sense and observable reality.   After all, for decades Mr. Brooks' Republican Party has been plunging unabated through ever more grotesque depths of depravity and madness, while the Democrats have tried in every way imaginable to contain, constrain, compromise and otherwise cool their tiny, fevered, racist brains.

So how (one may reasonably ask) is it still possible, for Mr. Brooks' "Center" to continue wildly zigging and zagging like a terrified rabbit trying to avoid becoming  lunch?

Because, kids, Mr. Brooks' "Center" is magic!   Hell, it's the fucking Philosopher's Stone!

Think about it.

It is only through his unswerving allegiance to a wholly imaginary "Center" that Mr. Brooks has managed to turn the dross of his shitty prose into New York Times paycheck gold.   We know this because, for the past 15 years, issuing dire warnings about The Extremes on Both Sides and singing the praises of the imaginary Center is literally the only column he writes.

But there is no Center, which is why, like Zeno's Paradox of the Arrow, Mr. Brooks' "Center" never arrives anywhere.  Why it has never been pegged to a set of policies one could debate or even a loose set of principles that one could describe without sounding like an idiot.  Instead, as your humble scrivener has pointed out many, many times, Mr. Brooks' "Center" has always been fraud.  As Mr. Brooks demonstrates in every single fucking column he has ever written including the turd he squeezed out today --
Many fly off to extremes, to the Donald Trump right or the Bernie Sanders left. Most of the rest of us feel adrift, gloomy and politically homeless.
-- his "Center" is merely a mathematical function.

Mr. Brooks' work product is not in any real sense "opinions" wrestled with and committed to paper by a human being.  They are the stale iterations of a mindless algorithm which is constantly seeking to return to its factory default settings even as the real world constantly knocks it off balance.  It is all ridiculously easy to see once you bother to start looking for it.  For example, during the 2016 primaries, Mr. Brooks Both Siderist sermonettes were all about "Trump and Sanders":
Hillary, for you the whirlwind is Bernie Sanders. For the rest of you it’s Donald Trump...

Trump has no actual policies and Sanders has little chance of getting his passed.

And yet the supporters don’t care. Sanders and Trump...

...the Trump and Sanders phenomena.

In debates Sanders is uninhibited by the constraints of reality, so his answers are always bolder. Trump speaks from the id, not from any policy paper, so his answers are always more vivid.

Many Americans feel like they are the victims of a slow-moving natural disaster. Sanders and Trump...

I’d love to see one of you counter the Trump and Sanders emotional tones with a bold shift in psychology...

Let Trump and Sanders shout, harangue and lecture...

Let them [Trump and Sanders] deliver long, repetitive and uninterrupted lectures...

Let them [Trump and Sanders] stand angry and solitary. You run as part of a team, a band of brothers...

Let them [Trump and Sanders] assert that all our problems can be solved if other people sacrifice...

Let them [Trump and Sanders] emphasize the cold relations of business (Trump) or of the state (Sanders)...

Let them [Trump and Sanders] preach pessimism...

Sanders and Trump have adopted emotional tones that are going to offend and exhaust people over time.
And once we moved to from the primary to the general election, the Brooks Both Siderist algorithm simply swapped out "Bernie Sanders" and swapped in "Hillary Clinton":
The two main candidates, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, are remarkably distrustful...

They have set the modern standards for withholding information — his not releasing tax and health records, her not holding regular news conferences or quickly disclosing her pneumonia diagnosis...

Both have a problem with spontaneous, reciprocal communication with a hint of vulnerability...

Both ultimately hew to a distrustful, stark, combative, zero-sum view of life...

Trump’s convention speech was the perfect embodiment of the politics of distrust...

Clinton’s “Basket of Deplorables” riff comes from the same spiritual place...
And almost exactly one year ago, we find Mr. Brooks has long since swapped out "Hillary Clinton" and swapped Bernie Sanders back in, along with "angry Sanders socialists and social justice warriors", "left-wing radicals" and "Saul Alinsky":
Both the Trumpian populists and the social justice warriors are more intent on denouncing the people they hate than on addressing the concrete problems before them...
(For more see "David Brooks: Both Siderism Is a Farce that Gives Us Meaning".)

This constant, rightward-moving imaginary midpoint between the fiction Jets on the Left and the very real Sharks on the Right, happens so fast that it frequently glitches the David Brooks Algorithm.  For example, even when Mr. Brooks gets from a Democratic president exactly what he has asked for, he is reduced to simply lying to pretends it isn't happening so that he can go right making a fortune bitching about the Extremes on Both Sides.  This is a pathology which a tiny, hardy band of Brooksologists (including your's truly) wrote about extensively during the Age of Obama, and which all the usual Beltway media suspects completely ignored because it conflicted with their mad dash to canonize Mr. Brooks as the Sage of the Acela Corridor.  For the memory or morally-impaired, here is a snippet from Jonathan Chait in 2013:
David Brooks Now Totally Pathological

Moderate Republicanism is a tendency that increasingly defies ideological analysis and instead requires psychological analysis. The psychological mechanism is fairly obvious. The radicalization of the GOP has placed unbearable strain on those few moderates torn between their positions and their attachment to party. Many moderate conservatives have simply broken off from the party, at least in its current incarnation, and are hoping or working to build a sane alternative. Those who remain must escape into progressively more baroque fantasies.

The prevalent expression of this psychological pain is the belief that President Obama is largely or entirely responsible for Republican extremism. It’s a bizarre but understandable way to reconcile conflicting emotions — somewhat akin to blaming your husband’s infidelity entirely on his mistress. In this case, moderate Republicans believe that Obama’s tactic of taking sensible positions that moderate Republicans agree with is cruel and unfair, because it exposes the extremism that dominates the party, not to mention the powerlessness of the moderates within it. Michael Gerson recently expressed this bizarre view, and the pathology is also on vivid display in David Brooks’s column today...
Yes, that's both Mr. Brooks and former George W. Bush chief speechwriter, senior Republican policy adviser and reliable Beltway Republican stalactite, Michael Gerson, each of whom have gone from a lucrative career penning op-ed columns excoriating Barack Obama for being so fucking calm and reasonable that he exposed what a toxic, racist shitpile their Republican Party had become...

...to a lucrative career penning op-ed columns looking with alarm at the toxic, racist shitpile their Republican Party has become and wondering very loudly why someone doesn't do something about it!

Proving once again, as Mark Twain said, "The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right."

And so today, as a dog returns to its vomit, Mr. Brooks returns to the same --
A Second G.O.P.
By DAVID BROOKS
January 28, 2013
-- Whig Fan Fiction --
The Conservative FutureBy DAVID BROOKS
November 19, 2012
-- he has been peddling to rich idiots --
Party No. 3
By DAVID BROOKS
August 10, 2006
-- for decades:
How to reinvent the G.O.P.
By DAVID BROOKS
AUG. 29, 2004

This time, the political spectrum will be magically upended in exactly the way Mr. Brooks approves by an outfit called the Niskanen Center, about which I have already written because it was 100% inevitable that David Brooks would be latching onto their Grand Plan for a !New!Republican!Party! and riding it for all he's worth.  (See "The Little Red Hen Institute for Libertarian Futurism".)

Boswood sums it up the absurdity of Mr. Brooks' new Centrist man-crush here:


Also, as I mentioned here, both the Niskanen Center and Mr. Brooks are conspicuously silent about what exactly they plan to do about the fifty-million-strong Republican zombie horde that Mr. Brooks' party spent the last 40 years carefully engineering.  A zombie horde which has been programmed to stomp the shit out of anything they are told to attack by anyone with a big enough megaphone and who knows the proper code words.

I suspect that, as always, men like Mr. Brooks plan to stay safely within their walled gardens, enjoying the fruits of wingnut welfare and scolding us dirty Libtards for not being more humble and civil as we do the grueling and thankless work of undoing the mess they have made of our country.

Then and only then, once the heavy lifting is done, they will emerge from their well-appointed panic rooms to try to steal from us by fraud and flummery a victory we will have won by hard work and sacrifice. 

Well fuck that.



Behold, a Tip Jar!


Wednesday, December 19, 2018

Giuliani's Next Lie


Letter of intent?

I never said letter of intent.

I said sweater of intent.   Donald Trump never signed a sweater of intent.

And he never did!

 You losers need to get your facts straight!

Behold, a Tip Jar!

Tuesday, December 18, 2018

The Little Red Hen Institute for Libertarian Futurism


For those of you who were raised in a cupboard under the stairs at number four Privet Drive and never heard the fable of the Little Red Hen, it's pretty simple.

Once upon a time there was a demon chicken.  A Transylvanian Naked Neck hen named Hellspawn who would slip into the houses of naughty children at night and lay the Egg of Moderate Remorse...

Nope.  Wrong one.

Here we go.

The Little Red Hen finds a grain of wheat and asks her fellow barnyard critters to help her turn it into bread, but they all tell her to go pound sand.   So she goes it alone.  At every step along the way -- planting, watering, harvesting, milling, etc. -- she asks for help, and they always refuse.  Finally, once the bread is baked and ready, she asks who will help her eat it. This time, all the slackers volunteer, but she tells them to fuck off, dumps her shitty husband (who hadn't done a damn thing all this time either), sells the bread and her bread-making LLC to a high-end restaurant chain for a small fortune, and splits for the Bahamas with her lover and her cash.

The end.

(Also if you would like to check out my eerily prescient political version of this story from 13 years ago you can find it here "Little Red State Fundy".)

So what (you shrewdly ask) does that have to with anything?

Good question.

See, these days, it seem like every Right-leaning think tank and future planning consortium and Very Serious public intellectual and Never Trump book peddler and professional haver-of-opinions has a whole whiteboard full of ideas about what sort of !New!And!Improved! Republican Party should rise up and occupy the political vacuum...

...which will be created once someone else does the hard and thankless work of demolishing the GOP and burying it at the crossroads with a Whip Inflation Now button through its heart. 

For example, Jonathan Chait seems very excited (for reasons which elude me) --
I Have Seen the Future of a Republican Party That Is No Longer Insane
-- about this outfit:
...the Niskanen Center, a libertarian-leaning Washington think tank, held a conference on the future of the Republican Party, called “Starting Over: The Center-Right After Trump.” 
Because all by themselves and with an annual budget of a scant $2M they have come up with a plan for the future of the Republican Party which I am sure sounds edgy and groundbreaking to the big thinkers on the Right...

...but which we on the Left would refer to more colloquially as "The Barack Obama/Hillary Clinton Center-Left wing of the Democratic Party".

And that's the first problem -- the fact that pretty much all of the Niskanen Center's revolutionary think-tanked policies already have a longstanding ideological home inside the Democratic Party.  Now if the Niskanen Center wants to spend their time and energy creating a New Republican Party which would exist to endorse 90% of the Democratic Party platform, well that'd be just great.

I wish all 17 members of this bold, new Republican Party all the luck in the world.

Because there is a second problem.  The big problem. The  "Trump is the Party and the Party is Trump" problem.  As Mr. Chait points out:
The pathological character of the Republican Party is the most important problem in American politics. It has taken decades to develop to its current deformed state, and will not be solved quickly. There is no way to imagine the current incarnation of the GOP getting to the place Niskanen envisions any time soon...

That distant point probably lies years, even decades, away. It can only happen after today’s Republican Party is destroyed, rendered incapable of wielding power at the national level, and its governing philosophy discredited completely. The Niskanen Center is the one institution planning for what can follow after the cleansing fire.
Jesus Hanging Chad Christ, Jonathan, everybody and their cousin has a whole sock drawer full of great big wonderful ideas for what to do after VR Day.  After the Republican Party is "destroyed".  After the "cleansing fire".

But the Niskanen Center (and every other clutch of Never Trump Big Thinkers who carry themselves as though they are the government-in-waiting) is conspicuously vague about who exactly they suppose will be doing the dirty, grueling work of actually demolishing the GOP and disposing of all the toxic waste they will leave in their wake.  And doing it while fighting a thankless, shitty uphill battle every inch of the way against the massive, well-financed, rear-guard action of every Republican elected official, every Conservative media outfit, the Never Trump Republicans. the entire Beltway media and anyone else who has a vested interest in not opening the ball on the decades-deep roots of the problem and allocating blame accordingly.

In other words, who exactly is supposed to grow the wheat and bake the bread which the Niskanen Center plans to slice up and serve as up toast points at their future fundraisers?

During my years years working in technology and public policy in the public and private sectors, I saw this sort of thing happen all the time.  I refer to it as the "11 quarterbacks and no wide receivers" syndrome.  It happens when C-class executives identify an imminent and potentially catastrophic mission-critical problem than is either too politically risky for them to tackle, or that none of them has the imagination or tenacity cope with.

Usually the imminent and potentially catastrophic mission-critical problem was the result of not fucking listening to people who knew better and were sounding the alarm back when it was a relatively minor problem that could have been dealt with fairly easily.

Inevitably, the people who ignored the situation until it became and imminent and potentially catastrophic mission-critical problem would end up redefining it as an "IT issue" (Translation: A "smart guy" problem) and dumping it on my desk.

Well the imminent and potentially catastrophic mission-critical problem with the GOP is not a portfolio of policies and principles that it might be theoretically possible to untangle and debate rationally.  Nor is it a vampire army where, if you slay the Vampire King, all of his minions fall to dust.  As I have written a thousand times, the Republican Party as it exists out here in the real world is composed of tens of millions of infinitely reprogrammable meatbags whose "principles" can be flipped on and off like a light switch by anyone with a big enough megaphone who knows the right code words.

A base which can be told one thing on Monday and swear by it, told the exact opposite on Tuesday and swear by that too, all while also swearing they never believed otherwise.

A base which would fling itself en masse into a live volcano if Sean Hannity told them it was safe to do so.  A base which, with their dying breath, would then blame brown people and Libtards because the lava burns.

This did not happen by accident.

This was the end-product of a calculated, massively well-funded, multi-generation Republican project to create a party base that was just exactly this rage-drunk, paranoid, racist, ignorant and malleable.  Not a vampire army, but a zombie horde, programmed to believe that anyone to the Left of Jerome Corsi is a godless, America-hating monster, that the entire mainstream media is vast commie conspiracy arrayed against them, and that any whiff of compromise on any issue is treason.

A zombie horde programmed to go wherever Fox News and Hate Radio points them.  A zombie horde which will keep coming and coming and coming for you no matter how many facts you hit them with until actuarial inevitability catches up with them and, one by one, they slouch off their unquiet graves.

Well this is not Paths of Glory, the GOP is not the Anthill and we on the Left are not going to be cannon fodder in some REMF Libertarian think tank's utopian fantasies. 

You want to shape the world to come?

Great.

Then get off your asses and into the trenches with the only people who have already been fighting this Long War for decades.

Us damn, dirty Liberals.

Fighting with little or no help from anyone.  Fighting against ridiculous odds.  Fighting as pariahs whose opinions no one wanted to hear.  Fighting in the face of the unified derision of the entire media establishment.


Because this time when we win -- and we will -- as the victors, we will dictate the contours of the postwar world.

And we have no intention of playing the piccolo in someone else's parade.


Behold, a Tip Jar!

Monday, December 17, 2018

David Brooks: Disruption for Thee but Not for Me

QUEENBOBO_SM


The New York Times spends a tidy sum every year on the maintenance and upkeep of a great, gassy, incredibly fragile Republican dirigible called David Brooks.  Mr. Brooks' job at the Times is to glide ponderously above the messy fears and traumas of actual humans being roasted on the spit the Republican policies and dispersing blame for those policies onto "Both Sides".  They pay him to be "detached" --
But the detached writer wants to be a few steps away from the partisans. She is progressive but not Democratic, conservative but not Republican. She fears the team mentality will blinker her views. She wants to remain mentally independent because she sees politics as a competition between partial truths, and she wants the liberty to find the proper balance between them, issue by issue.
-- as he hectors the hoi polloi on the importance of being humble and never taking any side of any issue.

So when Mr. Brooks abruptly brought his mighty Dirigible of Detachment in for an emergency landing during the middle of his year-end vacation in order to dash off an unscheduled Sunday New York Times column about !Monsters! and !Murder!...well something damn-near apocalyptic must have happened.  And not just "poor people" apocalyptic like Republicans throwing children into cages, or Republicans putting the hammer to health care for millions of Americans, or Republicans trying to deregulate the Earth into an uninhabitable hellscape, or even Republicans nominating and electing a treasonous, racist lunatic.

No this would have to be really apocalyptic.  "Acela Corridor" apocalyptic.  "Capitalism hanging its ass over David Brooks' privacy fence and taking a shit in his pool" apocalyptic.

And it was.
Who Killed The Weekly Standard?
Suddenly, one of capitalism's staunchest defenders and greatest beneficiaries of unearned privilege and undeserved wealth didn't like actual capitalists very much at all.
I’ve only been around Phil Anschutz a few times. My impressions on those occasions was that he was a run-of-the-mill arrogant billionaire. He was used to people courting him and he addressed them condescendingly from the lofty height of his own wealth.

I’ve never met Ryan McKibben, who runs part of Anschutz’s media group. But stories about him have circulated around Washington over the years. The stories suggest that he is an ordinary corporate bureaucrat — with all the petty vanities and the lack of interest in ideas that go with the type.
Suddenly, Mr. Let's Not Judge had some very definite opinions about the sincerity of other people's Christianity:
And Anschutz, being a professing Christian, decided to close the magazine at the height of the Christmas season, and so cause maximum pain to his former employees and their families.
Suddenly it wasn't the "creative destruction" wrought by rational actors making whatever decision they choose to with the company they own because capitalism is glorious but mess (which has been the generic sympathy card which tens of millions of Americans have been handed by men like David Brooks over the years as heroes of the free market hollowed out the American middle class.)

When the loot-and-scoot vultures finally came for David Brooks' wingnut welfare whelping box, suddenly it was straight-up murder, I tells ya!   Murder most foul!
This week, Anschutz and McKibben murdered The Weekly Standard, the conservative opinion magazine that Anschutz owned. They didn’t merely close it because it was losing money. They seemed to have murdered it out of greed and vengeance.
Linger on this sentence for a moment.  "They didn’t merely close it because it was losing money."

I have a strong suspicion that it is precisely because so many of The Weekly Standard's eulogists have apparently never held a real job in the real world, that the fact that TWS consistently lost money seems so weirdly irrelevant to their indignation.  A trivial matter, really.  Somebody else's problem (from Commentary magazine):
To be sure, it has never made money. Magazines like it never make money. But its circulation has always been extraordinarily healthy in opinion-journal terms. And within the giant corporations run by the wealthy men who started the Standard and then bought it—Rupert Murdoch and then Anschutz—its annual losses were a rounding error, akin to the budget for the catering on one of their blockbuster movie productions...
This is a direct glimpse into the wingnut welfare mindset that we poor peasants outside of Prince Prospero's castle very rarely get.   The arrogance of Conservative men (and they are mostly men) who came to believe that it was in the natural order of things that wealth and privilege and influence should flow to them -- a natural order for which someone else should pick up the tab in perpetuity.

The corporate culture Mr. Brooks describes at the magazine Rupert Murdoch's money propped up sounds delightful for those we were inside the tent pissing out.

It probably was.  I wouldn't know.  I never wrote for The Weekly Standard.

I was, however, frequently written about by The Weekly Standard.

Not me personally, of course.  Because while I have it on excellent authority that several professional Conservative havers-of-opinions (and more than a few professional Liberal havers-of-opinions) are quite aware of my work, as a Liberal blogger sans respectable byline, I officially do not exist.  But boy-howdy did Mr. David Brooks have some very firm opinions about Liberals just like me back in his TWS days, especially once the magazine had lashed itself to the administration of George W. Bush.

Back in those days, I was a "brainless, self-destructive" member of "The New Stupid Party" because I was concerned that massive Bush tax cuts would piss away the budget surplus which the Clinton Administration has finally accumulated after digging us out of the massive deficits which Mr. Brooks' party had created.

Because, according to Mr. Brooks, obviously the only problem with the Bush tax cuts is that the were too small!

I was just a stupid Pelosi Democrat who was wandering stupidly around stupid Paul Krugman-land.
The Pelosi Democrats  Are they going to become the stupid party?  
ARE THE DEMOCRATS about to go insane? Are they about to decide that the reason they lost the 2002 election is that they didn't say what they really believe? Are they about to go into Paul Krugman-land, lambasting tax cuts, savaging Bush as a tool of the corporate bosses? Are they about to go off on a jag that will ensure them permanent minority status in every state from North Carolina to Arizona?
Along with all Liberals and "the media" I was clearly "deranged":
What on earth has gotten into the liberals and the media? Perhaps affected by some sort of post-Palm Beach stress disorder, reporters and activists on the left have depicted George W. Bush as the leader of some sort of arch-conservative jihad. They've portrayed his tax plan as dangerously radical, some of his nominees as Confederacy-loving loons, and his voucher plan as a menace to the future of public education. To put it bluntly, this is all deranged. You get the impression that the left has actually started believing its own direct-mail fund-raising letters...
I was a dolt who refused to acknowledge that the GOP was not intolerant:
Pabulum with a Purpose
Beneath the much-mocked superficiality of the Philadelphia convention is a serious effort to transform the GOP
AUG 14, 2000 
The GOP is not intolerant...
I was a simpleton who refused to see that Bush and McCain had teamed up to invent an awesome new GOP! 
ONE NATION CONSERVATISM 
How George W. Bush and John McCain -- without quite realizing it -- are creating a new Republican philosophy
SEP 13, 1999 
...together, Bush's Compassionate Conservatism and McCain's New Patriotic Challenge are steps toward a fresh vision for the Republican party. Indeed, if you meld the core messages of the two campaigns, you get a coherent governing philosophy for the post-Clinton age.
That was gonna be, well, awesome!
Competent Conservatives, Reactionary Liberals
JAN 15, 2001 
We seem to be entering a period of competent conservatism and reactionary liberalism. George W. Bush has put together a cabinet long on management experience and practical skills. But liberal commentators and activists, their imaginations aflame, seem to be caught in a time warp, back in the days when Norman Lear still had hair.
Yes, during  his tenure as Managing Editor at The Weekly Standard, Mr. Brooks penned many bold columns on the Greatness of George Bush.

Which were followed by columns on the Greatness of George Bush.

Which were interspersed with columns mocking stupid Liberals like me for not recognizing the Greatness of George Bush.

Over the years, when things were slow and TWS needed something to fill up the column inches, Mr. Brooks could always be relied on to toss red meat to the peanut gallery with some faux anthropological analysis of the ridiculous habits and folkways of those stupid Liberals.

Those intolerant Liberals.

And although he and his Beltway colleagues have been extremely successful getting almost everyone to pretend it never happened, there are still quite a few of us who remember that, on the subject of the Iraq War, Mr. Brooks really let his inner Breitbart all the way out.

Because like so many Conservatives, Mr. Brooks' most giddy obsession during those critical years was speculating on the exact size and velocity of the Hell the Dirty Hippies were going to catch -- and how warped and pathetic their vicious, mindless denial would be -- now that they had been proven wrong!-wrong!-wrong!  Because (in case you weren't there or don't remember), during this period Conservatives like Mr. Brooks genuinely believed that the  Conservative Millennium was at hand -- that in the Bush Presidency and the Iraq War they had at last found their Movement's Holy Grail:  a final, irrefutable, public, slam-dunk  vindication of their Grand Unifying Theory that Dirty Hippies really are awful people who really do hate America, and who really are responsible for every bad thing that has ever happened and deserving of every horrible thing that Conservatives like Mr. Brooks had ever said about them.

And as I have already written about extensively elsewhere, the nakedly opportunistic Mr. Brooks used his position at The Weekly Standard to grab that grail with both hands and gleefully beat the shit out of the Dirty Hippies with it.  In fact, he rode his Weekly Standard hippie punching and Bush hyping all the way to a job-for-life at The New York Times.

But hey, that's all ancient history now, right?   And certainly not a history which either the Conservative Brain Caste or the Beltway media have any interest in revising.  A history of a Conservative movement which created the very monster that consumed it.  A history recounted now only among the reprobates and no-accounts, late at night, 'round our Liberal hobo fires.

For everyone else, history will record that it was a fun place to work.  The greatest magazine that ever was, where witty badinage flowed like cheap beer in the CPAC hospitality suite, and the benefits package was nonpareil.  Hell, the Savior of Conservatism himself has declared Mr. Brooks' column to be a virtual Voight-Kampff test of goodthinkfulness.  Perhaps a little "thank you" for Mr. Brooks blurbing Mr. Goldberg's shitty book (“Epic and debate-shifting.”) so extravagantly..

In fact a year from now, I'll be very surprised if there is not some grand square in Baghdad that is named after Bill Kristol, David Brooks and The Weekly Standard.


Behold, a Tip Jar!

Friday, December 14, 2018

Professional Left Podcast #471


“Richard Nixon is a no good, lying bastard. He can lie out of both sides of his mouth at the same time, and if he ever caught himself telling the truth, he'd lie just to keep his hand in."
-- Harry S Truman

Don't forget to visit our new website -- http://www.proleftpod.com -- for all of the sweet bells and whistles:  there are links to donate to our podcast work at that site, as well as links to our swingin' Zazzle merch store,  our respective blogs, Twitter, Facebook, Kittehs! and much more. Many thanks once again to @theologop for building it all for us!


Links:

The Professional Left is brought to you by our wholly imaginary "sponsors" and real listeners like you!




Thursday, December 13, 2018

Our Lonely War On Pronouns Continues...


...because both Republicans and the Beltway media never stop trying to diffuse responsibility for their catastrophes by "we"-ing the rest of us into their shame circle.

As you probably know, we here at the DGBG Productions (driftglass blog, The Professional Left Podcast, etc.) have been waging a long, lonely war against the promiscuous use "we", "us", "The American people", "The Congress", "Washington D.C." and any other language deployed by the media and by Republican politicians in the service of pretending that somehow everyone and all institutions are collectively and equally culpable for explicitly Republican cowardice, Republican barbarity, Republican racism and Republican sedition.

Or that, conversely, the energetic and resolution opposition to explicitly Republican cowardice, Republican barbarity, Republican racism and Republican sedition is something that "we" are all in together.  That, for example. stripping tens of millions of Americans of their health care in order to pay for tax cuts for plutocrats with something up with which "the American people" would not put.

No, no and no.

Because other than geographically, there is no such critter as "the American people".  This is the unhappy truth which the Beltway media damn well knows but would rather pull its own head off rather than speak aloud, which is why the word "we" has been so brutally abused by everyone with something to hide.


Exhibit A:  Raving racist deadbeat liar and former Republican congressman from IL08 turned belated Never Trumper, Joe Walsh.
Goons like Walsh never actually change.  They just shift with the prevailing wind.  And along with the rest of the Never Trumpers, current weather conditions have temporarily knocked him off the GOP dungheap, but the minute conditions improve, you can bet the mortgage that Deadbeat Joe will go right back to pounding his little tin wingnut drum.

Exhibit B:  At the other end of the respectability spectrum we find that bastion of relentless Beltway Both Siderism, The New York Times, and a lesson in how applying pressure to pressure-sensitive Both Siderists can sometimes yield happy results. 

Here is the Times' headline about the rise of far-right extremists before Liberals starting yelling at them on Twitter.



Here are a few example of Liberals yelling at the NYT on Twitter



And here is the same NYT headline after Liberals starting yelling at them on Twitter.
Lesson:  If it gathers enough momentum (and enough support from Bluechecks), sometimes publicly shaming Both Siderists actually works.

For example here is a small and almost-forgotten skirmish in our lonely war on pronouns from January of this year: Ms. Joy Ann Reid setting Ezra Klein straight on the abuse of the word "we".
Today you can still click on Joy Ann Reid's Tweet and see it in its original state.  But Young Ezra's original Tweet now exists only as a memory -- trapped in the amber of my post from January 2018, because he has since deleted it :-)

So however maddening it is to be right all along and ignored all along, never let anyone tell you that holding Both Siderists publicly to account doesn't work.

Because sometimes it does.


Behold, a Tip Jar!


Wednesday, December 12, 2018

If You Give a Never Trumper a Cookie...

...they'll try to fuck up your party too.

And if you are asking yourself, "Haven't I heard this exact same shitty idea before?" the answer is, yes.  Yes you have.  Many times, actually, and virtually always from some temporarily out-of-favor Republican or parasitic Centrist trying to sell it as the all-purpose, all-occasion, Beltway Both Siderist snake oil tonic guaranteed to cure whatever is ailing American democracy.

For example, all the way back in 2006 when Mr. David Brooks' very good friend and fellow Iraq War Pimp, Holy Joe Lieberman, lost his primary to Ned Lamont over the issue of the Iraq War, Mr. Brooks went on an extended, NYT-funded tantrum about how the Democrats had lost their fucking minds, civility was dead and the only hope of saving the republic from ruin was a McCain/Lieberman “Party No. 3":
...
There are two major parties on the ballot, but there are three major parties in America. There is the Democratic Party, the Republican Party and the McCain-Lieberman Party.

All were on display Tuesday night.

The Democratic Party was represented by its rising force — Ned Lamont on a victory platform with the net roots exulting before him and Al Sharpton smiling just behind.

The Republican Party was represented by its collapsing old guard — scandal-tainted Tom DeLay trying to get his name removed from the November ballot. And the McCain-Lieberman Party was represented by Joe Lieberman himself, giving a concession speech that explained why polarized primary voters shouldn’t be allowed to define the choices in American politics.

The McCain-Lieberman Party begins with a rejection of the Sunni-Shiite style of politics itself. It rejects those whose emotional attachment to their party is so all-consuming it becomes a form of tribalism, and who believe the only way to get American voters to respond is through aggression and stridency.

The flamers in the established parties tell themselves that their enemies are so vicious they have to be vicious too. They rationalize their behavior by insisting that circumstances have forced them to shelve their integrity for the good of the country. They imagine that once they have achieved victory through pulverizing rhetoric they will return to the moderate and nuanced sensibilities they think they still possess.

But the experience of DeLay and the net-root DeLays in the Democratic Party amply demonstrates that means determine ends. Hyper-partisans may have started with subtle beliefs, but their beliefs led them to partisanship and their partisanship led to malice and malice made them extremist, and pretty soon they were no longer the same people.

The McCain-Lieberman Party counters with constant reminders that country comes before party, that in politics a little passion energizes but unmarshaled passion corrupts, and that more people want to vote for civility than for venom...
Remember that when Mr. Brooks wrote this column in 2006, his Republican party enjoyed unified control over the House, the Senate and the White House, just as they do now.
Between 2001 and 2007, Republicans controlled at certain points all three branches while President George W. Bush occupied the White House. GOP control was interrupted between 2001 and 2003, as the Senate majority flipped to the Democrats as one senator switched his party affiliation, one senator died, and when the 2002 midterm elections shifted control of the upper chamber.
Remember that Mr. Brooks' Republican party used their complete control of the government to ram policies that were so ruinous to the country that we still haven't recovered from them.  Just as Trump and the Republican congress are doing now.

Remember that it was only once it became clear that a day of reckoning was at hand -- that Democrats were on track the wrest control of at least part of the government back from the Republicans and were going to start asking the kinds of questions Republicans did not want to answer -- that Mr. Brooks got up on his hind legs and start braying about how Both Sides Were Equally Terrible.

And finally, for you history buffs, this also marks the formal establishment of the modern High and Holy Church of Both Sides Do It as the official state religion of the Beltway, and a shelter for various Republican bottom feeders and their media enablers who frequently need a place wait out disasters of their own making without A) being held responsible for the evil that they have done and, B) missing a paycheck.

Brother Charlie Pierce has thoughts:
Things in Politico That Make Me Want to Guzzle Antifreeze: First-in-a-While Edition 
Just as the publication sets a course for redemption, we are subjected to this.

...
This is such a perfect, unspoiled example of Beltway political wisdom that somebody should hang it on the wall at the Smithsonian. There is the appeal to Saint John McCain. There is the fundamentalist reliance on polling data—two years before anyone votes anywhere. There is the assumption that the nation was so grieving the passage of Saint John McCain that it noticed, to its sorrow, that there was a terrible rent in the country's moral fabric. (This, of course, was 18 years after we started torturing people.) And there is the author identification.
Juleanna Glover has worked as an adviser for several Republican politicians, including George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Rudy Giuliani and advised the presidential campaigns of John McCain and Jeb Bush. She is on the Biden Institute Policy Advisory Board.


Behold, a Tip Jar!


Tuesday, December 11, 2018

Ingraham + Greenwald = Ingwald


Bolshie Freedom Troll, Glenn Greenwald, has finally arrived at the place where he has been headed all along.

An honored "guest" on The Laura Ingraham White Supremacy Advertiser Death-Spiral Hour.



Yes, wedged in there between Byron York dry-humping Donald Trump's leg and Michelle Malkin screeching about the horror of people being held accountable for the things they say, there you will find Mr. Greenwald, holding forth on the need for everyone to stop being so mean and snitty and holding-people-to-account-for-what-they -say-ish on social media.

It has been quite a journey for ol' Glenn, someone whose, just five minutes ago, regarded any social media slight, real or imagined, as a reason to go completely ballistic.

Someone who relentlessly parsed every semicolon of anyone Not Of The Body and always, always, always adjudged them to be drooling, jackbooted, fascist Obot enemies of Liberty who were obviously operating entirely in bad faith.

And then would come the Spleenwald Horde to punish the impure like me.

Someone who has since purged 27,000 of his old Tweets --

-- and starting showing up like a long-lost lodge brother on the Trump News Network.

Because as Sun Tzu once wisely noted, if you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by.

Or you'll see on Fox News, making a complete farce of everything they once claimed to believe in.  Either as Tucker Carlson's wacky sidekick or on the most boycotted show in the whole Fox News lineup, making nicey-nicey the Eva Braun Nose.

Funny old world.

Contributions to the "God damn it, droneglass was right again" swear jar can be made below.


Behold, a Tip Jar!



Captain Beefheart versus Bolt Vanderhuge


"Because in Mr. Sullivan's world, 'Liberal' does not refer to a political ideology, but to an impoverishing political ghetto from which no amount of 'being right about everything' will permit you to achieve escape velocity. In Mr. Sullivan's world, 'Liberal' is a terrible disease that afflicts losers who do not get invited to spout their views on teevee." 
-- driftglass, December 2009

Three years ago, the official Vox magazine line on Mr. Andrew Sullivan was that he was "the most influential public intellectual of the last 20 years":
How Andrew Sullivan changed America

Who is the most influential public intellectual of the last 20 years?

This designation should go to someone who actually has helped change the world, rather than just changing lots of minds. It also should go to someone who has embodied key trends of the time, noting that for both standards I am focusing on the United States.

Based on those standards, I am inclined to pick Andrew Sullivan, who is most recently in the news for his announcement that he is quitting after fifteen years of blogging.

Three years later, Ezra Klein has suddenly discovered that Andrew Sullivan is actually more of a mealy-mouthed fraud who continually and radically reinvents the history of the United States and the history of Christianity to comport with his woozy, myopic, Tory sense of How Things Should Be:
The political tribalism of Andrew Sullivan
Sullivan’s essay on political tribalism shows he’s blinded by his own.
Which means I'll probably have to pack up my shack at the edge of respectability and move on down the road.

Again.

Well, I've had a good run.

You see, since blogging's earliest days I've been writing about the "Andrew Sullivan" which Ezra Klein discovered only yesterday and which would never have risen to Vox's editorial attention had Mr. Sullivan not decided to take a gratuitous shot at Mr. Klein during his long, weepy disquisition on Very Important Things Like the Meaning of Fucking Life You Assholes.
I knew when we launched Vox that there would be criticisms I didn’t anticipate, but I’ll admit, I never foresaw one of them being that writing explainers doesn’t satisfyingly replace the role of religion in people’s lives.

Yet here we are:
But the banality of the god of progress, the idea that the best life is writing explainers for Vox in order to make the world a better place, never quite slakes the thirst for something deeper.
Rats. Foiled again!

That’s Andrew Sullivan writing in New York magazine, and while the column caught my attention for that line, which I will now have needlepointed on a pillow, the broader piece is wrong in more important, less amusing, ways...
So now I expect my little beanfield of serious Sullivan critiques will be overrun for awhile in an extended, low-stakes, high-drama, clickbait slapfight among privileged, cloistered Beltway insiders:
What I am interested in is American politics, and in this essay, Sullivan offers a nostalgic analysis of our current problems that has become popular among a certain class of pundits — David Brooks calls Sullivan’s essay a shoe-in for his annual Sidney Awards — but that doesn’t hold up to the slightest scrutiny, and in fact displays the very biases it laments.
Were I a betting man, I would lay down a couple of small wagers on the following propositions.

One, this will end in a Bill Maher show rapprochement between the antagonists.

Two, once all the Beltway sound and fury signifying nothing has passed, nothing will have changed.

Because there is a Club...

Meanwhile, for you Future Historians, here is a thing I wrote a very long time ago:
Yes, Mr. Sullivan, your objections emphatically do make you a "radical leftist", because in the hands of the shitkicker demagogues of the Right like Malkin, phrases like "radical leftist" have long since lost any meaning. They are just the pejorative-du-jour, pulled from a random grab-bag of Limbaugh-words -- socialist, elitist, feminist, Marxist, anti-American, compassionate, cut-and-run, surrender, Liberal, extremist, collectivist, queer, Communist, fascist, atheist, humanist, "New York", "San Francisco", “Chicago”, French, European -- that each used to have discrete and very different meanings, but are now bleated interchangeably by the Pig People and their overlords at anyone with a softer heart than Curtis LeMay and less imperial ambitions than Genghis Khan.

But then again, if Mr. Sullivan simply outed himself as a Liberal, he would instantly lose his place in the food-chain, wouldn’t he? Because like that microscopic number of self-loathing black Conservatives who make their daily bread by serving the interests of the Southern Bigot Party, more than any other single factor, it was always the sheer gawking, oddballness of the brazen self-delusion inherent in being the gay champion of the Christopath Homophobe Party that put Mr. Sullivan in the spotlight.

That was what gave him his unique and lucrative cache.

After all, Liberal gay political writers are a dime a dozen, and so in a strange way we find Andrew Sullivan locked in the same kind of mortal combat over labels -- and for exactly the same reasons -- as Roy Cohn's character in "Angels In America" as he adamantly insisted -- even as he was dying of AIDS -- that he was not a "ho-mo-sex-shall".


(Not Safe For Work)

Because, Cohn reasoned, homosexuals were nobodies; losers who had zero clout and “in 15 years cannot pass a pissant anti-discrimination bill from City Council.” And since Roy Cohn could get the President of the United States (or his wife) on the phone -- could take the man he was fucking to the White House and make Ronald Reagan smile at him and shakes his hand -- it therefore followed that Roy Cohn could not possibly be a homosexual.

That unlike every other person in his position on Earth, Roy Cohn was a heterosexual man, who fucked around with guys.

Likewise, even though Mr. Sullivan now, belatedly comes to believe much of what Liberals believe and finally deigns to notice a horde of grotesque truths about his Conservative Movement about which Liberals have been sounding the alarm for 30 years, Andrew Sullivan nonetheless looks us all straight in that eye and argues that he could not possibly be some mere Liberal.

Because in Mr. Sullivan's world, "Liberal" does not refer to a political ideology, but to an impoverishing political ghetto from which no amount of "being right about everything" will permit you to achieve escape velocity. In Mr. Sullivan's world, "Liberal" is a terrible disease that afflicts losers who do not get invited to spout their views on teevee.

Mr. Sullivan regularly receives such largess, therefore he must not be a Liberal.

He instead must be the lone member be of some rare and singular new species; some miraculous form of haploid political minotaur.

Because if he is not something spontaneously-generated and utterly sui generis, then he is just another Lefty-Come-Very-Lately, showing up at our door at 3:00 A.M., 20 years late and trailing toxic baggage behind him like a Halley Comet.

And who in the world would pay him to do his little dance then?




Behold, a Tip Jar!