Skip to content

The Way it Works

Proving once again that liberals just can’t seem to get over the demise of the Enlightenment (I mean rational thought is so over), Steve Benen at the Washington Monthly makes the obvious point that, contrary to Beltway wisdom, it is not Obama who has failed to meet the Republicans half way:

It’s tempting to think that the “Republican Ideas” section would be the area in which the White House blasts GOP critics of reform and mocks them for not even trying to create a comprehensive reform package. Of course, the opposite is true. The headline on this page reads, “Republican Ideas Included in the President’s Proposal.”

It’s clear that the American people want health insurance reform. They aren’t interested in Democratic ideas or Republican ideas. They’re interested in the best ideas to reduce costs, guarantee choices and ensure the highest quality care. They’re interested in ideas that will put them back in control of their own health care.

Throughout the debate on health insurance reform, Republican concepts and proposals have been included in legislation. In fact, hundreds of Republican amendments were adopted during the committee mark-up process. As a result, both the Senate and the House passed key Republican proposals that are incorporated into the President’s Proposal. […]

Benen draws the obvious conclusion that Republicans aren’t interested in constructive engagement.

But, in fact, the Republican’s intransigence is perfectly logical. They ask only that Obama adopt their ideas. The problem is that it is impossible for Obama to do so. What Obama, and Benen fail to realize is that once Obama accepts a Republican idea, it is transformed into an Obama idea and is no longer a Republican idea. As a result it is absolutely impossible for Obama to accept a Republican idea. Republicans understand this transformative process very well, as is demonstrated by the facility with which they turn against any idea that once was, but no longer is, of the Republican variety. The true mystery here is why Obama or the Democrats keep trying. Maybe they should talk to a kid named Charlie Brown about a girl named Lucy and her football.


Friday Night Music, John Mellencamp

Okay, so last night there was discussion on the Olbermann show about the possibility of drafting Indiana native John Mellencamp to run for the Senate against probable Republican Candidate and corrupt lobbyist Dan Coats. It probably won’t go anywhere, considering the process forced on the Indiana Democrats by DINO Evan Bayh. Personally, I think he’d be a great candidate who might not be afraid to articulate a genuinely left wing down home populist message. Which is why he’ll never be nominated, even though I think a message like that would sell anywhere, even among the historically brain dead Indianans. (I’m not running for anything, so I can say these things).

So, that’s what led me to Mellencamp for tonight. So far as I can see there’s no concert footage of him on youtube, only his music videos. I’ve made an exception to my normal no lip synching rules, in honor of the his historic, if fleeting candidacy. The silver lining is that the audio is first rate. Not hard to find political songs, which seems appropriate. The first: Our Country.

The inevitable: Pink Houses.


Good idea

Susan Byziewicz writes to me today (did she write to you too? what a coincidence!) that she will bring a declaratory action to determine whether she is qualified to be attorney general.

This is good news. I’d actually toyed with the idea of trying to sign up some lawyer friends to team up and bring such an action, though there are legal impediments to doing that (such as establishing standing) that Susan won’t have to face. I think she’s qualified by experience, but I don’t think she’s qualified under the law. My heart won’t be broken, in fact I’ll be glad, if a judge disagrees with me. She should be able to run.

But doing it this way, I assume perhaps under pressure from some in the party, she avoids the possibility of messy litigation in November.


It’s time for him to go

I greatly respect Chris Dodd for all he’s done, but I must say that it’s apparent that his time has passed, and we can be thankful that he has stepped aside. If I’d had any doubts, and I hadn’t, this interview, in which he says that the filibuster rule should not be changed, would have removed them. The money quote (via MyLeftNutmeg):

“I’m totally opposed to the idea of changing the filibuster rules,” the Connecticut Democrat said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe”. “I think that’s foolish in my view. You can write all the rules you want. At the end of the day if the chemistry isn’t there [it won’t work].”

When one puts the good of an institution-any institution-over that of the country, then one’s priorities have become seriously misplaced. If Dodd does not see the dysfunctional reality of the institution in which he currently serves then it’s hard to see any possibility that he would have been part of a solution to its problems in the future. In fact, his statement is absolutely wrong. We would have health reform now, most likely with a public option, were it not for the filibuster rule. That’s a difference; a huge difference, and the system would have worked by delivering what the American people wanted, and still say they want when asked in a reasonable fashion. We would have had better stimulus legislation had there been no filibuster. Instead of wasting money on worthless tax cuts, we could have saved the states from bankruptcy. We would have votes on Obama’s appointees. Obama could actually appoint what are now doomed nominees, given the fact that Ben Nelson, who felt it was wrong to filibuster nominees when a Republican was in office, now feels free to filibuster those of a Democratic president. Whether a change in the rules will disturb the chemistry of the Senate is debatable, but also irrelevant to the American people, particularly the people who put Dodd in the Senate. Parenthetically, it is probably the abuse of the filibuster that has destroyed the chemistry at present. If there were no filibuster, the Republicans would either have to play nice or become wholly irrelevant.

It’s understandable, but not really forgivable, that a Senator could equate institutional traditions with the public good. It’s impossible to believe that any Democrat could fail to perceive the direction in which the dysfunctional Senate’s is leading us. The filibuster can be abolished by majority vote at the beginning of the next Senate session, provided the Democrats don’t destroy their majority by further weakness. We need to get Dick Blumenthal on record on this issue. Will he vote to return majority rule to the United States Senate? Does he understand what’s happening? If not, we’re doomed.


Another threat to marriage quashed


A word about some words

Recently, Sarah Palin feigned outrage at the fact that Rahm Emmanuel called the people that elected his boss into office “fucking retards”. Naturally, neither she or anyone else objected to the insult to people who were only asking that Obama fulfill his promises; rather, her faux anger was voiced on behalf of the mentally retarded, such as the prop little boy that she carries with her everywhere.

This morning, my Pandora Bob Dylan radio station, served up Idiot Wind.

What do these two disparate events have to do with one another? Well, the second got me thinking (an achievement in itself) about the first, and about the malleability of language. Dylan’s song, after all, is about many things, but it certainly isn’t about the mentally retarded.

Nowadays we cheerfully use the term idiot as an insult, without a twinge of conscience, even though its original meaning (now demoted to second place behind “a foolish or stupid person”) is as follows:

A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally being unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.

The term “moron” has a similar derivation, though it was applied to the less profoundly retarded. Had Rahm used either of those terms, and I’m sure he would have, given half the chance, it’s highly unlikely that it would have occurred to Sarah to take offense (being an idiot herself, she is surely unaware of the derivation) nor would anyone else. The folks at MoveOn would have had to lick their wounds in silence. These terms have, so to speak, been euphemized. The euphemism for these now quite egalitarian terms of abuse is, of course “mentally retarded”, which is now rapidly acquiring all the negative connotations (at least with respect to the class of people to whom it refers) that “moron” and “idiot” have now almost shed. Yes, the term “mentally retarded” is itself in the process of becoming euphemized. The term now is “special” or “challenged”.

But we live in a fast paced world. While it took centuries to even perceive the need for euphemisms for “idiot” and “moron”, it took only decades for the same process to require a replacement for “mentally retarded” and, unless I miss my guess, it will be far less time than that before we are seeking replacements for “special”, “challenged”, or whatever other term wins the prize. I blame the kids. You can’t fool them, and they have a boundless capacity for cruelty. Even as we speak, there are kids on the playground referring to their peers as “special” or “challenged” and, need I say it, not in a good way.

It may seem unlikely that the term “special”, for instance, could ever acquire overwhelmingly negative connotations, but stranger things have happened. I can remember when a person could say that he or she was “gay”, meaning “happy”. That meaning lives on in our dictionaries (banished to second place, like “idiot”), but lives there a person under 90 who would now use the word in that way?

Meanwhile, let us pause for a moment of silence for the fucking retards against whom Rahm directed his anger. They made the mistake, over and over, of being right on the issues and right about the politics. There is nothing that will earn universal scorn more quickly than being consistently right. Who would dare come to the defense of someone who has committed such an iniquitous act? You’d have to be an idiot.


Holiday Pictures

This is a holiday, so I refuse to spend my day venting against the Democrats, such as Evan Bayh, who seems to be determined to wreak maximum damage before he leaves. I can only say, good riddance to him. If we play our cards right, we can be the minority party in the Senate, and then we’ll be in control.

So, instead, some pictures of Napatree Point in Watch Hill, Rhode Island. For those of you unfamiliar with this geographical feature, it is a peninsula, perhaps a mile long, jutting out into the Atlantic, at the end of which is a ruined fort from some past war. We did not make it to the end, deciding that we had better things to do than deal with winds that must have been upwards of 40 miles an hour.

This, by the way, is the date that, statistically, marks the beginning of the end of winter. It won’t be missed, at least by me.

I do recommend the walk, either at this time of year, for those intrepid souls who like the cold, or for normal humans, during the warmer months.


John Conyers coming to Norwich

The Norwich chapter of the NAACP is celebrating the 100th anniversary of that organization on Tuesday. The event will be held at the Kelly Middle School, 25 Mahan Drive, in Norwich. From the group’s flyer:

The Guest Speaker for the event will be United States Congressman and Chairman of the Judiciary, John Conyers Jr. Other invited panelists include: U.S. Senator Christopher Dodd; CT Representative Kenneth Green; U.S. Congressman Joseph Courtney, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal; William Carbone, Executive Director, CSSD; Attorney Lonnie Braxton; Terell Wilson, CT State NAACP Youth & College President, David Whitehead, Backus President and CEO; Tom Swan, Director of CCAG; and Abby Dolliver, Interim Superintendent of Norwich Schools

The Informational Forum starts at 7:00 PM, and is free. There will be a Pre-Program Social event starting at 5:30, which costs $20.00.


Read Frank Rich

I tend to doubt that Sarah Palin marked up her hands just to attract incoming liberal fire, and I really don’t believe Rich is serious on that point, but the rest of his analysis of the current situation is absolutely spot on.

He makes the point that the Republicans have skillfully, if mendaciously, cast themselves as the opponents of the very interests they serve, while the Democrats have stood by and let them do so.

I’ve tried to make the point here that the Democrats can only win in 2010 by forcing the Republicans to openly defend Wall Street and the corporations, by proposing, and making them vote on, bills that are both right from a policy standpoint and that play into the justifiable resentment the American people have toward the people who have caused, and now profited by, the financial mess we are in. As Rich points out, it ain’t going to happen.

I was amazed by this, which I hadn’t heard about before:

The Obama White House remains its own worst enemy. No sooner did Palin’s Tea Party speech end than we learned of the president’s tone-deaf interview expressing admiration for “very savvy businessmen” like Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs. With that single remark, Obama ingeniously identified himself with the most despised aspects of both Washington and Wall Street — the bailout and the bonuses. He still doesn’t understand that to most Americans, Blankfein is a savvy businessman only in the outrageous sense that he managed to grab his bonus some 17 months after the taxpayers had the good grace to save him from going out of business altogether.

Somewhere, and I can’t recall where at the present, I read speculation that Obama would actually prefer that we lose our majority in the House (the only chamber that has passed meaningfully progressive legislation) so he could run against them in 2012, like Clinton did in 1996. From a purely selfist, purely political point of view this might be good strategy, but that’s cold comfort for the rest of us. The historical dynamics here are frightening. Right wing presidents get pretty much what they want, while messing up the country and ignoring the real problems. Democratic presidents get almost nothing of what they want, except possibly (e.g., Clinton) cleaning up some of the mess, for which they get no credit, thereby paving the way for a return of the Republicans, who promptly start wreaking destruction. All the while our agencies, courts and system of taxation drift inexorably rightward.


Friday Night Music

At the White House