Skip to content

They can dish it out, but they can’t take it

Thursday, December 16, 2010

I realize that I should be writing about stuff that matters, but things are really just too depressing out there, what with the “compromise” and all down there in Washington. So, I prefer to celebrate a tiny victory.

Down in Fort Worth, in Texas, the state where they inflict prayer on you at high school football games, the persecuted Christians got all upset when a group of atheists put an ad on a bus that read “Millions of Americans are Good Without God”. Well, suddenly all those Christians got all sensitive-like about having someone else’s religion (or lack thereof) shoved down their throats.

Unfortunately, even in Texas the courts aren’t likely to say that you can let religious ads on the busses (and of course there have been plenty) and bar atheistical ads. Not yet of course, though I’d give even money that the current Supreme Court could find a way. But, not wanting to bear the cost, the Transportation Authority has banned all religious ads. Reminds me of the school board in Utah that banned all extracurricular groups because the courts wouldn’t let them ban a gay and lesbian group. What was that about a nose and a face?

Perhaps this is one way to impose reason on this benighted land. Atheists and non-Christians everywhere should put up displays next to creches, demand their turn to give the benedictions or prayers at public meetings, even, if they have the guts, demand equal time at those Texas football games. Now folks, if they do that, only two things can happen. The whole country might become tolerant and realize the error of its ways and that really the government ought to just stay out of religion for everyone’s good, or, more realistically, the country will double down on intolerance by following the Fort Worth example. Either way, we win.


Filed in Religion | | Comments (0)

It has served its purpose

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Remember when the fate of America and/or Christianity rested on whether an Islamic community center would be built somewhere close to both ground zero and a strip club? Seems like a long time ago, doesn’t it? The threat is technically still hanging over us, yet for some reason it doesn’t seem to bother the bloviators anymore. TPM reports that Judicial Watch is still pursuing a mosque related FOIA request, but this paragraph struck me:

Judicial Watch filed a request under New York’s Freedom of Information Law, or FOIL, back in August, when the street outside the Park51 Islamic center was packed daily with protesters and Islamophobia in general was rising throughout America. The furor over the project has died down considerably since, with only the fiercest anti-mosque folks voicing opposition.

The “mosque” is yesterday’s news. It has served its purpose; having ratcheted up the fear and loathing going into the election. Suddenly, all those Fox commentators that felt so threatened have other things to worry about, likely things that actually strike closer to their own homes, like tax cuts for themselves and their rich friends. But we should have no fear that the fear and loathing has come to an end. Come 2012 new threats from the other will appear, and the attention of this ADD nation will be diverted once again, in service to the interests of the upper 2%.

Filed in American Life, Uncategorized | | Comments (0)

It’s a topsy turvy world

Monday, December 13, 2010

It’s hard to believe that it’s not yet three years since Hillary Clinton proved she was incapable of being president by choking up a bit when she made the point that elections and their consequences actually mattered to real people. The fact that she came close to-might even have-shedding a few tears was all we heard about on the news.

Fast forward three years and here’sJohn Boehner once again shedding copious tears for no discernible reason. Nary a word do we hear about his unfitness for the office to which he aspires. Whatever happened to that sentiment I heard from my (female, as it happened) Dentist, as she prepared to drill my un-anesthetized teeth: “Big Boys Don’t Cry”? Were the Four Seasons right after all? Is it only Big Girls Who Don’t Cry?

Perhaps I’m revealing my age. Yes Virginia, I remember a time when it was considered “unmanly” to cry. In that long ago time, a woman was permitted, within reason, to shed a few tears no questions asked. Now, it seems, the rules are reversed. Imagine, if you will, what we would have heard had Nancy Pelosi ever shed a single tear in response to the vicious assaults against her, not to mention what would have been said had she broken down like Boehner did.

But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe this has nothing to do with gender. Maybe this is simply one more facet of a rule of political life that seems to have become cast into concrete: IOKIYAR.


Filed in Republicans | | Comments (0)

Fighting back in Great Britain

Monday, December 13, 2010

Last week I had jury duty. While we were in the “jury assembly room” we were, of course, subjected to the inevitable television, which appears to be the chief method used in this country to tranquilize people in waiting rooms. I suppose I should be thankful that we were spared the almost inevitable Fox channel. Instead of that hyper-irritant, they inflicted CNN on us.

CNN was reporting on the British student protests, and the court employee (a recent student himself judging by his age) who inflicted the television on us made a remark to the effect that they had nothing to complain about since our state universities, nowadays, typically charge four times what the British will be asked to pay.

I kept my mouth shut of course, but in my own humble opinion, the question is not why the British students are protesting, but why American students have been so quiescent while their right to acquire an education without acquiring massive debt has been slowly eroded. These mounting fees are just one more brick in the wall that is steadily being erected between the 2% who are about to secure their tax cut, and the rest of us, who are about to pay for that tax cut.

It’s time, it seems to me, for our kids to join this 15 year old Britisher (who has a future as a politician; let us hope he stays on our side). Our generation is screwing them big time, and it really seems like they should start fighting back.



Filed in Politics | | Comments (0)

Friday Night Music-Sympathy for the Rich

Friday, December 10, 2010

At the moment this is written, the House Democrats have done the unthinkable. They have stood by their guns and told Obama to stuff his deal, which fact, at first, I thought would render this video choice inapt. When I first chose it, I figured to say something to the effect that the rich folks on this side of the Atlantic don’t have to join the Kinks in lamenting their tax burden, as they had been, indeed, “saved from [the] squeeze”.

But now I can just turn that around. The upper 2% can join the Kinks in singing the blues, for the time being at least. Most likely, few will, as no one really believes they’ll be squeezed in the end.

Please pardon the video, in which there seems to be no effort to “suit the action to the word[s]”. It’s a great song nonetheless, and captures well the exquisite anguish experienced by our betters, as they contemplate the horrible prospect of paying something close to their fair share.


Filed in Music | | Comments (0)

Gentleman’s C

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Now that we are approaching the conclusion of what is perhaps the greatest political surrender in American history, it’s time to look back and ask ourselves. How did CTBlue do? Did his predictions here and here come to pass?

Well, as you can see above, I get a passing grade. I got a lot of the details wrong, as I thought Congress would lead the way to the surrender. In a way they (with Obama’s passive as always acquiescence) did, by putting the issue off, a strategic blunder so massive one stands in awe. I certainly did not anticipate the fact that Obama would embrace the issue as his own, and bravely lead the Democrats off a cliff.

So, how did I earn my C? Well, I got the denouement right. And I did anticipate Obama’s willingness to cave, though not his absolute eagerness to do so:

The only question that remains: Will Obama stick to his recently announced position (so far he is, but we’ve heard that before), or “compromise” by giving the Republicans everything they want?

Stay tuned, but I predict it won’t be pretty.

Well, though I framed it as a question, I think it’s pretty clear which way I thought Obama would go. So, my passing grade.

I was hoping to get an F on this one, but never had much hope.

The road ahead is far easier to predict. The Republicans have taken Obama’s measure, and despite the fact that they will be in legal control of only one House of Congress, they are now effectively in control. No one will ever believe he will stand firm on anything, as indeed, he never has and never will. Obama got one year of unemployment benefits ( a relatively small benefit to the economy that will be of little political benefit to him and his party) in exchange for two years of tax cuts, meaning he’s going to have to give away something else a year from now to get the benefits extended again, and will no doubt be forced to give way on taxes again in time for the 2012 election. We can expect him to continue to lash out at the people who voted for him and actually believed his message of hope, while giving the Republicans more love than any Stockholm syndrome sufferer ever gave to his tormentors. Bill Clinton had his defects, but he learned quickly how to manipulate the Republicans and make them look bad. Obama hasn’t learned that, and never will. It’s going to be a very difficult two years, and, regretfully I must say we can’t afford four more years of Obama’s incompetence. Looking back, it would have been better if John McCain had won. The economy would be a total disaster right now, no doubt, but the Democrats would have complete control of the Congress right now and would be positioned to take the White House in 2012 with, perhaps, a candidate ready to lead. There’s no reason to think Obama will change if re-elected, so even if he wins we will get four more years of Republican rule, regardless of who theoretically controls the Congress. That means, by the way, four more years of recession/depression because the Republicans will insist on policies designed to keep the economy depressed, which has benefitted them electorally, and Obama will be incapable of opposing them or even of articulating a counter-message the American people can understand and/or believe.

We are fucked.


Filed in Obama | | Comments (1)

I’m confused.

Monday, December 6, 2010

According to the Huffington Post there’s no chance the Democrats will have the spine to let the Bush tax cuts expire. I don’t quarrel with that.

But this had me shaking my head:

A top Senate aide, meanwhile, predicted that there would be “lots of nay votes on a White House compromise,” though likely not enough to sustain a filibuster. A far more difficult calculus faces the party in the House, as The Huffington Post’s Howard Fineman reported. But even then, most observers expect leadership to let only enough disaffected members vote no so that it doesn’t endanger final passage.

Since when has a Democratic Congressman had to be allowed to vote against his or her party? Seems to me the Blue Dogs have made a habit of it, their reward being a party that fell on its collective sword in a (thankfully) mostly vain attempt to save their collective asses. Does Pelosi have some sort of hold over the votes of the progressives that she lacks over those of the DINOs that are constantly impeding real progressive legislation in the House?

The odd thing about this is that it assumes that the legislation will need any unwilling Democratic votes. Is this to be one of those “compromises” that the Democrats have to push through on their own? Shouldn’t there be enough Republican votes (all of them, I would say, or no deal) so that, along with the willing Democrats, the cave in will pass easily? I mean, you can always count on the Democrats to reinforce their spineless image. Since when have they needed to be pressured?

Filed in Democrats | | Comments (0)

Friday Night Music-REM

Friday, December 3, 2010

I have a sort of a rule that I don’t repeat an artist/group that I’ve already done, but I can’t be sure as far as REM goes, and when I search the site for the group’s name I get every post where the letters “rem” appear in sequence. So, I’m going to assume that this is their first appearance. Losing My Religion.


Filed in Music | | Comments (0)

Outrage fatigue

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Another post at Kos, as at so many of our left leaning blogs, documenting yet another “outrageous” act by a Republican, this time the fact that John Kyl is holding up the Start Treaty in order to get a tax cut for the rich.

I must confess that I am not outraged by this, nor am I outraged at any of the other outrageous acts in which Republicans have engaged lately. I will admit that the acts of the Republicans are objectively outrageous, but I no longer find them emotionally outrageous. At this point, it is just Republicans being Republicans. It is what they do. Worth noting and cataloging to be sure, but not worth an increase in one’s blood pressure. After all, so far as the Republicans are concerned, I can take comfort in the fact that I am in no way responsible for their push to establish a plutocracy. I didn’t vote for them, contribute money to them, or support them in any other way.

I’m afraid that at this point my emotional outrage is reserved solely for the Democrats, from Obama on down, for whom I do have some responsibility, although in my defense, I didn’t have a lot of choices. I know objectively that spineless retreat and ineffectual public communication is what the Democrats do (in the latter category, and somewhat mysteriously, only after they get elected, see e.g., Obama’s campaign in contrast to Obama’s presidency), but I confess that I can’t accept this with the equanimity with which I can accept Republican outrageousness. It is outrageous that the Republicans will hold the government hostage to get their tax cut; it is even more outrageous that the Democrats will cave. It is outrageous that the Republicans are out to destroy the middle class, it is even more outrageous that the Democrats will let them do it. It is outrageous that the Republicans manipulate the middle class, working class, and stupid class with misleading frames; it is even more outrageous that the Democrats make no attempt to counter those frames by effectively packaging the truth. It is outrageous that the Republicans accuse Obama of failing to reach across the aisle, it is even more outrageous when, in the teeth of 2 years of evidence to the contrary, Obama agrees with them.

In the single case of the tax cuts, it would have been easy- it would still be easy- to brand the Republicans as lackeys of the rich, the servants of the folks who are living off of our bailouts. I am 100% certain that if given the choice, most people would prefer no action on taxes over giving yet another tax cut to the rich. But that’s not going to happen. The best we can hope for is a “temporary” extension that will be made permanent later, either by another Democratic capitulation, or by the Republican president elected in 2012 due to the Democrats demonstrated weakness. Meanwhile, the Republicans will, out of feigned concern about the deficits they created with their tax cuts, demand cuts in programs that benefit the lower 98%, to which demands the Democrats will cravenly accede, since they won’t want the pundits and the Republicans to think they can’t make “tough choices”.

Filed in Democrats | | Comments (3)

Corporations doing good

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Sometimes corporations do good. It is almost always unintentionally, and always out of self interest, but nonetheless it can happen. We insignificant denizens of the internet have not been able to get the federal government to commit to net neutrality, despite the fervent promises of Democrats, at any rate, to promote the concept. Of course, we are used to Democrats running away from their promises even faster than they run away from their principles (amazing how fast you can run without a spine) even when their principles are in accord with what the majority favors.

But I wander.

It looks like we have a fighting chance to get net neutrality, because there are some corporations that want it as much, or more, than we do. Netflix, for example, has a vested interest in keeping the “series of tubes” unobstructed.

It is a sad fact of life that we stand the best chance of having something happen in the public interest that also happens to be in the interest of at least some powerful corporations. It remains to be seen whether Netflix, at the moment, is strong enough to defeat Comcast, but it’s just possible that this is one time when having a Democrat in the White House, and putative Democrats running a regulatory agency, might just make a difference.

At this stage in our history, the internet is a relative anomaly. It is actually a democratic, open institution. If we can preserve that it might make it slightly possible for we the people to counter, at least somewhat, the coming corporate domination of the political process.

Filed in Media | | Comments (0)