Of course the Republican party looks old, white and irrelevant in this 21st century, but it wasn't planned that way. The condition it finds itself in started in the nineteen sixties like the mythical flutter of the butterfly wings. My peers, who are not. as my wife fervently points out, part of the baby boom generation, were upset with our younger brothers and sisters who embraced the Drugs, Sex and Rock n' Roll culture. Some of us have been waiting for them to pay for their misdeeds, but, unlike what we had raised to believe, mom and dad never did make them truly answer for their adventures. Not only was this disappointing in the sense that secretly we knew they were having more fun, it was also defaming our values and mores.
Some of us, have never forgiven our parents and our siblings for this disappointment. It was like getting to the gates of heaven and finding out that all of the things you had been told were wrong as it turned out made no difference at all. Imagine finding out that Mother Theresa was no better than Broadway Joe. The malcontents and angonizers are called Conservative Republicans and they refer to the rest of us by various labels, but mostly we are liberals with some kind of pejorative associated.
This election maybe noteworthy in that it could be the last audible scream of that demon that lives in the mind of those kids that behaved in the sixties and it's anger with the kids that didn't. The sheep's cloak has been coming of this wolf ever so slowly. But the betrayal of the Republican party and a true conservative movement is so corrupt that it is no longer impossible to ignore. Social conservatives motivated by ultra conservative religious factions have fueled an intolerance in the political arena that is unprecedented in modern politics. It is so narrow as to exclude even worthy followers, such as Mitt Romney, for not being sufficiently Christian and John McCain for not being Conservative enough. Either one of these guys policies is enough to make a true progressive gag, but for the true believers they are not pure enough.
And that is why the spotlight is now shinning on the Campaign of John McCain. McCain is a war hero, stalwart Senator from Arizona, and a guy that gave the Bush administration fits with his observations of their incompetence in the handling of the Iraq War. He has been a man who can transcend partisanship and get things done. He was even mentioned as a possible running mate for John Kerry on what would have amounted to a coalition ticket against George Bush in 2004. He's the "straight talking', John Wayne like figure that a lot of independents like and he is going to be formidable competition for whomever prevails on the Democratic side of the ticket. But his problem is that to get the wholehearted support of his party he's going to need to sound like one of them and if he doesn't he will suffer the same fate as George Bush I and Bob Dole. The get-out-the-vote Christian right will not perform and his fate will be in the hands of the independent voters.
In any other election, that might be enough, but unfortunately this election has a true phenomenon in the person of Barak Obama, who also has wide appeal amongst independent voters and has made the mending of our divisions the corner stone of his campaign. As McCain makes his way to the right of his party, gets the nomination and than inevitably tracks toward the center, he will be spotlighted like a prisoner crossing the barbwire zone of a maximum security prison in the middle of the night. The only thing that can foul up this plan is to nominate the only person that can get right wing conservatives to vote no matter who their party nominates, Hillary Clinton. While this is regrettable, because I think she would make and excellent President, I would not want to risk the chance to hobble the far right movement in this country by playing into their hands strategically.
This is the Democrats moment, but they must make good use of it. Wanting leadership and being a leader is two different things. I'm sorry, you can win a nomination of your party, run a competent campaign and win the office, but that does not mean you're a leader. I present the George Bush II as my proof. Obama or Clinton, (I will vote for her if she wins the nomination) must build a coalition of the center and force the radical wings of the parties to co-operate or shut up. The Democrats are discussing the value issues that effect all of us. Health care, education, jobs and repairing this nations infrastructure are things that all of us can benefit from. If they don't keep their eye on the ball and get re-involved in partisan bickering the Republicans may lose the battle but the War may still be lost.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Big Ideas? It's to Soon
In his recent New York Times (NYT) column on Bob Herbert praises the candidacies of Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama for their historic significance and for the genuine quality of the candidates, yet he questions the lack of vision.
"What’s missing in this campaign is a bold vision of where the United States should be heading in these crucially important early years of the 21st century. In their different ways, Senators Clinton and Obama have shown themselves to be inspirational and at times even heroic figures. But neither has offered the vision that this moment in history demands."
What Mr. Hebert knows to well is that it isn't time to roll out your vision of the future. In this artificially long, election season, which began the moment the midterm election of 2006 was settled, we are just getting the chairs arranged around the table. Pundits and policy wonks are having a great time speculating on everything from hairdo's toneer-do's . Every special interest with a power position is weighing in on which candidate will serve them best. The candidates are keeping their cards very close to their proverbial vest in order to look as vanilla as they can across the board. Once the party nominations are settled, we will see a little ankle, a glimpse of the leg and the top button will loosen on this subject, but we aren't going to see the "vision statement" in anything but the broadest terms. Laying you cards on the table before the betting has closed is a mistake even the a rube inLas Vegas knows is stupid.
However, Mr. Herbert has a good point. We should be talking more about the candidates vision of the future and he is right to demand they give to us before we vote for them. There is little doubt that we really are at a turning point in our history. It is not a campaign slogan to merely spread a tent and try to get everyone under it. Fortunately a significant number of young people get it and are energizing this movement. Their support of Obama have surprised and gotten the attention of the public in general and the political wonks in specific. What these young people have realized and what their involvement in the this political process has highlighted are issues that have been on the back burner for too long.
We need to to do, in general, is invest in this country. We need to reassess our foreign policy. We need to restructure our government to answer the needs of this century.
Investment in this country is usually interpreted as code for isolationism by right wing politicians, but the truth is while we try to build roads, bridges, schools and other infrastructure in Iraq, our own needs in this area is decaying. We need to set aside the rhetoric and take a clear look at the needs in our own country.
Leaders of the future need to recognize that the class structure in our society has changed forever and that protection for the former middle class need to be introduced n the face of global corporations. Unions, local and state government are generally helpless in the face of the strength and mobility of these entities.
Tax rules, health care protection, requiring the payment of a living wage and other so-called left wing issues become more reasonable when faced with the monolithic global corporation. We need to look at the rights and responsibility of citizenship in order to empower people to control their communities. On the other hand we have to increase the opportunity for education and underwrite that effort. We do not have a shortage ofeducatable workers in almost any field that you might name. What we have is a shortage of affordable opportunities for educable people to gain the knowledge and skills they need to serve.
(Example: Educated workers from foreign countries who are granted work permits in this country because there are shortages in their fields of expertise, are often educated for free in their own countries. College degrees in their fields can cost the American student thousands of dollars and usually is represented by debt upon graduation.)
We clearly need to debate the real issues of our time. Economic and social needs are important and have been neglected for far too long, however we still represent he strongest nation in the world and can't abandon that responsibility. Global terrorism is real, but engaging ourselves in land wars in the middle east is not the way to fight this battle.
We need to look at the world with fresh eyes. Unfortunately recent decisions by our government have damaged our reputation and standing in the world community. We need to repair that by making good decisions in our partnership with other countries to achieve a balance that allows the rest of the world to grow and prosper, rather than exploiting them for our own short term interests. We will not always like nor will it be in our best interest to witness the journey other countries will take in their own self interest. However, the directions they take and their goals, unless they include our destruction, are and never have been, any of our business. Currently, we relate to the rest of the world, like a meddling mother, who knows no limits on her justification to manipulate theirchild's lives and influence their actions. Instead, we need to be that shinning example of what works and the sympathetic good neighbor, not the global bully that gets it's way or strikes out in anger and vengeance.
Clearly, our armed forces are the best in the world, but as we have seen, and let's admit it the world has witnessed, we can not police the world. The military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan have stretched or resources to the maximum. We not only exhibit our limitations to the real enemies of freedom, but we are wasting our assets in yet another attempt to protect oil company assets. Rather than asking our selves why we are "hooked" on this oil consumption habit and how we could break it, we engage in war to feed our habit. Our foreign policy is always about us and as a result we are left with bitter and vengeful allies with the thinnest veneer of allegiance.
Yes, we need a big idea vision of the future, but we also have to have the dialogue in the public sector to build a coalition of thought and purpose to a new vision of America. Change does not happen quickly nor without resistance. The next President has to build a body of public approval that is prepared to remain committed and vocal in their insistence on change.
"What’s missing in this campaign is a bold vision of where the United States should be heading in these crucially important early years of the 21st century. In their different ways, Senators Clinton and Obama have shown themselves to be inspirational and at times even heroic figures. But neither has offered the vision that this moment in history demands."
What Mr. Hebert knows to well is that it isn't time to roll out your vision of the future. In this artificially long, election season, which began the moment the midterm election of 2006 was settled, we are just getting the chairs arranged around the table. Pundits and policy wonks are having a great time speculating on everything from hairdo's toneer-do's . Every special interest with a power position is weighing in on which candidate will serve them best. The candidates are keeping their cards very close to their proverbial vest in order to look as vanilla as they can across the board. Once the party nominations are settled, we will see a little ankle, a glimpse of the leg and the top button will loosen on this subject, but we aren't going to see the "vision statement" in anything but the broadest terms. Laying you cards on the table before the betting has closed is a mistake even the a rube inLas Vegas knows is stupid.
However, Mr. Herbert has a good point. We should be talking more about the candidates vision of the future and he is right to demand they give to us before we vote for them. There is little doubt that we really are at a turning point in our history. It is not a campaign slogan to merely spread a tent and try to get everyone under it. Fortunately a significant number of young people get it and are energizing this movement. Their support of Obama have surprised and gotten the attention of the public in general and the political wonks in specific. What these young people have realized and what their involvement in the this political process has highlighted are issues that have been on the back burner for too long.
We need to to do, in general, is invest in this country. We need to reassess our foreign policy. We need to restructure our government to answer the needs of this century.
Investment in this country is usually interpreted as code for isolationism by right wing politicians, but the truth is while we try to build roads, bridges, schools and other infrastructure in Iraq, our own needs in this area is decaying. We need to set aside the rhetoric and take a clear look at the needs in our own country.
Leaders of the future need to recognize that the class structure in our society has changed forever and that protection for the former middle class need to be introduced n the face of global corporations. Unions, local and state government are generally helpless in the face of the strength and mobility of these entities.
Tax rules, health care protection, requiring the payment of a living wage and other so-called left wing issues become more reasonable when faced with the monolithic global corporation. We need to look at the rights and responsibility of citizenship in order to empower people to control their communities. On the other hand we have to increase the opportunity for education and underwrite that effort. We do not have a shortage ofeducatable workers in almost any field that you might name. What we have is a shortage of affordable opportunities for educable people to gain the knowledge and skills they need to serve.
(Example: Educated workers from foreign countries who are granted work permits in this country because there are shortages in their fields of expertise, are often educated for free in their own countries. College degrees in their fields can cost the American student thousands of dollars and usually is represented by debt upon graduation.)
We clearly need to debate the real issues of our time. Economic and social needs are important and have been neglected for far too long, however we still represent he strongest nation in the world and can't abandon that responsibility. Global terrorism is real, but engaging ourselves in land wars in the middle east is not the way to fight this battle.
We need to look at the world with fresh eyes. Unfortunately recent decisions by our government have damaged our reputation and standing in the world community. We need to repair that by making good decisions in our partnership with other countries to achieve a balance that allows the rest of the world to grow and prosper, rather than exploiting them for our own short term interests. We will not always like nor will it be in our best interest to witness the journey other countries will take in their own self interest. However, the directions they take and their goals, unless they include our destruction, are and never have been, any of our business. Currently, we relate to the rest of the world, like a meddling mother, who knows no limits on her justification to manipulate theirchild's lives and influence their actions. Instead, we need to be that shinning example of what works and the sympathetic good neighbor, not the global bully that gets it's way or strikes out in anger and vengeance.
Clearly, our armed forces are the best in the world, but as we have seen, and let's admit it the world has witnessed, we can not police the world. The military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan have stretched or resources to the maximum. We not only exhibit our limitations to the real enemies of freedom, but we are wasting our assets in yet another attempt to protect oil company assets. Rather than asking our selves why we are "hooked" on this oil consumption habit and how we could break it, we engage in war to feed our habit. Our foreign policy is always about us and as a result we are left with bitter and vengeful allies with the thinnest veneer of allegiance.
Yes, we need a big idea vision of the future, but we also have to have the dialogue in the public sector to build a coalition of thought and purpose to a new vision of America. Change does not happen quickly nor without resistance. The next President has to build a body of public approval that is prepared to remain committed and vocal in their insistence on change.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Overconfidence
They haven't decided whose won the nomination yet, but the one thing I'm starting to hear is the don't count your chickens before they hatch speeches on the edge of the discussions. Electability has been and issue from the start on both sides of the aisle. McCain looks like he's cruising to a win for the Republicans. His job is to bring the factions of his party together and in his case, this is no easy matter. The insanity of the extreme right has reasoned that John, war hero, defender of Bush's War and fiscally conservative senate voter is not conservative enough. He is evidently not pure on the loony issues, fags, flags and fetuses.
Republican conservatives don't want to hear that he is popular among independent voters, that group that ultimately will decide the election. They don't want to hear that he and he alone may be the only candidate that can beat Hillary Clinton. They want to believe, evidently, anyone can beat Hillary because...well because..goll darn it she's wrong and we're right, don't ya know. That is what passes for policy in a party that is so splintered that the demographics probably look like phone book with each person believing themselves to be a power broker. These are the folks that still can't believe after all the energy and money they invested in trying to bring down Bill Clinton, that he's still kicking their ass.
But they do love their cheerleaders. Remember, if Rush Limbaugh didn't exist, some one would invent him. His constant campaign to bring down McCain will only bring down the party as it will further drive a wedge between the party faithful to the point they will not vote and give up the field of battle. This is a lesson the Democrats learned post McGovern and Clinton. Maybe.
The Democrats are posed on the edge of new era in American Politics. It appears they will nominate the first woman or the first black man to become President of the United States. This is no small thing. It is suppose to be the Democrats office to take. It's generally conceded, they have to lose the election. Anti Republican feelings are running high in the country. Most experts feel that they have to take their act out of town polish it and come back another day.
Or do they? Two things can happen that could be bad for the Democrats. The Obama-Clinton fight could get so vicious as to split the party. Not only would they squander the advantage they apparently have, but they would turn the country back to a revitalized Republican Party for yet another round of disastrous leadership. Secondly, they will have destroyed the chances of two very talented and important politicians. I for one am uneasy about this slam-dunk victory for the Democrats. Given the malevolence the Republicans will bring to the general election, after all if they will sacrifice their own, what do expect they will do to the competition, I think we have a right to worry.
Republican conservatives don't want to hear that he is popular among independent voters, that group that ultimately will decide the election. They don't want to hear that he and he alone may be the only candidate that can beat Hillary Clinton. They want to believe, evidently, anyone can beat Hillary because...well because..goll darn it she's wrong and we're right, don't ya know. That is what passes for policy in a party that is so splintered that the demographics probably look like phone book with each person believing themselves to be a power broker. These are the folks that still can't believe after all the energy and money they invested in trying to bring down Bill Clinton, that he's still kicking their ass.
But they do love their cheerleaders. Remember, if Rush Limbaugh didn't exist, some one would invent him. His constant campaign to bring down McCain will only bring down the party as it will further drive a wedge between the party faithful to the point they will not vote and give up the field of battle. This is a lesson the Democrats learned post McGovern and Clinton. Maybe.
The Democrats are posed on the edge of new era in American Politics. It appears they will nominate the first woman or the first black man to become President of the United States. This is no small thing. It is suppose to be the Democrats office to take. It's generally conceded, they have to lose the election. Anti Republican feelings are running high in the country. Most experts feel that they have to take their act out of town polish it and come back another day.
Or do they? Two things can happen that could be bad for the Democrats. The Obama-Clinton fight could get so vicious as to split the party. Not only would they squander the advantage they apparently have, but they would turn the country back to a revitalized Republican Party for yet another round of disastrous leadership. Secondly, they will have destroyed the chances of two very talented and important politicians. I for one am uneasy about this slam-dunk victory for the Democrats. Given the malevolence the Republicans will bring to the general election, after all if they will sacrifice their own, what do expect they will do to the competition, I think we have a right to worry.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Lame Duck, It's not just Bush
Last night the pathetic spectacle of George Bush, in my opinion the worst President of my lifetime, gave his final State of the Union speech. It is required by law, but I'm sure most of the participants would have voted to let him e mail it. As it was, the leader of the free world stood powerless, clad in failure in front of two of his likely successors, Clinton and Obama.
I need not go through the list of failed policies that Bush pursued while in office. Enough said that his constituency, the religious right and the economically privileged are not really better off than they were seven years ago when he took office with their hopes and prayers lifting him up as the next saviour. Yes they have their Supreme Court and their tax cuts, but even those will fade. Karl Rove's dream of a generational Republican dynasty was destroyed in the wake of inept leadership, the strum and drang of the War in Iraq and the total lack of dialogue with anyone who could have told them they were not in touch with the majority of American People.
We are not a nation of bigots. Nor do we believe that getting rich is worth setting aside any commitment to the common good. We do have noble intentions. Some of us do not know what to do with those feelings. We crave action on the matter. Like the physician we seek to do no harm and feel it would be nice to leave this place a little better than we found it. From time to time, a leader comes a long that inspires us Some bring out the worst of our fears and inclinations. Some inspire us to do better.
We may have such a leader in Barak Obama. Regardless of whether he becomes President, because there is a lot of work to be done in that effort, his candidacy represents the turning of the page on an ugly story in American Political History. The rejection of the social contract for individualism, the elevation of economics over citizenship and the criminalization of poverty may have felt good as long as you were on the winning team, but when the fact that the game was rigged became apparent it behoves all of us to be a little bit ashamed.
It is a time for change. This word might become a campaign cliche, but it is true nonetheless. I believe we've had enough partisan politics. Make no mistake no matter how weakened the Republican Party might be after the election, they will not go quietly in the that good night. And if you don't believe there are some Democrats that will waste their time looking for payback, you've in for a shock.
But as the will of the people becomes more apparent, it is my hope that we can coalesce under an agenda of the real issues. The issues that balance the needs of the people against those of special interests (which will not go away either). We have problems of global proportions. The mismanagement of environmental issues, the belligerent conduct of foreign policy and the neglect of infrastructure issues are bad enough, but we must be aware the policies of change need traction. Moving from one direction to another will take time, patience and most of all leadership that keep it's eye on the business at hand.
I need not go through the list of failed policies that Bush pursued while in office. Enough said that his constituency, the religious right and the economically privileged are not really better off than they were seven years ago when he took office with their hopes and prayers lifting him up as the next saviour. Yes they have their Supreme Court and their tax cuts, but even those will fade. Karl Rove's dream of a generational Republican dynasty was destroyed in the wake of inept leadership, the strum and drang of the War in Iraq and the total lack of dialogue with anyone who could have told them they were not in touch with the majority of American People.
We are not a nation of bigots. Nor do we believe that getting rich is worth setting aside any commitment to the common good. We do have noble intentions. Some of us do not know what to do with those feelings. We crave action on the matter. Like the physician we seek to do no harm and feel it would be nice to leave this place a little better than we found it. From time to time, a leader comes a long that inspires us Some bring out the worst of our fears and inclinations. Some inspire us to do better.
We may have such a leader in Barak Obama. Regardless of whether he becomes President, because there is a lot of work to be done in that effort, his candidacy represents the turning of the page on an ugly story in American Political History. The rejection of the social contract for individualism, the elevation of economics over citizenship and the criminalization of poverty may have felt good as long as you were on the winning team, but when the fact that the game was rigged became apparent it behoves all of us to be a little bit ashamed.
It is a time for change. This word might become a campaign cliche, but it is true nonetheless. I believe we've had enough partisan politics. Make no mistake no matter how weakened the Republican Party might be after the election, they will not go quietly in the that good night. And if you don't believe there are some Democrats that will waste their time looking for payback, you've in for a shock.
But as the will of the people becomes more apparent, it is my hope that we can coalesce under an agenda of the real issues. The issues that balance the needs of the people against those of special interests (which will not go away either). We have problems of global proportions. The mismanagement of environmental issues, the belligerent conduct of foreign policy and the neglect of infrastructure issues are bad enough, but we must be aware the policies of change need traction. Moving from one direction to another will take time, patience and most of all leadership that keep it's eye on the business at hand.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Clinton's Folly, Bill that is...
No one owes more to a wife that stuck by him through thick and thin, than Bill Clinton. Be warned, I discount the Monica thing. She has been his conscience, his soul mate and his minister without portfolio during times when his enemies were people like Delay, Armey and Gingrich. This unholy force was enough to make anyone wish they were teaching at a small University in some obscure state, such as Arkansas rather than living in the bull ring that is Washington DC. Everything from her effort to straighten out the health care mess in the country to the hairstyle she chose was criticized by lead brains that included Moreen Dowd, who writes for a paper that is rumoured to be liberal. During the eight years of Bill's presidency she was vilified and hated by some of the highest ranking Christians and right wing nuts in the political spectrum.
Generally, Hilary Clinton was more intelligent than her opposition. She showed more class and restraint in the onset of attack after attack, than any of her partisan pot-shooters. The only time she really looked pathetic was when Bill lied. (I didn't have sex with that women.) She believed him at a time when she should have known better. At the time, she told the media that it was a conspiracy by the right wing. And it was, however for once they didn't need to rig the charge.
All of this being said, Bill has been on the campaign trail trying to get Hilary into his old job, and no one is working harder, maybe to hard. As you regular readers know I have my doubts about another Clinton White House, but that would not prevent me voting for her. I do like the prospects of an Obama White House, so sift my remarks good citizen, I'm not totally without bias.
Bill is swinging the ax that has two edges. He might cut Obama with his relentless, "his record isn't clean on the War in Iraq" and "he isn't experienced enough", but what happens dear friend when one of them becomes the nominee of the party? We will need both of them to form the coalition that will put this partisan gridlock behind us and get us moving again. That's when the other edge of the ax might hurt us.
Generally, Hilary Clinton was more intelligent than her opposition. She showed more class and restraint in the onset of attack after attack, than any of her partisan pot-shooters. The only time she really looked pathetic was when Bill lied. (I didn't have sex with that women.) She believed him at a time when she should have known better. At the time, she told the media that it was a conspiracy by the right wing. And it was, however for once they didn't need to rig the charge.
All of this being said, Bill has been on the campaign trail trying to get Hilary into his old job, and no one is working harder, maybe to hard. As you regular readers know I have my doubts about another Clinton White House, but that would not prevent me voting for her. I do like the prospects of an Obama White House, so sift my remarks good citizen, I'm not totally without bias.
Bill is swinging the ax that has two edges. He might cut Obama with his relentless, "his record isn't clean on the War in Iraq" and "he isn't experienced enough", but what happens dear friend when one of them becomes the nominee of the party? We will need both of them to form the coalition that will put this partisan gridlock behind us and get us moving again. That's when the other edge of the ax might hurt us.
Friday, January 25, 2008
How to Lose a Sure Thing
I, like I'm sure many others are totally dismayed at the current democratic campaigns for their parties nomination. Talk about he said she said and all of the school yard antics to go with it. I have to say, as Bill Cosby soeloquently titled his latest book, "Come on People!".
The Republican Party is in melt down. The various factions within the party are trying to position themselves for a post Bush era and they have failed to find a rally point. The candidates are stuck defending Bush's failed policies because to not do so would lose them a significant part of the party base. Remember, they have to appeal to Republican voters not the general public. The real candidate will emerge after they are nominated.
The religious right, that vaunted two edge sword that Karl Rove and company sharpened so well for Bush, can't find a candidate that will pass their narrow litmus test of social engineer and true Christian.
The anti-Tax guys, Norquist and Company, just don't get it. The mood of the electorate has changed. We have seen less government and we don't like it. It seems that lack of regulation and free market economics produces Enron, Wall StreetBanditry and home loan panics. With the rich obviously getting richer, the poor getting nominally poorer and the middle evaporating like spilled beer on a summer sidewalk, it seems the myth of everyone being welcomed at the country club has vanished.
Health care costs and educational opportunities are more important than spreading democracy to the Middle East. And while Iraq is on the back burner because the "Surge" has put a relativedegree of calm in the area, most of us still don't see the way out. Maybe a newer version of a dignified retreat?
Amidst all of this Republican chaos is the gloom of failure. Supply side economics, the hallmark of the Reagan era, has failed. Peace in the Middle East is still not a reality. We have lost the respect and admiration of most of the world including our friends. Trust me, nothing will happen on the international front until thisadministration is gone. Our domestic economy and infrastructure has been ignored to a large extent. The only thing that is sure since Bush has taken office is that Corporate Welfare entitlements are firmly in place for theforeseeable future.
And the Democrat? Fighting like kids in a school yard over which is better girls or boys, he said she said and my friends are cooler than your friends. Come on People!
The Republican Party is in melt down. The various factions within the party are trying to position themselves for a post Bush era and they have failed to find a rally point. The candidates are stuck defending Bush's failed policies because to not do so would lose them a significant part of the party base. Remember, they have to appeal to Republican voters not the general public. The real candidate will emerge after they are nominated.
The religious right, that vaunted two edge sword that Karl Rove and company sharpened so well for Bush, can't find a candidate that will pass their narrow litmus test of social engineer and true Christian.
The anti-Tax guys, Norquist and Company, just don't get it. The mood of the electorate has changed. We have seen less government and we don't like it. It seems that lack of regulation and free market economics produces Enron, Wall StreetBanditry and home loan panics. With the rich obviously getting richer, the poor getting nominally poorer and the middle evaporating like spilled beer on a summer sidewalk, it seems the myth of everyone being welcomed at the country club has vanished.
Health care costs and educational opportunities are more important than spreading democracy to the Middle East. And while Iraq is on the back burner because the "Surge" has put a relativedegree of calm in the area, most of us still don't see the way out. Maybe a newer version of a dignified retreat?
Amidst all of this Republican chaos is the gloom of failure. Supply side economics, the hallmark of the Reagan era, has failed. Peace in the Middle East is still not a reality. We have lost the respect and admiration of most of the world including our friends. Trust me, nothing will happen on the international front until thisadministration is gone. Our domestic economy and infrastructure has been ignored to a large extent. The only thing that is sure since Bush has taken office is that Corporate Welfare entitlements are firmly in place for theforeseeable future.
And the Democrat? Fighting like kids in a school yard over which is better girls or boys, he said she said and my friends are cooler than your friends. Come on People!
Monday, January 14, 2008
The American Ayatollah's
No, they didn't insist on women wearing headscarf's or hiding their bodies completely in floor length gowns. Nor, did they insist that they travel only with male members of their own family. And they weren't Muslim extremists, but other similarities to the Taliban are frightening.
In my mind, any religion that subjugates either sex is wrong on the face of its belief system. I can't think of one religion that considers men the inferior of the two sexes. While the equality of women in American culture is new, (Yes, I know that will surprise people under the age of forty.), the blow-back from the feminist movement of the sixties has always been at the forefront of the conservative, may I say, extremists in the US. The recognition of equality between the sexes has been blamed for the break up of the traditional American Family, the higher divorce rate, the resulting escalation in single parent families, the abortion rate and the general lowering of morals in the society. Are these issues all solely the results of the feminist success?
Many men who were caught in the cross over from "a mans home is his castle" to the "why doesn't he help with the housework' eras, were frustrated, some say emasculated by events and there is no doubt they were motivated to strike back. Women who felt that the freedom to be all they could be was nice, but the practical application of the day to day reality of the concept was hard. In the early days of the movement the talk was easy, the walk, as a lot of women will tell you, was another story. Your security and future, when you have kids, a low paying job and no husband doesn't look to good and slogan and conscious raising nights out with the girls isn't a lot of solace.
Those of us that lived through the sixties thought that society had changed irrevocably on number of social fronts, but what we forget is that power is never surrendered. Finding a coalition of frustrated and seemingly disenfranchised, religious leaders formed a movement called "the moral Majority". Let me say this that while admittedly the movement gained a lot of power because of its solidarity and visibility, at its core it was neither moral nor a majority, but it often times appeared that way. T V Evangelists and mega church pastors did one thing differently than their predecessors, they took sides in the political arena. Billy Graham, used to be the pastor to presidents. He never seemed political, but he was always welcome in the White House. The new Ayatollahs however, hung their hat on the Republican party and rode the moral and social discontent to a position of power so great that even during this election process in 2008, we are witnessing the republican candidates jockeying for "Evangelical Christian" support, similar to the Democrats scrambling for the Labor Union support.
The Ayatollahs have been able to keep their flock together because they successfully convinced these good folks that these issues are personal and that they are being persecuted. The government is the problem. The government is controlled by liberal interests that do not have their best interests in mind when they legislate laws that protect gays, promiscuous single moms, and convicted criminals. This movement is highly symbolic. Prayer in school, protection for the American Flag and focus on banning abortions are all highly visible rallying points. I call The guns, flags, sluts and fags" agenda.
The problem is that while the support of these groups might be important to get the nomination from the party in some respects they are toxic in the general election. The American Ayatollahs are no different in one respect to their counterparts in the Muslim world. They have to convince their followers that they are the victims of society, that they are persecuted for their beliefs and the enemy is the defiler of their sacred beliefs. Abortion is murder and those that practice it can be justifiably killed. Women are vessels of God and should be sheltered and defended from sin and degradation. Only their husband can do that and they must trust and obey him in all things. Homosexuals are all living in sin and can not be tolerated. If we do not pray in school we are losing the Christian foundation of our American beliefs. And the latest scare tactic, illegal immigrants are a threat to our society and must be expunged from our country.
This deliberate and calculated reliance on discontent and fear is no different than their counterparts in extremist Muslim countries. Unfortunately, it worked for a long time. A minority of malcontents have held this countries deliberative process hostage for far to long. For Republicans it required being the right kind of conservative to gain admission to the inner circle, moderates from either party need not apply. And so in each election process, the candidates would march to Bob Jones University, pay homage to the Ayatollahs and get their blessing. The power, of course, came from motivating a huge voter turn out that blindly voted their pitiful one issue minds. Their need to be assured that the candidate would not make them license their guns, would not recognize gay marriage, fight to overturn Roe v Wade, allow them to pray in schools and, subtly but clearly understood was, the need to assure them that they were candidates of a Christian America.
What's changed? The stark realization that the Ayatollahs had sold out the needs of the average Joe. Somewhere along the line, people began to realize that all of these social issues were important, but not so important as to not recognize other needs, pressing needs. Poor health care delivery, the instability of jobs in a global economy. failing infrastructure and lack of emergency preparedness all became more important than abortion rights, flag burning, commencement prayers and homosexuals rights.
As a matter of fact, people became aware that nobody was preventing them from pray silently in school, forcing them to, burn a flag, have an abortion or adopt a homosexual lifestyle. They could still object to these things on moral ground and more to the point they did not have to prevent others from holding their beliefs. In short they weren't being persecuted for their beliefs, they were attempting to inflict their beliefs on others by law. Does that not sound like religious extremism? Of course it is and while you can try and call it strong religious belief, it's fascism with a holy face. I am hoping this next election deals a death blow to religious extremism in our political system. I want the Republicans to field meaningful candidates and provide honest opposition to the Democrats in matters of civil law and statecraft. The Ayatollahs will not go away, but at least they will be relegated to the fanatic fringe where they belong.
In my mind, any religion that subjugates either sex is wrong on the face of its belief system. I can't think of one religion that considers men the inferior of the two sexes. While the equality of women in American culture is new, (Yes, I know that will surprise people under the age of forty.), the blow-back from the feminist movement of the sixties has always been at the forefront of the conservative, may I say, extremists in the US. The recognition of equality between the sexes has been blamed for the break up of the traditional American Family, the higher divorce rate, the resulting escalation in single parent families, the abortion rate and the general lowering of morals in the society. Are these issues all solely the results of the feminist success?
Many men who were caught in the cross over from "a mans home is his castle" to the "why doesn't he help with the housework' eras, were frustrated, some say emasculated by events and there is no doubt they were motivated to strike back. Women who felt that the freedom to be all they could be was nice, but the practical application of the day to day reality of the concept was hard. In the early days of the movement the talk was easy, the walk, as a lot of women will tell you, was another story. Your security and future, when you have kids, a low paying job and no husband doesn't look to good and slogan and conscious raising nights out with the girls isn't a lot of solace.
Those of us that lived through the sixties thought that society had changed irrevocably on number of social fronts, but what we forget is that power is never surrendered. Finding a coalition of frustrated and seemingly disenfranchised, religious leaders formed a movement called "the moral Majority". Let me say this that while admittedly the movement gained a lot of power because of its solidarity and visibility, at its core it was neither moral nor a majority, but it often times appeared that way. T V Evangelists and mega church pastors did one thing differently than their predecessors, they took sides in the political arena. Billy Graham, used to be the pastor to presidents. He never seemed political, but he was always welcome in the White House. The new Ayatollahs however, hung their hat on the Republican party and rode the moral and social discontent to a position of power so great that even during this election process in 2008, we are witnessing the republican candidates jockeying for "Evangelical Christian" support, similar to the Democrats scrambling for the Labor Union support.
The Ayatollahs have been able to keep their flock together because they successfully convinced these good folks that these issues are personal and that they are being persecuted. The government is the problem. The government is controlled by liberal interests that do not have their best interests in mind when they legislate laws that protect gays, promiscuous single moms, and convicted criminals. This movement is highly symbolic. Prayer in school, protection for the American Flag and focus on banning abortions are all highly visible rallying points. I call The guns, flags, sluts and fags" agenda.
The problem is that while the support of these groups might be important to get the nomination from the party in some respects they are toxic in the general election. The American Ayatollahs are no different in one respect to their counterparts in the Muslim world. They have to convince their followers that they are the victims of society, that they are persecuted for their beliefs and the enemy is the defiler of their sacred beliefs. Abortion is murder and those that practice it can be justifiably killed. Women are vessels of God and should be sheltered and defended from sin and degradation. Only their husband can do that and they must trust and obey him in all things. Homosexuals are all living in sin and can not be tolerated. If we do not pray in school we are losing the Christian foundation of our American beliefs. And the latest scare tactic, illegal immigrants are a threat to our society and must be expunged from our country.
This deliberate and calculated reliance on discontent and fear is no different than their counterparts in extremist Muslim countries. Unfortunately, it worked for a long time. A minority of malcontents have held this countries deliberative process hostage for far to long. For Republicans it required being the right kind of conservative to gain admission to the inner circle, moderates from either party need not apply. And so in each election process, the candidates would march to Bob Jones University, pay homage to the Ayatollahs and get their blessing. The power, of course, came from motivating a huge voter turn out that blindly voted their pitiful one issue minds. Their need to be assured that the candidate would not make them license their guns, would not recognize gay marriage, fight to overturn Roe v Wade, allow them to pray in schools and, subtly but clearly understood was, the need to assure them that they were candidates of a Christian America.
What's changed? The stark realization that the Ayatollahs had sold out the needs of the average Joe. Somewhere along the line, people began to realize that all of these social issues were important, but not so important as to not recognize other needs, pressing needs. Poor health care delivery, the instability of jobs in a global economy. failing infrastructure and lack of emergency preparedness all became more important than abortion rights, flag burning, commencement prayers and homosexuals rights.
As a matter of fact, people became aware that nobody was preventing them from pray silently in school, forcing them to, burn a flag, have an abortion or adopt a homosexual lifestyle. They could still object to these things on moral ground and more to the point they did not have to prevent others from holding their beliefs. In short they weren't being persecuted for their beliefs, they were attempting to inflict their beliefs on others by law. Does that not sound like religious extremism? Of course it is and while you can try and call it strong religious belief, it's fascism with a holy face. I am hoping this next election deals a death blow to religious extremism in our political system. I want the Republicans to field meaningful candidates and provide honest opposition to the Democrats in matters of civil law and statecraft. The Ayatollahs will not go away, but at least they will be relegated to the fanatic fringe where they belong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
