What a great article by Matt Taibbi for RollingStone online, entitled The Mansion Family. He argues — quite effectively — how pundits like David Brooks and the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), have the common desire to champion the “just be nice” crowd of political movers, which includes mostly those who work within the established party system and catch a bye due to their seniority and focus on the centrist position of power, even as national political bias tilts dangerously toward the autocratic and away from the democratic. Understandably, this results in CYA politics-as-usual for those on the party payroll, and secures the greatest following among those who are presently among the most financially comfortable and arguably, have the most to lose from a grassroots alarmist platform which questions a continuous, incremental assult upon rights and liberties of all American citizens under the present administration.
Can you see a demographic trend here? We have the well-to-do, well-meaning liberal leadership growing tired of fighting the good fight. And why should they? Why should the DLC promote policies of change, when life is so grand — for them? Idealism is a noble cause for the young, naive and powerless. Those with positions to lose — the Democratic leaders, choose to cede their influence bit by bit, in a truly defensive manner. Call it band-aid diplomacy, with a primary focus on tending the garden of big donor money, greasing the wheels of party machinery without the need to stoop and glad-hand the individual voter.
Does it make sense to plug voter-loss through knee-jerk policy that is reactionary without discernable direction or platform? This stategy stifles the progressive spirit of grassroots support. Let’s use the Lamont/Lieberman battle shaping up, for example. Taibbi says it best:
The DLC are the lowest kind of scum; we’re talking about people who are paid by the likes of Eli Lilly and Union Carbide to go on television and call suburban moms and college kids who happen to be against the war commies and jihadists. On the ignominious-sellout scale, that’s lower than doing PR for a utility that turns your grandmother’s heat off at Christmas. And that’s pretty bad — but with enough money and enough of the right kind of publicity their side still might win in the Lamont/Lieberman primary on August 8th.
So we will see Aug 8th, whether CT Democrats choose business as usual, in a continuous slide into oblivion, or pick a fresh face built from the base constituency. If the miraculous does happen, perhaps a tipping point will mark a new direction for the Democratic Party in 2006.
Tags: chicken hawks, military-industrial complex, national security, war
So the general population now thinks the war in Iraq is a mistake. We can no longer justify the deaths of our sons and daughters in this foreign land that we occupy. And what of the escalating national debt — how will we pay for this war? When will Congress respond with fiscal responsibility, rejecting tax breaks for those already sufficiently well off? Are we now a nation which condones torture? What of murder of innocents, like those in the Iraqi village of Haditha — is not genocide one of the supporting arguments for disposing of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein? We hear of secret US sponsored prison camps where people — combatants, suspected terrorists, whoever — are held without standards of due process. Still we thank God for the protection afforded our own inalienable rights — until these defenses also fall under attack, as security concerns provide justification for warrant-less spying granted by those elected or appointed to guard not dilute our freedoms.
While corrosive attempts to dismantle social safeguards legislated over the past eight decades — often in favor of corporate interests, continues — a Republican administration and congress, accused broadly and repeatedly of corruption, cronyism and gross incompetence — schemes to deflect scandalous inquiries with debate upon burning issues of the day — same sex marriage.
When these fear-mongers lose the confidence and respect of most constituents, they rally their faithful rabid base — in this case, homophobic christianist wingnuts. By proffering a constitutional amendment that both curtails individual rights and promotes social inequality, this Republican regime has again sought means to curb personal freedom and enhance institutional authority. Friends, this is the foundation of fascism. As Sinclair Lewis wrote in 1935, “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag, and carrying a cross.”
Tags: chicken hawks, fear mongering, military-industrial complex, national security, public opinion, war