"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation…want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters…. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." Frederick Douglass
Has "American character" turned into an oxymoron?
There are two of my comments I am transitioning into a post right now in a quest for any OS thoughts on the moral (or, in my opinion, the primarily amoral) state of America and, the really hard part, what are we going to do about it.
The first comment I made at Jonathan Wolfman's latest post, "The Moral Core of the Current Debate" and the second one (two parts) I made in response to a comment by skypixieo on my latest post, "War Criminal Named Obama Smells Sweeter Than One Named Bush?" I hope skypixieo does not mind my re-posting his very profound and motivating comment to me here, also.
Here is my first comment to Jonathan Wolfman which was also a continuation of my thoughts stirred on by skypixieo:
Why is political activism so passionate and inspired for the tea party folk, et al., and flailing about and disjointed and cynically tepid on the part of the progressives? So seriously not there in terms of walking the walk? Where is the wave of humanitarianism? The right is motivated but misguided. Where is the left and its spiritual humanitarian motivation?
Why is there not a serious movement of outrage that is being sustained on the left? Yes, against Walker in Wisconsin something was happening there, but why has not the fire caught on? Or combusted elsewhere in more places and been sustained? The Arab Spring folks -- they want democracy like the West and yet perhaps they don't know that in the West it has so seriously drained away at this point. Have we not come to a deep enough bottom? Granted the US corporate media often does not acknowledge those who are walking the walk. But still. Why are there not hundreds of thousands of us forcing them to do that?
We have all as citizens been goose-stepping by the homeless for years after Reagan emptied public-funded institutions for the mentally ill. Yes, maybe some of us smile, nod and give over some change. Is that it? And no left or right president or reps want to focus on the plight of the homeless, even homeless vets (until John Edwards brought them up) out of fear of freaking out citizens who they assume would be hysterical giving help to the under-class. Ironically, the taxpayer's money ($14 trillion) was given to the over-class out of a sudden perverted "socialism" to rescue THEM.
"When good people do nothing." Edmund Burke. That is what we have here. A political will-lessness on the part of the majority of Americans. Is it just the tea partiers with feelings? Beyond the astro-turfing there are feelings involved. Even if these people are fighting against their own self-interest unbeknownst to them, the political manipulators are that good, but there is a mojo there. As the left sits back and mocks them and yet what are they doing to help themselves and the people they maintain they care about? Even to help THEMSELVES would be a step in the right direction.
Going to vote once a year? Is that it? Or not if we are pissed off or just plain cynical? That is what we do. Go to vote for the limited and hypocritically-performing choices that the oligarchs present to us with the help of the Oprahs, etc.
What about the innocents being killed in other countries with US corporate-agenda wars? Or innocent people sitting in cages forever since they were at the wrong place at the wrong time (in their own countries, mind you) and in the name of the fear of terrorism and the idea that maybe 1% may be real terrorists let the other 99% rot because of American exceptionalism. (Just don't tell us the reality behind the Repub or Dem administration military matrix ... neither one wants transparency, ergo the FURY at Wikileaks .. and Americans disdaining Wikileaks and not heeding the revelations there since tch tch tch the media and their not so fearless leaders talk about Wikileaks as a crime when the CRIMES this government has been perpetrating are STUPENDOUS, even as the "leaders" busily make them legal. Institutionalized evil ... the twisted letters of the law perverting the spirit of what should be humane law and order!) What about both parties ho-humming through these military ethical freakshow horrors?
Even now when 50 cents out of every tax dollar goes to said gratuitous killings and manufacture and engineering of diabolical weaponry and black ops operations ALL OVER THE WORLD. Think of the money as well as the innocent blood. Where is our outrage and activism?
Christ's words: "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." (Matthew 25:35-40)
Do we take responsibility as citizens. Do we have the "response-ability" -- the "ability to respond"?
NOT EVEN CLOSE RIGHT NOW!!!!
There is a fast hardening of soft fascism happening in this country. Without committed citizen activism our republic is lost. We're not outwaiting a trend here, a pendulum swing. We're watching the irrevocable move to fascism, the U.S. Constitution circling the bowl.
As Gandhi said, "We must be the change we want to see in the world."
We have all as citizens been goose-stepping by the homeless for years after Reagan emptied public-funded institutions for the mentally ill. Yes, maybe some of us smile, nod and give over some change. Is that it? And no left or right president or reps want to focus on the plight of the homeless, even homeless vets (until John Edwards brought them up) out of fear of freaking out citizens who they assume would be hysterical giving help to the under-class. Ironically, the taxpayer's money ($14 trillion) was given to the over-class out of a sudden perverted "socialism" to rescue THEM.
"When good people do nothing." Edmund Burke. That is what we have here. A political will-lessness on the part of the majority of Americans. Is it just the tea partiers with feelings? Beyond the astro-turfing there are feelings involved. Even if these people are fighting against their own self-interest unbeknownst to them, the political manipulators are that good, but there is a mojo there. As the left sits back and mocks them and yet what are they doing to help themselves and the people they maintain they care about? Even to help THEMSELVES would be a step in the right direction.
Going to vote once a year? Is that it? Or not if we are pissed off or just plain cynical? That is what we do. Go to vote for the limited and hypocritically-performing choices that the oligarchs present to us with the help of the Oprahs, etc.
What about the innocents being killed in other countries with US corporate-agenda wars? Or innocent people sitting in cages forever since they were at the wrong place at the wrong time (in their own countries, mind you) and in the name of the fear of terrorism and the idea that maybe 1% may be real terrorists let the other 99% rot because of American exceptionalism. (Just don't tell us the reality behind the Repub or Dem administration military matrix ... neither one wants transparency, ergo the FURY at Wikileaks .. and Americans disdaining Wikileaks and not heeding the revelations there since tch tch tch the media and their not so fearless leaders talk about Wikileaks as a crime when the CRIMES this government has been perpetrating are STUPENDOUS, even as the "leaders" busily make them legal. Institutionalized evil ... the twisted letters of the law perverting the spirit of what should be humane law and order!) What about both parties ho-humming through these military ethical freakshow horrors?
Even now when 50 cents out of every tax dollar goes to said gratuitous killings and manufacture and engineering of diabolical weaponry and black ops operations ALL OVER THE WORLD. Think of the money as well as the innocent blood. Where is our outrage and activism?
Christ's words: "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." (Matthew 25:35-40)
Do we take responsibility as citizens. Do we have the "response-ability" -- the "ability to respond"?
NOT EVEN CLOSE RIGHT NOW!!!!
There is a fast hardening of soft fascism happening in this country. Without committed citizen activism our republic is lost. We're not outwaiting a trend here, a pendulum swing. We're watching the irrevocable move to fascism, the U.S. Constitution circling the bowl.
As Gandhi said, "We must be the change we want to see in the world."
end of comment to wolfman
------------
skypixieo:
libby,
I am 70 yrs old. I was involved in all the old activist and progressive movements of the 60s and 70s. These were WORLD WIDE movements, not just ‘Merikan.
And then we died.
One day we were a connected host of millions spread around the world. We had a list of “You’re doing it wrongs” that we were confronting “the establishment” with that would have stretched from Washington to Moscow.
We all, no matter what our particular “beef”, came together to support the anti-Viet Nam war protesters. And one day Viet Nam was over.
Then everyone went home.
We weren’t stupid. We knew perfectly well that if we didn’t quickly gain a new focal point - a new “main” cause around which to maintain cohesion, that we would soon be scattered, irrelevant and unable to initiate the kind of change needed to prevent the elite from total and complete mastery of the world.
We fought and scrapped and quarrelled among ourselves. Each striving to put his particular cause forward as the most “important and needed”. In the end none of us succeeded at this and we all became ashamed of ourselves for letting silly differences split us into a thousand splinters.
The world continued to turn without us. We have, to this day, never again come together in such massive world-wide numbers over anything.
The enemy today is world-wide. It is pervasive. It has corrupted so much of the world that it cannot be escaped. It has strength of numbers; it has strength of wealth; it has developed brain-washing techniques so sophisticated that anyone can be made to believe anything. Not those crude tortures used in GitMo and the dark prisons. Those are just for effect; to frighten the kids with. REAL brainwashing - the kind you don’t even know you have.
How many of our fellows KNOW all that you - and a few others - point out here. Millions? Tens of millions? Hundreds of millions? Probably all that. Why don’t they add it all up and look at the “Amerika of Today”?
They can’t, that’s why.
They have the bits. They have the pieces. They know things are wrong. They know who is behind it all. And why.
But they cannot put it all together and look at it as a whole. In their minds has been inserted a psychological “off” switch. They are literally unable to assemble the pieces - pieces they already have - and look at what is in front of them.
Do you wonder why you cannot get them to “do” anything about our problems? Do you wonder at how deaf they all seem?
Well, they’re not deaf.
They’re bored.
You’re telling them the same things they already know. That they’ve known for a long time; that they have NO ABILITY to assemble into a coherent picture.
It doesn’t help that almost every doggone “progressive” seems to have his/her own half-baked ides of what we might put in place of the corrupt crap we now have. It is time for the “progressives” to start getting a bit progressive. It’s time for those who CAN think to begin to do so. Time to draw up a plan of the world as it ought to be - a goal.
Until that plan is designed, developed, and being put forward in an organized and methodical manner, the “progressives” aren’t.
I am 70 yrs old. I was involved in all the old activist and progressive movements of the 60s and 70s. These were WORLD WIDE movements, not just ‘Merikan.
And then we died.
One day we were a connected host of millions spread around the world. We had a list of “You’re doing it wrongs” that we were confronting “the establishment” with that would have stretched from Washington to Moscow.
We all, no matter what our particular “beef”, came together to support the anti-Viet Nam war protesters. And one day Viet Nam was over.
Then everyone went home.
We weren’t stupid. We knew perfectly well that if we didn’t quickly gain a new focal point - a new “main” cause around which to maintain cohesion, that we would soon be scattered, irrelevant and unable to initiate the kind of change needed to prevent the elite from total and complete mastery of the world.
We fought and scrapped and quarrelled among ourselves. Each striving to put his particular cause forward as the most “important and needed”. In the end none of us succeeded at this and we all became ashamed of ourselves for letting silly differences split us into a thousand splinters.
The world continued to turn without us. We have, to this day, never again come together in such massive world-wide numbers over anything.
The enemy today is world-wide. It is pervasive. It has corrupted so much of the world that it cannot be escaped. It has strength of numbers; it has strength of wealth; it has developed brain-washing techniques so sophisticated that anyone can be made to believe anything. Not those crude tortures used in GitMo and the dark prisons. Those are just for effect; to frighten the kids with. REAL brainwashing - the kind you don’t even know you have.
How many of our fellows KNOW all that you - and a few others - point out here. Millions? Tens of millions? Hundreds of millions? Probably all that. Why don’t they add it all up and look at the “Amerika of Today”?
They can’t, that’s why.
They have the bits. They have the pieces. They know things are wrong. They know who is behind it all. And why.
But they cannot put it all together and look at it as a whole. In their minds has been inserted a psychological “off” switch. They are literally unable to assemble the pieces - pieces they already have - and look at what is in front of them.
Do you wonder why you cannot get them to “do” anything about our problems? Do you wonder at how deaf they all seem?
Well, they’re not deaf.
They’re bored.
You’re telling them the same things they already know. That they’ve known for a long time; that they have NO ABILITY to assemble into a coherent picture.
It doesn’t help that almost every doggone “progressive” seems to have his/her own half-baked ides of what we might put in place of the corrupt crap we now have. It is time for the “progressives” to start getting a bit progressive. It’s time for those who CAN think to begin to do so. Time to draw up a plan of the world as it ought to be - a goal.
Until that plan is designed, developed, and being put forward in an organized and methodical manner, the “progressives” aren’t.
---------
My comment in response in two phases:
sky, I felt humbled reading your heartfelt comment and I want to sit tonight and brainstorm a bit before getting back to you tomorrow. You deserve some thoughtfulness on this.
In fact, you may want to post exactly what you wrote in the above comment as a blog unto itself and I could comment there. Since I would like to know where all the "DFHs" (term of endearment) have gone, too, like the old song refrain, from fellow DFHs. In fact why don't you call the blog "Where Have All The DFHs Gone?" (sorry, being controlling :) )
That amazing and connected worldwide counterculture of youth calling out the shallow status quo. Peace Corps people. Nader's Raiders. Vietnam War protesters. Pushing for Civil Rights. Women's rights. Animal rights. Environmental Rights. The pressure that made LBJ resign, that made Walter Cronkite declare we weren't gonna win in Vietnam. It was cool to want to take care of humanity. It was soul-fulfilling. The music, those folk songs went right into one's heart and opened it up. Your comment is poignant and troubling and deserves an answer. "What happened?" (Wasn't that a followup book from Catch 22 by Heller? or no, it was "Something Happened". Not as good as Catch-22, which maybe is a good parallel metaphor for what happened to all of us.) There are still activists out there seriously walking the walk and willing to be jailed and whatever risks and they are stunning and inspiring. But you are right, it is tragically not a wide movement.
Thanks for posing this. To be continued tomorrow after some pondering and considering what you are saying re the boredom vs. the NOT knowing. It gives me chills, you spelling it out like that. And then I think of the slogan, "If you fail to plan, you plan to fail." And that is what you are saying. There is all this progressive flailing but no cohesion. Obama flirted with many on that score, revved it up, especially among the youth of the ex-DFHs and then was just a big tease. Worse. A Judas. A front man for our oligarchical enemies pretending to be champion when we desperately could have used a spiritual champion, like MLK or RFK.
But whenever there seems to be time and God knows motivation, there is not the necessary cohesion.
My Greens group decided to skip the August meeting since it is hot and summer and people are on vacation and I was startled. Since I see now as recruitment for Greens time and that doesn't seem to be in the imagination of the long time Greens so much who have a certain cynicism themselves, maybe, not the visualization of a massive influx of people though I envision it sometimes but I am a newbie there. When I was passing out leaflets the last election I felt so frustrated and angry with the pedestrians. I felt so remote from them. There was no energy. Boredom? Cynicism, maybe? The main comment I got was a disdainful, "You are not gonna win!" Framed as a "game" our efforts were ... not a humanitarian goal.
later, libby
In fact, you may want to post exactly what you wrote in the above comment as a blog unto itself and I could comment there. Since I would like to know where all the "DFHs" (term of endearment) have gone, too, like the old song refrain, from fellow DFHs. In fact why don't you call the blog "Where Have All The DFHs Gone?" (sorry, being controlling :) )
That amazing and connected worldwide counterculture of youth calling out the shallow status quo. Peace Corps people. Nader's Raiders. Vietnam War protesters. Pushing for Civil Rights. Women's rights. Animal rights. Environmental Rights. The pressure that made LBJ resign, that made Walter Cronkite declare we weren't gonna win in Vietnam. It was cool to want to take care of humanity. It was soul-fulfilling. The music, those folk songs went right into one's heart and opened it up. Your comment is poignant and troubling and deserves an answer. "What happened?" (Wasn't that a followup book from Catch 22 by Heller? or no, it was "Something Happened". Not as good as Catch-22, which maybe is a good parallel metaphor for what happened to all of us.) There are still activists out there seriously walking the walk and willing to be jailed and whatever risks and they are stunning and inspiring. But you are right, it is tragically not a wide movement.
Thanks for posing this. To be continued tomorrow after some pondering and considering what you are saying re the boredom vs. the NOT knowing. It gives me chills, you spelling it out like that. And then I think of the slogan, "If you fail to plan, you plan to fail." And that is what you are saying. There is all this progressive flailing but no cohesion. Obama flirted with many on that score, revved it up, especially among the youth of the ex-DFHs and then was just a big tease. Worse. A Judas. A front man for our oligarchical enemies pretending to be champion when we desperately could have used a spiritual champion, like MLK or RFK.
But whenever there seems to be time and God knows motivation, there is not the necessary cohesion.
My Greens group decided to skip the August meeting since it is hot and summer and people are on vacation and I was startled. Since I see now as recruitment for Greens time and that doesn't seem to be in the imagination of the long time Greens so much who have a certain cynicism themselves, maybe, not the visualization of a massive influx of people though I envision it sometimes but I am a newbie there. When I was passing out leaflets the last election I felt so frustrated and angry with the pedestrians. I felt so remote from them. There was no energy. Boredom? Cynicism, maybe? The main comment I got was a disdainful, "You are not gonna win!" Framed as a "game" our efforts were ... not a humanitarian goal.
later, libby
-----
skypixieo--I was protesting through a political website I am on against Obamacare and for single payer expanded Medicare for all in NY a while back. Only two of us showed up outside our US rep's office. My friend had gotten a permit. Again, only two of us at first though we hoped for a few more. Two white vans pulled up at the assigned time with about 6 cops (but soon only two stone-faced guys stood outside the entrance) to I guess “protect” the Rep from us and the public from us if we were troublemakers (it did make me gulp, also that they had dropped off those bright colored wooden planks of barricades lying on the side of the street apparently the night before though they did not have to use them ... since only 2 eventually 4 of us showed in the narrow 2 hour permitted time allotment). It was the weekend and we were on the sidewalk in front of the tall building that housed her office with flyers protesting Obamacare and she was mostly likely in DC.
Anyway, at one point a man walked by who had been an activist throughout his life and he was so frustrated and so angry at the apathy of his fellow Americans and admitted he had dropped out and given up. And it seemed the idea of the four of us trying to protest was even more painful for him than no one protesting and he demanded to know from me why it was all so hopeless and went on and on telling me all he had done especially during the anti-Vietnam years and what on earth had happened to us as a people and as a movement.
As I encouraged him to get active again he got more and more exasperated and frustrated with me and it was bringing up a sadness and frustration and confusion in me, too. Triggering a lot of the questions you are now asking. What happened?
I guess I like the idea of the Green Party because it has an international coalition and a national coalition and it is fighting the “good fight” for the “good” (and has a list of values that I endorse and certainly are a blueprint of a moral counterculture, kind of reminding me of the 12 step recovery counterculture internationally) though I wish it had more traction in terms of numbers but it is a process. And there are issues that come up there that are not always agreed on. Many Greens in NY are concerned about the Palestine issue and that is a third rail in American politics, taking issue with Israel.
Speaking of this, when the first Gulf War happened I was in NYC then and I was stunned that there was so much support for it. That is when I really noticed enough to begin asking what happened to the anti-war movement. It took me some time to get that some of those liberals in my social network were Jewish and that the Middle East was a whole different arena for a war than East Asia. It wasn’t asserted to me directly. I was slow-witted. But their tribalism, group-loyalty, etc. was ferocious. This is a big factor. The Gazan War for example just after Obama took office that was willfully ignored and was not a war but a slaughter! The pathological cronyism the US has with Israel is a real bottleneck for humanitarian enlightenment about international reality.
Also re First Gulf war when Mailer was it who challenged Bush Sr not to be a wimp, and triggered that macho force forward with the military industrial complex behind it, and the tv got so caught up in the war technology, war tech porn (the scud stud, remember?) that this was about vast propaganda and omission of war reality. I remember wondering why no one ever estimated how many Iraqis were being killed during that war. Exact numbers of the US troops, but hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died it ended up. NEVER EVER UTTERED.
There is a burnout also, sky, that people may be feeling after so many thwarted attempts to get a “good” person in office and at times having their clay feet revealed or they can't make it into the money-rigged game. Trying to get Nader in. The case of Obama's betrayal. The case of John Edwards whom I worked for and believed in his platform and so much of what he was addressing and committing to fight for is oppressing us today. But then his national shaming, cheating on his dying wife, even after he was outdistanced was an extra sucker punch to the gut. Would he have followed through? He spoke with such a passion and had so many more concrete ideas for change than Obama. But still.
Look at Clinton and Monica and Wiener and his behavior. I know exploding their personal lives is not right, but at the same time, that brings up a cynicism in people or low expectations of moral conduct on a personal scale. I do believe individual character is required to be a responsive and responsible leader. I do believe people are human and should be cut some slack, also, but cheating on a marriage and doing immature things admittedly troubles me. I don't think they can be divorced, the personal and the public duty to a great degree. I also don't want a Stepford person at the helm, so deliberately perfection- and image-obsessed.
We as a nation of citizens have been “coexisting” with a homeless class for so many years and so little has been done for them. When Reagan’s administration emptied out institutions that could help the mentally ill, that was a national crime! And yet from Reagan onward, a national politician or others are unwilling to address a glaring humanitarian crisis for fear of freaking the conservatives who will say their money is being taken away to give to the poor and helpless. (Yeah, better their money be taken away to be given to the uber wealthy which is how it works now?) I think these politicians are cowards and inhumane especially with this and grossly underestimating the national compassion. But we have not rallied to take care of the homeless on the streets, most of us, either. Or the vets reentering society with their devastating problems.
There is the group-think desensitization. Whatever the majority are expressing or exhibiting is the comfortable place to exist in. And 24/7 tv propaganda that washes over people and frames so much of the issues and the news or blackouts the real human priorities because of corporate sponsor advantage and profit-making. So much of the news is not news, it is political analysis in which there is so much over-identification with the leaders as “gamesmen” but so little empathy expressed for the plight of real citizens and putting it in context of what situations mean to them, the political movers and shakers. Morality is not valued. Titillation is key. “Let’s you and him fight” for entertainment value in terms of political reporting. Black and white oversimplification, and also a mystification, that going very deeply into an issue is just too complicated and would be too much for the common citizen. Let's let our parental leaders do it for us. Look at the “mystification” exploited by Alan Greenspan who instead of being vilified for his greed and obtuseness with the economic crisis is still a popular and revered talking head on news programs. Bleeeeeeecccchhhh.
I think consciousness raising about the environment has been done very well in schools since I was in school, but I think there is more censorship on the encouragement of critical thinking. Teachers are at risk to role model provocative intellectual challenges about our government and media though I am no longer close to that orbit. With privitatization and conservative Christianity holding so much sway it seems critical thinking is being even more discouraged.
There is the Stockholm Syndrome whereby instead of having to grasp the horror of being a captive, one identifies with one’s captor. Authoritarian following. Learned helplessness.
We are the Seinfeld/Sex and the City generation of TV watchers now. There was an endearing and entertaining narcissism role-modeled on these shows and others like them. The characters were intelligent and aware of social issues but uncommitted to integrating their lives with serious activism. "Uncommitted and charming." Kinda like Obama. You know I recently read somewhere that it was a shame Clinton was not old enough to know the Depression when he became Prez as a youngish man because it made him more cavalier about the economy than he would have been if that had sobered him. Also, I wished Obama had been old enough to experience the pain of Vietnam and that would maybe have made him less callow about military violence.
I haven’t had the time and energy today to address this as I wanted. I was even going to google around, sky. I know Hedges wrote a few things on the death of liberalism. I am grateful you have pressed this issue. I am interested in hearing more thoughts from you and others and maybe will do a blog about it at some point, too. Although it lives in every blog any of us does, trying to wake up the minds and hearts of our readers out there. thanks. to be continued. libby
Anyway, at one point a man walked by who had been an activist throughout his life and he was so frustrated and so angry at the apathy of his fellow Americans and admitted he had dropped out and given up. And it seemed the idea of the four of us trying to protest was even more painful for him than no one protesting and he demanded to know from me why it was all so hopeless and went on and on telling me all he had done especially during the anti-Vietnam years and what on earth had happened to us as a people and as a movement.
As I encouraged him to get active again he got more and more exasperated and frustrated with me and it was bringing up a sadness and frustration and confusion in me, too. Triggering a lot of the questions you are now asking. What happened?
I guess I like the idea of the Green Party because it has an international coalition and a national coalition and it is fighting the “good fight” for the “good” (and has a list of values that I endorse and certainly are a blueprint of a moral counterculture, kind of reminding me of the 12 step recovery counterculture internationally) though I wish it had more traction in terms of numbers but it is a process. And there are issues that come up there that are not always agreed on. Many Greens in NY are concerned about the Palestine issue and that is a third rail in American politics, taking issue with Israel.
Speaking of this, when the first Gulf War happened I was in NYC then and I was stunned that there was so much support for it. That is when I really noticed enough to begin asking what happened to the anti-war movement. It took me some time to get that some of those liberals in my social network were Jewish and that the Middle East was a whole different arena for a war than East Asia. It wasn’t asserted to me directly. I was slow-witted. But their tribalism, group-loyalty, etc. was ferocious. This is a big factor. The Gazan War for example just after Obama took office that was willfully ignored and was not a war but a slaughter! The pathological cronyism the US has with Israel is a real bottleneck for humanitarian enlightenment about international reality.
Also re First Gulf war when Mailer was it who challenged Bush Sr not to be a wimp, and triggered that macho force forward with the military industrial complex behind it, and the tv got so caught up in the war technology, war tech porn (the scud stud, remember?) that this was about vast propaganda and omission of war reality. I remember wondering why no one ever estimated how many Iraqis were being killed during that war. Exact numbers of the US troops, but hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died it ended up. NEVER EVER UTTERED.
There is a burnout also, sky, that people may be feeling after so many thwarted attempts to get a “good” person in office and at times having their clay feet revealed or they can't make it into the money-rigged game. Trying to get Nader in. The case of Obama's betrayal. The case of John Edwards whom I worked for and believed in his platform and so much of what he was addressing and committing to fight for is oppressing us today. But then his national shaming, cheating on his dying wife, even after he was outdistanced was an extra sucker punch to the gut. Would he have followed through? He spoke with such a passion and had so many more concrete ideas for change than Obama. But still.
Look at Clinton and Monica and Wiener and his behavior. I know exploding their personal lives is not right, but at the same time, that brings up a cynicism in people or low expectations of moral conduct on a personal scale. I do believe individual character is required to be a responsive and responsible leader. I do believe people are human and should be cut some slack, also, but cheating on a marriage and doing immature things admittedly troubles me. I don't think they can be divorced, the personal and the public duty to a great degree. I also don't want a Stepford person at the helm, so deliberately perfection- and image-obsessed.
We as a nation of citizens have been “coexisting” with a homeless class for so many years and so little has been done for them. When Reagan’s administration emptied out institutions that could help the mentally ill, that was a national crime! And yet from Reagan onward, a national politician or others are unwilling to address a glaring humanitarian crisis for fear of freaking the conservatives who will say their money is being taken away to give to the poor and helpless. (Yeah, better their money be taken away to be given to the uber wealthy which is how it works now?) I think these politicians are cowards and inhumane especially with this and grossly underestimating the national compassion. But we have not rallied to take care of the homeless on the streets, most of us, either. Or the vets reentering society with their devastating problems.
There is the group-think desensitization. Whatever the majority are expressing or exhibiting is the comfortable place to exist in. And 24/7 tv propaganda that washes over people and frames so much of the issues and the news or blackouts the real human priorities because of corporate sponsor advantage and profit-making. So much of the news is not news, it is political analysis in which there is so much over-identification with the leaders as “gamesmen” but so little empathy expressed for the plight of real citizens and putting it in context of what situations mean to them, the political movers and shakers. Morality is not valued. Titillation is key. “Let’s you and him fight” for entertainment value in terms of political reporting. Black and white oversimplification, and also a mystification, that going very deeply into an issue is just too complicated and would be too much for the common citizen. Let's let our parental leaders do it for us. Look at the “mystification” exploited by Alan Greenspan who instead of being vilified for his greed and obtuseness with the economic crisis is still a popular and revered talking head on news programs. Bleeeeeeecccchhhh.
I think consciousness raising about the environment has been done very well in schools since I was in school, but I think there is more censorship on the encouragement of critical thinking. Teachers are at risk to role model provocative intellectual challenges about our government and media though I am no longer close to that orbit. With privitatization and conservative Christianity holding so much sway it seems critical thinking is being even more discouraged.
There is the Stockholm Syndrome whereby instead of having to grasp the horror of being a captive, one identifies with one’s captor. Authoritarian following. Learned helplessness.
We are the Seinfeld/Sex and the City generation of TV watchers now. There was an endearing and entertaining narcissism role-modeled on these shows and others like them. The characters were intelligent and aware of social issues but uncommitted to integrating their lives with serious activism. "Uncommitted and charming." Kinda like Obama. You know I recently read somewhere that it was a shame Clinton was not old enough to know the Depression when he became Prez as a youngish man because it made him more cavalier about the economy than he would have been if that had sobered him. Also, I wished Obama had been old enough to experience the pain of Vietnam and that would maybe have made him less callow about military violence.
I haven’t had the time and energy today to address this as I wanted. I was even going to google around, sky. I know Hedges wrote a few things on the death of liberalism. I am grateful you have pressed this issue. I am interested in hearing more thoughts from you and others and maybe will do a blog about it at some point, too. Although it lives in every blog any of us does, trying to wake up the minds and hearts of our readers out there. thanks. to be continued. libby
------
I only nibbled at the edges of what skypixieo is asking. The why of it. What are we going to do about it? Any help?
----------------
It's starting to look like the country can and will just move ever rightward, without anybody rising up... I don't think anyone has the answer to it.
What a GREAT and courageous post. I think the blabbermouths, apologists, revisionists, and appeasers have seen their day.
When the market starts to hit the upper classes like it did today, obama and his minions find their base shrinking rapidly.
Thanks for the SUPERLATIVE post.
-R-
When the market starts to hit the upper classes like it did today, obama and his minions find their base shrinking rapidly.
Thanks for the SUPERLATIVE post.
-R-
Libby, I was just about to search for that quote from Douglass that was so popular in the 1960s. Hard as it may be to create, I suspect only a genuine grassroots movement from below has any chance of real change. Why is that so difficult? Part of it is imtimidation: we have the makings of a police state and people are genuinely afraid to speak out such powerful interests. Example: publicaly criticize TSA or the airlines and you might find yourself on someone's no-fly list without recourse. Criticise the local police and you soon might be on their shit list. I don't know but I suspect drugs and the explosion of endless forms of electronic entertainment and distraction are also contributing factors to passivity--home entertainment centers where you need never leave your couch; 150 cable channels; endless video games and social media. I know we really need to try to listen to and understand those we'd like to recruit rather than denounce them. I know that as a teenager I was moved by the Civil Rights leaders' argument, "What does it mean to say you believe something if you don't act on it? If you won't stand up and be counted?" Hard as it may seem I think we're going to have to start building from the ground up and assert a moral, pro-social dimiension to our demands for change. I remember that King's last book--I think it was his last--was entitled 'Where Do We Go From Here--Chaors or Community?" Thank you for laying so much out in your post.
Btw, as Mark said this is a brilliant post... Not sure how I neglected to mention that.
Ya' know, as we were out foraging fruitlessly for food, this post echoing in my mind, so as soon as we got back, I re-read it, and find myself wishing that instead of just rating, I wish there was a star system, so I could give this a five-star rating.
And to think, there are still raving maniacs out there who think Nader cost Gore the election, when the fix was in from the get-go.
I've detailed, elsewhere, how any banana republic dictator would be proud of the thorough job done to bypass the will of the people (and twice, no less).
And as the late GREAT George Carlin (may He r.i.p) said: "And nobody seems to care."
And to think, there are still raving maniacs out there who think Nader cost Gore the election, when the fix was in from the get-go.
I've detailed, elsewhere, how any banana republic dictator would be proud of the thorough job done to bypass the will of the people (and twice, no less).
And as the late GREAT George Carlin (may He r.i.p) said: "And nobody seems to care."
Being lectured on morals from the extreme right or the extreme left is like being lectured on how to stay slim by Rush Limbaugh.
Sean, yes, there seems this relentless ebb tide to regressivism. Oligarchs sure are merciless in maxing their opportunities. In 2009 the top 10 hedge fund executives made $900,000 an hour! Not only is this obscene, it is surreal! Media corporate stooges cooperate in the manipulations to cover such grand scale fraud by the government against its own citizenry. And every day is a new shock and awe development. Maybe I should have finished with the so apt "boiled frogs" metaphor. BTW, thanks for the "brilliant"! Distilled a lot of issues lurking in my sad American heart thanks to skypixeo's prompting.
Mark, thank you for your validation and reciprocating inspiration! Yes, George Carlin recognized how saturated with corruption the government was long ago! I often think of his right-on rants! Appreciate so much your support here! :)
Donegal, how interesting that Douglass' quote had come to you, too. Thanks for your comment! Yes, indeed, the police state intimidation is a factor. When those shiny homeland security jeep-trucks pulled up with the two of us for our protest and six cops got out with grim faces, even when they saw we were only two pleasant women, it sure felt like over-kill. Some people walking by immediately thought we were tea partiers since we were protesting Obamacare. Not surprising since the media had totally blocked out reporting on protest of Obama from the left. We saw what we were up against. Most people when we explained the difference between single payer and Obamacare got angry. They said they had no idea what Obamacare constituted and there certainly wasn't much effort in the media or government to really make it clear. More "mystification".
Yes, how true re the "never leave your couch with home entertainment" factor to divide us up as a community and distract us. Good point. Lots of distractions from reality. And stress makes people depressed and narcissistic. So all the more motivation to numb out or not empathize with fellows. I remember some writer on American Prospect totally disgusted with the Code Pink women making fools of themselves for political speech in public. Why were they not more mature like him, writing blogs from the computer was the essence of his message. He was so supercilious and smug and thoroughly disgusted with their "antics". That, too, was telling.
I agree re grass roots. Pete Seeger said "think globally, work locally." I am committing to the Greens and am working now on a five week workshop for young voters to launch in Dec. to focus on the history of political issues in America. To give young people some general knowledge and perspective and working vocabulary on the challenges to this country and to their own futures. I think we as citizens need to answer the call, to find our niche of activism, something that helps us feel spiritually aligned and is proactive for our country and plug in a few hours each week if we can. And tough-love proactive for our country, enabling the country that we want, not enabling its corrupters.
There is the metaphor of the 100 monkeys I used to hear about years ago during the protest glory days. When the 100th monkey grasps a truth, then the entire monkey nation comes on board. We have been in need of a 100th monkey for a while. (The Vietnam War turning point it has been said had Cronkite as the 100th monkey!)
Frank, I apologize about being snarky earlier about your being snarky. Truce? Actually, I think this crack is going against your own preaching to be open-minded. It also sounds like Obama's manipulative conflating of geometry with morality in presenting the "center" as superior. Obama's and the media's equating the extreme left and extreme right as being similar in their fringe-ness I found very insulting, though more and more I empathize with the right about dealing with the superciliousness of progressive media. Ignoring, marginalizing, minimizing and demonizing people of conscience on the left has been a media and establishment Dem game for a long time. The media is allergic to calls for morality and integrity of course. The media cherry picks some stories and gets the issues right and then it blocks out or apologizes for others to protect its political team. "Progressive pragmatism" put us on a fascism-directed slippery slope. We must get off the slope. I am not saying join the other team. I am saying the Dem team is corrupt it is time to clean it up and focus on it! Quite a racket always using the "at least we are not like the tea partiers" to excuse the rightward migration as Sean mentioned.
Mark, thank you for your validation and reciprocating inspiration! Yes, George Carlin recognized how saturated with corruption the government was long ago! I often think of his right-on rants! Appreciate so much your support here! :)
Donegal, how interesting that Douglass' quote had come to you, too. Thanks for your comment! Yes, indeed, the police state intimidation is a factor. When those shiny homeland security jeep-trucks pulled up with the two of us for our protest and six cops got out with grim faces, even when they saw we were only two pleasant women, it sure felt like over-kill. Some people walking by immediately thought we were tea partiers since we were protesting Obamacare. Not surprising since the media had totally blocked out reporting on protest of Obama from the left. We saw what we were up against. Most people when we explained the difference between single payer and Obamacare got angry. They said they had no idea what Obamacare constituted and there certainly wasn't much effort in the media or government to really make it clear. More "mystification".
Yes, how true re the "never leave your couch with home entertainment" factor to divide us up as a community and distract us. Good point. Lots of distractions from reality. And stress makes people depressed and narcissistic. So all the more motivation to numb out or not empathize with fellows. I remember some writer on American Prospect totally disgusted with the Code Pink women making fools of themselves for political speech in public. Why were they not more mature like him, writing blogs from the computer was the essence of his message. He was so supercilious and smug and thoroughly disgusted with their "antics". That, too, was telling.
I agree re grass roots. Pete Seeger said "think globally, work locally." I am committing to the Greens and am working now on a five week workshop for young voters to launch in Dec. to focus on the history of political issues in America. To give young people some general knowledge and perspective and working vocabulary on the challenges to this country and to their own futures. I think we as citizens need to answer the call, to find our niche of activism, something that helps us feel spiritually aligned and is proactive for our country and plug in a few hours each week if we can. And tough-love proactive for our country, enabling the country that we want, not enabling its corrupters.
There is the metaphor of the 100 monkeys I used to hear about years ago during the protest glory days. When the 100th monkey grasps a truth, then the entire monkey nation comes on board. We have been in need of a 100th monkey for a while. (The Vietnam War turning point it has been said had Cronkite as the 100th monkey!)
Frank, I apologize about being snarky earlier about your being snarky. Truce? Actually, I think this crack is going against your own preaching to be open-minded. It also sounds like Obama's manipulative conflating of geometry with morality in presenting the "center" as superior. Obama's and the media's equating the extreme left and extreme right as being similar in their fringe-ness I found very insulting, though more and more I empathize with the right about dealing with the superciliousness of progressive media. Ignoring, marginalizing, minimizing and demonizing people of conscience on the left has been a media and establishment Dem game for a long time. The media is allergic to calls for morality and integrity of course. The media cherry picks some stories and gets the issues right and then it blocks out or apologizes for others to protect its political team. "Progressive pragmatism" put us on a fascism-directed slippery slope. We must get off the slope. I am not saying join the other team. I am saying the Dem team is corrupt it is time to clean it up and focus on it! Quite a racket always using the "at least we are not like the tea partiers" to excuse the rightward migration as Sean mentioned.
libby,
The high volume of deeply interested comments here has made my point better than anything I could have ever said.
I’ll PM you.........Sky
The high volume of deeply interested comments here has made my point better than anything I could have ever said.
I’ll PM you.........Sky
Libby,
I think you speak your mind—and that is admirable. We are, despite our considerable differences, on the same side of the big picture. I want to see our nation become a more humane, reasonable, caring, nurturing place in which to live. I have no problem with people being rich—but I have lots and lots of problem with people being poor—especially when so many of the poor are not poor because they “want to be” or because “they are lazy” as some right wingers keep asserting. They are poor because of circumstances often beyond their control.
I think we are in harmony about that.
We both recognize there are problems—and that the problems have to be solved in order for the growth we both want occur to be achieved.
Where we differ is on perspective and methodology.
Here is my perspective in a kind of list form:
Right now, I cannot think of anything that will get us further away from a solution for the problems we both see—than a substantial victory by the Republicans. They have gone insane—or at least, the insane have taken control of them. Anything that helps them win…is a loss for the agenda I want advanced.
I do not see a win by Obama and a win by Republicans as being a push. There is absolutely no way that a Republican win will not be much, much, much worse for the agenda I want advanced than a win by Obama.
Third party convictions are fine—but the reality is that NO THIRD PARTY is going to win in 2012—and some third parties (like the Greens) are going to aid the Republicans in defeating the Democrats.
Savaging Obama, no matter how good it might make one feel; no matter how justified one can make it seem, is a net loss for the agenda I want advanced—and probably is a net loss of enormous proportions. Every moment spent by anyone on our side of the agenda fence—is comfort and aid to the enemy.
Libby, I can see that you will not be able to accept my perspective in its whole—and perhaps not even in any significant part. But it IS my perspective—and I am as compulsive about proffering it as you are about putting yours up for discussion.
I respect you—and although you do not ever engage in any of that personal insult nonsense—I do have trouble with the huge amount of anger and loathing you express for Barack Obama. You have every right to express it, but I have a right (I feel an obligation) to counter it. I will continue to do so—and I hope you understand my motivation.
I apologize for those times where I have been snarky.
In other words, Yes, Truce! Of course!
I think you speak your mind—and that is admirable. We are, despite our considerable differences, on the same side of the big picture. I want to see our nation become a more humane, reasonable, caring, nurturing place in which to live. I have no problem with people being rich—but I have lots and lots of problem with people being poor—especially when so many of the poor are not poor because they “want to be” or because “they are lazy” as some right wingers keep asserting. They are poor because of circumstances often beyond their control.
I think we are in harmony about that.
We both recognize there are problems—and that the problems have to be solved in order for the growth we both want occur to be achieved.
Where we differ is on perspective and methodology.
Here is my perspective in a kind of list form:
Right now, I cannot think of anything that will get us further away from a solution for the problems we both see—than a substantial victory by the Republicans. They have gone insane—or at least, the insane have taken control of them. Anything that helps them win…is a loss for the agenda I want advanced.
I do not see a win by Obama and a win by Republicans as being a push. There is absolutely no way that a Republican win will not be much, much, much worse for the agenda I want advanced than a win by Obama.
Third party convictions are fine—but the reality is that NO THIRD PARTY is going to win in 2012—and some third parties (like the Greens) are going to aid the Republicans in defeating the Democrats.
Savaging Obama, no matter how good it might make one feel; no matter how justified one can make it seem, is a net loss for the agenda I want advanced—and probably is a net loss of enormous proportions. Every moment spent by anyone on our side of the agenda fence—is comfort and aid to the enemy.
Libby, I can see that you will not be able to accept my perspective in its whole—and perhaps not even in any significant part. But it IS my perspective—and I am as compulsive about proffering it as you are about putting yours up for discussion.
I respect you—and although you do not ever engage in any of that personal insult nonsense—I do have trouble with the huge amount of anger and loathing you express for Barack Obama. You have every right to express it, but I have a right (I feel an obligation) to counter it. I will continue to do so—and I hope you understand my motivation.
I apologize for those times where I have been snarky.
In other words, Yes, Truce! Of course!
Thanks, Frank, appreciate the good will. We are committed to what we are committed to.
I do feel you play the "Yes, but ..." game a lot when specifics are presented about Obama. You don't agree with or deny them, you just bring up the Republicans. It feels like the Dems can do anything (and have!) and there is an unbreakable loyalty you have to them.
Your defense of Obama seems solely based on how bad the "other" party would be. I wonder if you believe that what I and others put forth about what Obama and the Dems have done is not true? Is not serious? Advocating corporate-agenda wars, escalation of drone warfare and in sovereign countries against international law, assassinations of American citizens, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, lack of transparency, Bagram and Gitmo anti-human rights horrors, the throwing away the key of due process detentions. from Goldman Sachs on down non-accountability for fraud and extortion, the Bush administration mafia non-accountability looking forward not back crap, the BP oil company enabling, the clean coal hypocrisy, the pro-nuclear power endangerment, his war on whistleblowers, his ignoring the Gaza war and promoting a real I/P peace, his betrayal of women's issues, his betrayal of programs for working class families, his collusion with Big Pharma and the insurance companies, his eagerness to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, his privatization of schools again for corporate profit-making and these are just the ones on the top of my head this minute. If you have issues with them, please speak to them.
The above are why I don't trust Obama AND THE DEMS, don't respect him and them, don't want him as my president or the DEMS if they won't change their continuing sell-out of Americans.
Both parties have driven the proverbial bus of state off the cliff.
I know one doesn't (or shouldn't) keep playing at a rigged game that guarantees you continually lose. One doesn't (or shouldn't) keep rewarding the person(s) who has been betraying one out of emotional/social/political blackmail that he is the lesser of two evils.
We have so long ago passed the "perfect being the enemy of the good" here. When a Repub doesn't vote the mandate of the Tea Partiers they withhold their vote from him or her. When a Dem Party rep doesn't, the Dems are upset, even SUPER upset at times, but don't resort to withholding their votes and demanding their mandate. That to me is like a battered spouse not removing herself or himself from a toxic and dangerous situation. Putting up with any endangerment out of fear of the unknown.
There is time to scare the Dems and dump Obama. To demand a humanitarian mandate. A humanitarian leader. But instead the "stay the coursers" seem to IGNORE THE UN-IGNORABLE. One in good conscience should not enable evil policies. Should not stay in the "problem" but move to the "solution."
MSNBC GE-paid corporate media stooges sometimes say really profound things about the Republican recklessness, but they are paid to enable a corporate-friendly system at the expense of the citizenry. They are paid well to manipulate and some of them I am sure have rationalized their own righteousness with said pay check and rewarded empowerments. To push for team Dem and imply that they are not part of the ugly pro-corporate profits over people system.
Frank, we need people like you and others calling out the rabid rat bastard Republican antics. Yes, we need to be conscious of them. I should say that more often. But we also need people like me calling out the Democratic hypocrisy and keeping our eyes on the game the cutthroat Dem leadership is playing.
This is a class war and the kleptocrats in the government have sold the people out. The talking the talk but for way too long not walking the walk Dem hypocrits in Congress have betrayed us. Have sold us out to the lobbyists and yet have stamped their Gucci-laden feet and insisted that if only it weren't for the Republicans things would be more equitable in the US. They vote earmarks for the corporations to get money for elections, they vote for war funding, they enabled the sellouts I listed above. We all demonized the Bush administration but the status quo has not been altered by Obama who flip-flopped so nauseatingly and shamelessly from what he campaigned on. And if at this point we can't see that it was both parties that did us in as a country, we are lost in the fog of denial.
you have a good day! libby
I do feel you play the "Yes, but ..." game a lot when specifics are presented about Obama. You don't agree with or deny them, you just bring up the Republicans. It feels like the Dems can do anything (and have!) and there is an unbreakable loyalty you have to them.
Your defense of Obama seems solely based on how bad the "other" party would be. I wonder if you believe that what I and others put forth about what Obama and the Dems have done is not true? Is not serious? Advocating corporate-agenda wars, escalation of drone warfare and in sovereign countries against international law, assassinations of American citizens, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, lack of transparency, Bagram and Gitmo anti-human rights horrors, the throwing away the key of due process detentions. from Goldman Sachs on down non-accountability for fraud and extortion, the Bush administration mafia non-accountability looking forward not back crap, the BP oil company enabling, the clean coal hypocrisy, the pro-nuclear power endangerment, his war on whistleblowers, his ignoring the Gaza war and promoting a real I/P peace, his betrayal of women's issues, his betrayal of programs for working class families, his collusion with Big Pharma and the insurance companies, his eagerness to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, his privatization of schools again for corporate profit-making and these are just the ones on the top of my head this minute. If you have issues with them, please speak to them.
The above are why I don't trust Obama AND THE DEMS, don't respect him and them, don't want him as my president or the DEMS if they won't change their continuing sell-out of Americans.
Both parties have driven the proverbial bus of state off the cliff.
I know one doesn't (or shouldn't) keep playing at a rigged game that guarantees you continually lose. One doesn't (or shouldn't) keep rewarding the person(s) who has been betraying one out of emotional/social/political blackmail that he is the lesser of two evils.
We have so long ago passed the "perfect being the enemy of the good" here. When a Repub doesn't vote the mandate of the Tea Partiers they withhold their vote from him or her. When a Dem Party rep doesn't, the Dems are upset, even SUPER upset at times, but don't resort to withholding their votes and demanding their mandate. That to me is like a battered spouse not removing herself or himself from a toxic and dangerous situation. Putting up with any endangerment out of fear of the unknown.
There is time to scare the Dems and dump Obama. To demand a humanitarian mandate. A humanitarian leader. But instead the "stay the coursers" seem to IGNORE THE UN-IGNORABLE. One in good conscience should not enable evil policies. Should not stay in the "problem" but move to the "solution."
MSNBC GE-paid corporate media stooges sometimes say really profound things about the Republican recklessness, but they are paid to enable a corporate-friendly system at the expense of the citizenry. They are paid well to manipulate and some of them I am sure have rationalized their own righteousness with said pay check and rewarded empowerments. To push for team Dem and imply that they are not part of the ugly pro-corporate profits over people system.
Frank, we need people like you and others calling out the rabid rat bastard Republican antics. Yes, we need to be conscious of them. I should say that more often. But we also need people like me calling out the Democratic hypocrisy and keeping our eyes on the game the cutthroat Dem leadership is playing.
This is a class war and the kleptocrats in the government have sold the people out. The talking the talk but for way too long not walking the walk Dem hypocrits in Congress have betrayed us. Have sold us out to the lobbyists and yet have stamped their Gucci-laden feet and insisted that if only it weren't for the Republicans things would be more equitable in the US. They vote earmarks for the corporations to get money for elections, they vote for war funding, they enabled the sellouts I listed above. We all demonized the Bush administration but the status quo has not been altered by Obama who flip-flopped so nauseatingly and shamelessly from what he campaigned on. And if at this point we can't see that it was both parties that did us in as a country, we are lost in the fog of denial.
you have a good day! libby
skypixie0 -- thank you for your powerful words above. look forward to the PM. libby
Libby
Thanks for the reply—and thanks to both of us for getting past the other stuff.
I would like to answer a couple of your questions—and address a few remarks in reply to some of the comments you made. So as not to make this cumbersome, I will focus on your post bit by bit—taking your comments one by one—with just a few of the first items coming into play in this post. If you reply to what I write, let me know if you want me to continue to comment and I will.
You wrote:
I do feel you play the "Yes, but ..." game a lot when specifics are presented about Obama. You don't agree with or deny them, you just bring up the Republicans. It feels like the Dems can do anything (and have!) and there is an unbreakable loyalty you have to them.
The local Demcorats here in Piscataway would get a huge laugh out of that, Libby, because there have been times where I have fought them in ways they could not have imagined. Reporters from the three major network outlets in New York have been at my house interviewing me about disagreements I have had with the all-Democratic council—and the New York Times wrote an article about my disputes with them. I am hardly a Democratic Party apologist.
I was a Democrat at one time, but have not been for 20 plus years. I am a registered Independent. I have no loyalty to them in any way; I simply see a progressive agenda as more likely to make us a better, more caring nation than the conservative agenda of the right…and I consider the agenda of the right to be destructive of those ends—so I give as much support to the progressives (and to the Democrats) as paracticable.
Your defense of Obama seems solely based on how bad the "other" party would be.
Not really, Libby—in fact, not at all.
I have mentioned many, many times that part of my “defense” is based on the fact that I do not interpret the things he has done (or has not done) in such a dark light as some of you folks do. Surely you’ve heard me mention that I think he is doing the best job he can with the cards he’s been dealt…and that I do not know of anyone I would reasonably expect to do appreciably better. I have mentioned that he is, in my opinion, getting as much out of this toxic political environment in which he is working as anyone could possibly be expected to get. I have mentioned that some people are expecting him to fashion a silk purse out of a sow’s ear—and that their unrealistic expectations play as big a part in their disappointment as what Obama has done or not done.
You do agree that I have done those things, do you not? And that I have mentioned those things dozens upons dozens of times. So to suggest that my “defense” of Obama seems solely based on how bad the other party would be really doesn’t compute.
I wonder if you believe that what I and others put forth about what Obama and the Dems have done is not true? Is not serious?
I know that the things you and others have put forth are correct—but with all the respec in the world, I am convinced that your assessment of why he has done them (or not done them) is unnecessarily harsh, unrealistic, and unreasonable.
LET ME MAKE THIS CLEAR: You may be right on that and I may be completely wrong, but that is my assessment—and the assessment of many people. There are intelligent, well-informed, reasonable people who assess Obama and the Democrats closer to the way you do…and intelligent, well-informed, reasonable people who assess them closer to the way I do. One of us is right; perhaps both of us are right. But I certainly am not willing to concede that your assessment should be used—and mine disregarded. I hope you understand that.
Let me stop here so that you can comment on what I have responded so far. I’ll go on to the rest of your post—and comment on anything in your reply that should be covered.
Thanks for the reply—and thanks to both of us for getting past the other stuff.
I would like to answer a couple of your questions—and address a few remarks in reply to some of the comments you made. So as not to make this cumbersome, I will focus on your post bit by bit—taking your comments one by one—with just a few of the first items coming into play in this post. If you reply to what I write, let me know if you want me to continue to comment and I will.
You wrote:
I do feel you play the "Yes, but ..." game a lot when specifics are presented about Obama. You don't agree with or deny them, you just bring up the Republicans. It feels like the Dems can do anything (and have!) and there is an unbreakable loyalty you have to them.
The local Demcorats here in Piscataway would get a huge laugh out of that, Libby, because there have been times where I have fought them in ways they could not have imagined. Reporters from the three major network outlets in New York have been at my house interviewing me about disagreements I have had with the all-Democratic council—and the New York Times wrote an article about my disputes with them. I am hardly a Democratic Party apologist.
I was a Democrat at one time, but have not been for 20 plus years. I am a registered Independent. I have no loyalty to them in any way; I simply see a progressive agenda as more likely to make us a better, more caring nation than the conservative agenda of the right…and I consider the agenda of the right to be destructive of those ends—so I give as much support to the progressives (and to the Democrats) as paracticable.
Your defense of Obama seems solely based on how bad the "other" party would be.
Not really, Libby—in fact, not at all.
I have mentioned many, many times that part of my “defense” is based on the fact that I do not interpret the things he has done (or has not done) in such a dark light as some of you folks do. Surely you’ve heard me mention that I think he is doing the best job he can with the cards he’s been dealt…and that I do not know of anyone I would reasonably expect to do appreciably better. I have mentioned that he is, in my opinion, getting as much out of this toxic political environment in which he is working as anyone could possibly be expected to get. I have mentioned that some people are expecting him to fashion a silk purse out of a sow’s ear—and that their unrealistic expectations play as big a part in their disappointment as what Obama has done or not done.
You do agree that I have done those things, do you not? And that I have mentioned those things dozens upons dozens of times. So to suggest that my “defense” of Obama seems solely based on how bad the other party would be really doesn’t compute.
I wonder if you believe that what I and others put forth about what Obama and the Dems have done is not true? Is not serious?
I know that the things you and others have put forth are correct—but with all the respec in the world, I am convinced that your assessment of why he has done them (or not done them) is unnecessarily harsh, unrealistic, and unreasonable.
LET ME MAKE THIS CLEAR: You may be right on that and I may be completely wrong, but that is my assessment—and the assessment of many people. There are intelligent, well-informed, reasonable people who assess Obama and the Democrats closer to the way you do…and intelligent, well-informed, reasonable people who assess them closer to the way I do. One of us is right; perhaps both of us are right. But I certainly am not willing to concede that your assessment should be used—and mine disregarded. I hope you understand that.
Let me stop here so that you can comment on what I have responded so far. I’ll go on to the rest of your post—and comment on anything in your reply that should be covered.
This comment is posted from markinjapan:
"Advocating corporate-agenda wars, escalation of drone warfare and in sovereign countries against international law, assassinations of American citizens, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, lack of transparency, Bagram and Gitmo anti-human rights horrors, the throwing away the key of due process detentions. from Goldman Sachs on down non-accountability for fraud and extortion, the Bush administration mafia non-accountability looking forward not back crap, the BP oil company enabling, the clean coal hypocrisy, the pro-nuclear power endangerment, his war on whistleblowers, his ignoring the Gaza war and promoting a real I/P peace, his betrayal of women's issues, his betrayal of programs for working class families, his collusion with Big Pharma and the insurance companies, his eagerness to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, his privatization of schools again for corporate profit-making and these are just the ones on the top of my head this minute. If you have issues with them, please speak to them. "
Note,once again, ... , as he has done for three years now, since being heckled and run off the google religion boards, refuses to respond substantively to even a single one of the points You've raised.
NEVER has one known so little about so much, nor so much about so little.
[MARK, will PM you soon about missing text ... libby]
"Advocating corporate-agenda wars, escalation of drone warfare and in sovereign countries against international law, assassinations of American citizens, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, lack of transparency, Bagram and Gitmo anti-human rights horrors, the throwing away the key of due process detentions. from Goldman Sachs on down non-accountability for fraud and extortion, the Bush administration mafia non-accountability looking forward not back crap, the BP oil company enabling, the clean coal hypocrisy, the pro-nuclear power endangerment, his war on whistleblowers, his ignoring the Gaza war and promoting a real I/P peace, his betrayal of women's issues, his betrayal of programs for working class families, his collusion with Big Pharma and the insurance companies, his eagerness to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, his privatization of schools again for corporate profit-making and these are just the ones on the top of my head this minute. If you have issues with them, please speak to them. "
Note,once again, ... , as he has done for three years now, since being heckled and run off the google religion boards, refuses to respond substantively to even a single one of the points You've raised.
NEVER has one known so little about so much, nor so much about so little.
[MARK, will PM you soon about missing text ... libby]
My passionate friends, I hear you! But tomorrow is a new day. I do not now nor have I ever considered blind support of me as an act of a patriot. I beseech you to always seek the truth and hold fast to your convictions. Hold my feet to the fire when I lose my way. That's the sign of a true supporter!
I bless you and Tiny Tim blesses you!
I bless you and Tiny Tim blesses you!
Since you haven’t responded to my earlier post yet, Libby, I am going to continue my response to your post.
Advocating corporate-agenda wars, escalation of drone warfare and in sovereign countries against international law, assassinations of American citizens, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, lack of transparency, Bagram and Gitmo anti-human rights horrors, the throwing away the key of due process detentions. from Goldman Sachs on down non-accountability for fraud and extortion, the Bush administration mafia non-accountability looking forward not back crap, the BP oil company enabling, the clean coal hypocrisy, the pro-nuclear power endangerment, his war on whistleblowers, his ignoring the Gaza war and promoting a real I/P peace, his betrayal of women's issues, his betrayal of programs for working class families, his collusion with Big Pharma and the insurance companies, his eagerness to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, his privatization of schools again for corporate profit-making and these are just the ones on the top of my head this minute. If you have issues with them, please speak to them.
For the sake of my arguments here, let’s suppose each of these items is correct; each an example of what Obama has done or has not done that constitutes a true “failing.” I am not saying they are correct nor that they actually constitute failings, just that we can assume, for the purpose of the discussion that they are.
First we have to acknowledge that every president has items done and not done at this stage of an administration—some longer, some not quite so long. We also have to acknowledge that Obama has a list of accomplishments—which can easily be Googled on the Internet. In any case, they really are not germane to my comments here which deal specifically with the list of perceived failings you offered.
The possibilities for why these “failings” exist pretty much reduce to five possibilities that I can think of (you may be able to think of others):
One: He is incompetent—not up to the job intellectually or psychologically. He cannot do these things because he does not have the leadership abilities and make-up required to see them through to completion—nor does he have the tenacity required.
Two: He is competent—up to the job intellectually and psychologically and has the leadership abilities, but for reasons we don’t even have to explore here, he has decided to become a Judas, a Manchurian Candidate—a traitor to the liberal/progressive agenda—and he has decided to side completely with the conservatives and tea partiers.
Three: He has been bribed or otherwise paid-off to purposefully fail to deliver on these things.
Four: He cannot get these things done because of the obstructionism that the Republicans are placing in the path of any moves in a leftward direction—and probably no one else would make greater progress on any of these things to any significant degree.
Five: After coming to office, he became aware of influences and conditions that made him change his stance on some of these items—and caused him to abandon some and modify his thinking on others.
Now, Libby, obviously I cannot tell you which of these is correct. More than likely, a combination of these items are the reason some things expected are not done—and some things not expected were done. Intelligent, rational, well-intentioned people can disagree about which properly apply to the situation; none can say definitively that one (or a particular combination of several) is definitely correct to the absolute exclusion of the other possibilities.
Decent, intelligent, rational, logical, well-intentioned people can suggest why some seem more likely than others to be the actual reason—and other decent, intelligent, rational, logical, well-intentioned people can disagree to the extreme.
I suspect that a prudent combination of door numbers four and five is the best guess that can be made. I understand that you do not, but I do. And that is the combination of factors I go with.
I think the political atmosphere in America is so poisoned—so toxic, that nobody could get most of those things passed to any significant degree. In fact, I see negative consequences to making serious attempts to do so—unintended consequences that would hurt more than help. I also think if Obama truly saw a real possibility to get any of them passed, he would have done so in a heartbeat. I think his intentions and sensibilities are entirely in the progressive camp. I cannot conceive of anyone—not Hillary or Bill Clinton, not Gore, not any of the leaders of congress (who also were not able to get this stuff passed), not any governor, not any poster here on OS—who could get appreciably better results on any of those items in your list. The deck is stacked against getting this stuff done; the country simply is not ready for a radical shift to the left.
Fact is, many mainstream Americans think Obama has tried to shift our nation TOO FAR TO THE LEFT—tried to get too many left leaning initiatives passed. The most common comment I hear from my many conservative friends is, “Why is this socialist trying to make us into a socialist nation?”
I am hoping (and am fairly certain) some of the military options that trouble you probably were decisions made after consultation with military advisors who recommended that Obama change his position for strategic reason that were not known to him before he took office (and which are not known to us now.) Moves regarding phasing down in Iraq and Afghanistan were probably made after new information was gained in consultation with the military leaders. Responses in Libya also. Drone increase, too. In any case, if Obama had made moves completely different from the ones he made, I suspect he’d be getting lots of crap in response from those moves also. Sometimes you just cannot win!
But that change of direction in the face of new facts, is one of the things I want to see in a leader…the willingness to change. I do not want a leader stuck in concrete—the kind of nonsense the tea partiers expect of people they send to congress. I expect that new information will be learned—new advice given—and I expect adjustments.
So although you have this long list of what you see as failures—I, and many others, prefer to consider them adjustments made—because of expediency; because of new information; because of new or altered considerations; and because of adjustment to the realities of the political situation.
I understand you and other well-meaning, intelligent individuals want to see it as something akin to treason and duplicity. I don’t. That is what I mean when I say I see the things Obama has done or has not done…in a more favorable light than you.
Advocating corporate-agenda wars, escalation of drone warfare and in sovereign countries against international law, assassinations of American citizens, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, lack of transparency, Bagram and Gitmo anti-human rights horrors, the throwing away the key of due process detentions. from Goldman Sachs on down non-accountability for fraud and extortion, the Bush administration mafia non-accountability looking forward not back crap, the BP oil company enabling, the clean coal hypocrisy, the pro-nuclear power endangerment, his war on whistleblowers, his ignoring the Gaza war and promoting a real I/P peace, his betrayal of women's issues, his betrayal of programs for working class families, his collusion with Big Pharma and the insurance companies, his eagerness to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, his privatization of schools again for corporate profit-making and these are just the ones on the top of my head this minute. If you have issues with them, please speak to them.
For the sake of my arguments here, let’s suppose each of these items is correct; each an example of what Obama has done or has not done that constitutes a true “failing.” I am not saying they are correct nor that they actually constitute failings, just that we can assume, for the purpose of the discussion that they are.
First we have to acknowledge that every president has items done and not done at this stage of an administration—some longer, some not quite so long. We also have to acknowledge that Obama has a list of accomplishments—which can easily be Googled on the Internet. In any case, they really are not germane to my comments here which deal specifically with the list of perceived failings you offered.
The possibilities for why these “failings” exist pretty much reduce to five possibilities that I can think of (you may be able to think of others):
One: He is incompetent—not up to the job intellectually or psychologically. He cannot do these things because he does not have the leadership abilities and make-up required to see them through to completion—nor does he have the tenacity required.
Two: He is competent—up to the job intellectually and psychologically and has the leadership abilities, but for reasons we don’t even have to explore here, he has decided to become a Judas, a Manchurian Candidate—a traitor to the liberal/progressive agenda—and he has decided to side completely with the conservatives and tea partiers.
Three: He has been bribed or otherwise paid-off to purposefully fail to deliver on these things.
Four: He cannot get these things done because of the obstructionism that the Republicans are placing in the path of any moves in a leftward direction—and probably no one else would make greater progress on any of these things to any significant degree.
Five: After coming to office, he became aware of influences and conditions that made him change his stance on some of these items—and caused him to abandon some and modify his thinking on others.
Now, Libby, obviously I cannot tell you which of these is correct. More than likely, a combination of these items are the reason some things expected are not done—and some things not expected were done. Intelligent, rational, well-intentioned people can disagree about which properly apply to the situation; none can say definitively that one (or a particular combination of several) is definitely correct to the absolute exclusion of the other possibilities.
Decent, intelligent, rational, logical, well-intentioned people can suggest why some seem more likely than others to be the actual reason—and other decent, intelligent, rational, logical, well-intentioned people can disagree to the extreme.
I suspect that a prudent combination of door numbers four and five is the best guess that can be made. I understand that you do not, but I do. And that is the combination of factors I go with.
I think the political atmosphere in America is so poisoned—so toxic, that nobody could get most of those things passed to any significant degree. In fact, I see negative consequences to making serious attempts to do so—unintended consequences that would hurt more than help. I also think if Obama truly saw a real possibility to get any of them passed, he would have done so in a heartbeat. I think his intentions and sensibilities are entirely in the progressive camp. I cannot conceive of anyone—not Hillary or Bill Clinton, not Gore, not any of the leaders of congress (who also were not able to get this stuff passed), not any governor, not any poster here on OS—who could get appreciably better results on any of those items in your list. The deck is stacked against getting this stuff done; the country simply is not ready for a radical shift to the left.
Fact is, many mainstream Americans think Obama has tried to shift our nation TOO FAR TO THE LEFT—tried to get too many left leaning initiatives passed. The most common comment I hear from my many conservative friends is, “Why is this socialist trying to make us into a socialist nation?”
I am hoping (and am fairly certain) some of the military options that trouble you probably were decisions made after consultation with military advisors who recommended that Obama change his position for strategic reason that were not known to him before he took office (and which are not known to us now.) Moves regarding phasing down in Iraq and Afghanistan were probably made after new information was gained in consultation with the military leaders. Responses in Libya also. Drone increase, too. In any case, if Obama had made moves completely different from the ones he made, I suspect he’d be getting lots of crap in response from those moves also. Sometimes you just cannot win!
But that change of direction in the face of new facts, is one of the things I want to see in a leader…the willingness to change. I do not want a leader stuck in concrete—the kind of nonsense the tea partiers expect of people they send to congress. I expect that new information will be learned—new advice given—and I expect adjustments.
So although you have this long list of what you see as failures—I, and many others, prefer to consider them adjustments made—because of expediency; because of new information; because of new or altered considerations; and because of adjustment to the realities of the political situation.
I understand you and other well-meaning, intelligent individuals want to see it as something akin to treason and duplicity. I don’t. That is what I mean when I say I see the things Obama has done or has not done…in a more favorable light than you.
Hi Frank, I haven't had a chance to do much further commenting since my job has become a real sweatshop of late (I know, lucky I still have one ... one day at a time). I will peruse your comments now.
You clearly have a lot of empathy for Obama. And clearly I do not.
I feel as a conscience-awakened citizen I can't afford to invest empathy in Obama since his incompetence and/or selling out and/or ineffectiveness is bringing such profound pain and suffering to so many. My empathy goes to the victims of American governmental hubris and psychopathology.
By the way, people like Oprah really piss me off, too. And David Axelrod. Don't get me started on Emmanuel!
Obama continues so many of the unconstitutional behaviors of Bush. Bush made me nauseous. I could literally not watch him on the tv. I have trouble stomaching watching Obama on the tube, too.
So many of us were so enraged at Bush. Obama perpetrates many of the same horrors. And my profound anger at Obama seems disturbing to many progressives, many who were chronically incensed at Bush? Well, their lack of anger I find disturbing, so there you go.
I forget where I made a comment on this site about some of the brave protesters against Kissinger's speaking at the 92nd St. Y recently. They bought tickets and at different points in his presentation stood up and challenged him from the audience with questions. Questions that never had a chance of being answered. Because, of course, Kissinger was ENABLED by the audience who shushed them and the police or guards who escorted these people of conscience out of the auditorium. THEY WEREN'T BEING NICE AND RESPECTFUL ENOUGH.
In fact, the audience was OUTRAGED that they came into the auditorium to challenge him WHERE APPARENTLY THE AUDIENCE, AND POLICE, FELT THEY DID NOT BELONG though they had bought their tickets. These brave spokespeople defying the group's hostility and rough handling of the guards were asking questions that the 7 million dead or displaced East Asians could not address to him, decades later, but deserved to have asked.
This highly educated gathering, this American audience, in spite of the calm and articulateness of the activists, hissed at them, some demanding to know why they hadn't stayed in their police penned area in front of the building WHERE THEY BELONGED. Not exercising critical thinking and the right to dissent inside the auditorium. Actually asking a US leader who had ENORMOUS POWER, GLOBAL POWER, that caused massive death and pain to explain himself! The nerve!
HOW DARE THEY COME IN and EMBARRASS the great Henry Kissinger, inconvenience him. Henry, the war criminal. Henry now the voice of our Chinese relations. Henry the beloved guest of Charlie Rose. Henry has and had power. Power of celebrity. Power of death and violence. So how dare these upstarts of conscience inconvenience all of them in that auditorium that night? Bringing up the past like that. So rudely. Wasn't it all swept under the carpet? Back in the fog after the Vietnam War moral reckoning. I ask again, as skypixieo has, WHAT HAPPENED????
Anyway, those few brave souls were representing those of us who have a sense of moral outrage at US wars. Those few brave souls were also representing 7 million East Asians, the dead and displaced from the Vietnam War tragedy. I would say Kissinger had the power of celebrity. The seekers of truth and justice had overwhelming spiritual power! Not appreciated mind you by the 92nd St. Y audience too disconnected themselves to get it. And maybe, probably, Henry is still clueless of what moral power vs. celebrity power is, dropped off and picked up in his limo, having pitched his book of rationalizations of his past and suggestions for the country's "might makes right" future. With lots of profits to come.
Obama is morally disconnected, too, imho. Like that audience. Like Henry.
Obama uses the rhetoric of morality and that repels me. And the Democrats in Congress, all but a handful of honest ones, also are morally disconnected and they too vilely use the language of morality to cover their STUPENDOUS betrayals. So you think the STUPENDOUS betrayals of the Republicans outdistance the STUPENDOUS betrayals of the Democrats? Probably they do. I give you that, Frank. But both groups of betrayals are EVIL! Both groups of betrayals are STUPENDOUSLY evil!
This country didn't get to the crisis it's in with only half the government corrupt. It took all of it. We don't have Dems and Repubs really. We have kleptocrats.
Obama may be lost to a degree, let's say, in a very dangerous thrall to the Republicans, as the Dems in general may also be in terms of the gamesmanship the media loves to comment on. When I look at it from that angle, it reminds me of the sickness of the coaddict mate of an addict. He or she becomes locked in totally reactive behavior to the addict.
Let's say the metaphorical kids of this toxic coupling are the citizens. Neglected and made crazy by the stress and the obsessive enmeshment of the two parents. Coaddicts are just as sick if not sicker than addicts, or become that way eventually. They enable a system that is destroying the family by their overfocus on the irrational and unpredictable behavior of the reckless addict. Accepting it as the only option possible.
They lose the big picture. They are bound in reactivity to the addict. Focused on the addict. Trying to change the addict. Trying to control the addict. HAH! And at what expense? Their own welfare and that of the children. As the amoral media eggs the sick scenario on.
Do you know, Frank, that the administration of the Alanon group (family members affected by alcoholism) in this country forbids that "double winners" within its organization hold high offices in Alanon? (Double winners are members of both AA and Alanon). Do you know why? Because the recovering AAers were dominating the recovering Alanonics too much in the governance and holding all the executive offices! That is kinda interesting I think. So much for the battle between coaddicts and addicts, even in their recovering stages!
Frank, I AM ASKING FOR THE COADDICT DEMS AND COADDICT OBAMA, IF THEY AREN'T GREED AND POWER ADDICTS THEMSELVES (and the jury is still out in my mind and heart) TO "DETACH", FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE. Focus on those whom both parties are supposed to be committed to nurturing. But like in a dysfunctional partnership, the kids are the victims. The prisoners of war of the roller coaster of insane conflict. Doesn't this sound like the political insanity in this country?
BTW, I think it is interesting that Obama's mother was a hippie-liberal type and his father was an African and the needs and wants of these two groups Obama has ignored so profoundly. Makes me wonder some about his familial story, too. I don't know a lot, but that has entered my mind at times. Hmmmm. On that sudden tangent I gotta close. Maybe another blog to annoy people with? :)
But thanks for the dialogue.
You take care. best, libby
You clearly have a lot of empathy for Obama. And clearly I do not.
I feel as a conscience-awakened citizen I can't afford to invest empathy in Obama since his incompetence and/or selling out and/or ineffectiveness is bringing such profound pain and suffering to so many. My empathy goes to the victims of American governmental hubris and psychopathology.
By the way, people like Oprah really piss me off, too. And David Axelrod. Don't get me started on Emmanuel!
Obama continues so many of the unconstitutional behaviors of Bush. Bush made me nauseous. I could literally not watch him on the tv. I have trouble stomaching watching Obama on the tube, too.
So many of us were so enraged at Bush. Obama perpetrates many of the same horrors. And my profound anger at Obama seems disturbing to many progressives, many who were chronically incensed at Bush? Well, their lack of anger I find disturbing, so there you go.
I forget where I made a comment on this site about some of the brave protesters against Kissinger's speaking at the 92nd St. Y recently. They bought tickets and at different points in his presentation stood up and challenged him from the audience with questions. Questions that never had a chance of being answered. Because, of course, Kissinger was ENABLED by the audience who shushed them and the police or guards who escorted these people of conscience out of the auditorium. THEY WEREN'T BEING NICE AND RESPECTFUL ENOUGH.
In fact, the audience was OUTRAGED that they came into the auditorium to challenge him WHERE APPARENTLY THE AUDIENCE, AND POLICE, FELT THEY DID NOT BELONG though they had bought their tickets. These brave spokespeople defying the group's hostility and rough handling of the guards were asking questions that the 7 million dead or displaced East Asians could not address to him, decades later, but deserved to have asked.
This highly educated gathering, this American audience, in spite of the calm and articulateness of the activists, hissed at them, some demanding to know why they hadn't stayed in their police penned area in front of the building WHERE THEY BELONGED. Not exercising critical thinking and the right to dissent inside the auditorium. Actually asking a US leader who had ENORMOUS POWER, GLOBAL POWER, that caused massive death and pain to explain himself! The nerve!
HOW DARE THEY COME IN and EMBARRASS the great Henry Kissinger, inconvenience him. Henry, the war criminal. Henry now the voice of our Chinese relations. Henry the beloved guest of Charlie Rose. Henry has and had power. Power of celebrity. Power of death and violence. So how dare these upstarts of conscience inconvenience all of them in that auditorium that night? Bringing up the past like that. So rudely. Wasn't it all swept under the carpet? Back in the fog after the Vietnam War moral reckoning. I ask again, as skypixieo has, WHAT HAPPENED????
Anyway, those few brave souls were representing those of us who have a sense of moral outrage at US wars. Those few brave souls were also representing 7 million East Asians, the dead and displaced from the Vietnam War tragedy. I would say Kissinger had the power of celebrity. The seekers of truth and justice had overwhelming spiritual power! Not appreciated mind you by the 92nd St. Y audience too disconnected themselves to get it. And maybe, probably, Henry is still clueless of what moral power vs. celebrity power is, dropped off and picked up in his limo, having pitched his book of rationalizations of his past and suggestions for the country's "might makes right" future. With lots of profits to come.
Obama is morally disconnected, too, imho. Like that audience. Like Henry.
Obama uses the rhetoric of morality and that repels me. And the Democrats in Congress, all but a handful of honest ones, also are morally disconnected and they too vilely use the language of morality to cover their STUPENDOUS betrayals. So you think the STUPENDOUS betrayals of the Republicans outdistance the STUPENDOUS betrayals of the Democrats? Probably they do. I give you that, Frank. But both groups of betrayals are EVIL! Both groups of betrayals are STUPENDOUSLY evil!
This country didn't get to the crisis it's in with only half the government corrupt. It took all of it. We don't have Dems and Repubs really. We have kleptocrats.
Obama may be lost to a degree, let's say, in a very dangerous thrall to the Republicans, as the Dems in general may also be in terms of the gamesmanship the media loves to comment on. When I look at it from that angle, it reminds me of the sickness of the coaddict mate of an addict. He or she becomes locked in totally reactive behavior to the addict.
Let's say the metaphorical kids of this toxic coupling are the citizens. Neglected and made crazy by the stress and the obsessive enmeshment of the two parents. Coaddicts are just as sick if not sicker than addicts, or become that way eventually. They enable a system that is destroying the family by their overfocus on the irrational and unpredictable behavior of the reckless addict. Accepting it as the only option possible.
They lose the big picture. They are bound in reactivity to the addict. Focused on the addict. Trying to change the addict. Trying to control the addict. HAH! And at what expense? Their own welfare and that of the children. As the amoral media eggs the sick scenario on.
Do you know, Frank, that the administration of the Alanon group (family members affected by alcoholism) in this country forbids that "double winners" within its organization hold high offices in Alanon? (Double winners are members of both AA and Alanon). Do you know why? Because the recovering AAers were dominating the recovering Alanonics too much in the governance and holding all the executive offices! That is kinda interesting I think. So much for the battle between coaddicts and addicts, even in their recovering stages!
Frank, I AM ASKING FOR THE COADDICT DEMS AND COADDICT OBAMA, IF THEY AREN'T GREED AND POWER ADDICTS THEMSELVES (and the jury is still out in my mind and heart) TO "DETACH", FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE. Focus on those whom both parties are supposed to be committed to nurturing. But like in a dysfunctional partnership, the kids are the victims. The prisoners of war of the roller coaster of insane conflict. Doesn't this sound like the political insanity in this country?
BTW, I think it is interesting that Obama's mother was a hippie-liberal type and his father was an African and the needs and wants of these two groups Obama has ignored so profoundly. Makes me wonder some about his familial story, too. I don't know a lot, but that has entered my mind at times. Hmmmm. On that sudden tangent I gotta close. Maybe another blog to annoy people with? :)
But thanks for the dialogue.
You take care. best, libby
ps. Kissinger protesters part of The World Can't Wait group, http://www.worldcantwait.net/. These people seriously walk the walk!
Just trying to get my toe in some door somewhere at the moment. For anyone perhaps nuttily intrigued by ?pseudo numerology?, today is the 66th year anniversary of the 6th day of August that the US dropped the first of two "atomic" ("hydrogen") bombs on Japan. That was the much romanticised "Hiroshima" and it was the smaller of the two bombs. The second one was dropped three days later on Nagasaki and was the larger of the two. The older of my two brothers was a pilot with the (later eliminated to merge with the army) US Marine Corps and flew fighter accompaniment to the Nagasaki bomber.
I don't want to hog space on anyone's blog. As I said, I'm just "trying to get a toe in a door somewhere" here (Open Salon) today, just to keep connected. Thanks, Libby, for your articulateness and persistence; thanks all commenters for keeping this ?"virtual reality community"? open, alive, and active.
I don't want to hog space on anyone's blog. As I said, I'm just "trying to get a toe in a door somewhere" here (Open Salon) today, just to keep connected. Thanks, Libby, for your articulateness and persistence; thanks all commenters for keeping this ?"virtual reality community"? open, alive, and active.
Just trying to get my toe in some door somewhere at the moment. For anyone perhaps nuttily intrigued by ?pseudo numerology?, today is the 66th year anniversary of the 6th day of August that the US dropped the first of two "atomic" ("hydrogen") bombs on Japan. That was the much romanticised "Hiroshima" and it was the smaller of the two bombs. The second one was dropped three days later on Nagasaki and was the larger of the two. The older of my two brothers was a pilot with the (later eliminated to merge with the army) US Marine Corps and flew fighter accompaniment to the Nagasaki bomber.
I don't want to hog space on anyone's blog. As I said, I'm just "trying to get a toe in a door somewhere" here (Open Salon) today, just to keep connected. Thanks, Libby, for your articulateness and persistence; thanks all commenters for keeping this ?"virtual reality community"? open, alive, and active.
I don't want to hog space on anyone's blog. As I said, I'm just "trying to get a toe in a door somewhere" here (Open Salon) today, just to keep connected. Thanks, Libby, for your articulateness and persistence; thanks all commenters for keeping this ?"virtual reality community"? open, alive, and active.
Sorry that comment posted twice. OS is -- understandably! -- a busy site these days and some times I mistakenly think I failed to click my comment in.
Libby, thanks for the response. Nancy and I just got back from a trip "down the shore" (as we say in New Jersey)...and we've got plans for tonight. I'll get back to you tomorrow. But I do want to say that I totally understand your position...and probably I am more in "sympathy" and "synch" with it than might appear at first blush.
Lemme get into that tomorrow. I have a few more posts to make...and then on to our night's activities.
Have a good night. Looks like we are gonna get some rain, so plan indoor stuff for this evening.
f.
Lemme get into that tomorrow. I have a few more posts to make...and then on to our night's activities.
Have a good night. Looks like we are gonna get some rain, so plan indoor stuff for this evening.
f.
"The older of my two brothers was a pilot with the (later eliminated to merge with the army) US Marine Corps and flew fighter accompaniment to the Nagasaki bomber."
podunk, thanks so much for commenting! :) All those 6s!!!!
Whoa, that is an intense share about your big brother and what he ended up participating in that closely! American exceptionalism and amnesia and conscienceless-ness about what we have been responsible for.
The bloody gamesmanship of war whereby innocents die. In massive numbers at times. In small clusters at others.
Your brother must have been traumatized by that, podunk. Must have traumatized a clearly empathetic sibling like yourself, too.
I think I got a measure of secondary PTSD from a father who had PTSD from his war experiences. He brought the PTSD home with him. I didn't have to enlist for it. His alcoholism was a factor. Other factors, too. PTSD a b*tch to recover from.
That is happening now all over the country. PTSD victims and their families coping with the symptoms.
And the wars continue on.
podunkmarte (fascinating name), would love to hear more from you about what you shared or anything else! thanks for sticking that toe in the door! to be continued! libby
Frank, been to Cape May and Spring Lake. Excellent summer spots! :) libby
podunk, thanks so much for commenting! :) All those 6s!!!!
Whoa, that is an intense share about your big brother and what he ended up participating in that closely! American exceptionalism and amnesia and conscienceless-ness about what we have been responsible for.
The bloody gamesmanship of war whereby innocents die. In massive numbers at times. In small clusters at others.
Your brother must have been traumatized by that, podunk. Must have traumatized a clearly empathetic sibling like yourself, too.
I think I got a measure of secondary PTSD from a father who had PTSD from his war experiences. He brought the PTSD home with him. I didn't have to enlist for it. His alcoholism was a factor. Other factors, too. PTSD a b*tch to recover from.
That is happening now all over the country. PTSD victims and their families coping with the symptoms.
And the wars continue on.
podunkmarte (fascinating name), would love to hear more from you about what you shared or anything else! thanks for sticking that toe in the door! to be continued! libby
Frank, been to Cape May and Spring Lake. Excellent summer spots! :) libby
PodunkMarte, You needn't feel that You need to get Your toe in the door - You, have, already established Yourself as an essential part of the community.
The heat and humidity, here (in NYC, one, usually, gets a break after several days, but here's it's basically constant for seven months {or more}) makes a mid-day nap,nearly essential, but after that I've got Your PM to respond to.
LibbyLiberalNYC, do You EVER sleep???
The heat and humidity, here (in NYC, one, usually, gets a break after several days, but here's it's basically constant for seven months {or more}) makes a mid-day nap,nearly essential, but after that I've got Your PM to respond to.
LibbyLiberalNYC, do You EVER sleep???
mark, I probably keep Japanese hours! :) hope you are okay. libby
No comments:
Post a Comment