Here’s an interesting theory.
This country is in a world of hurt if the likes of Michele Bachmann or Rick Perry wins the next election. It might be in greater trouble if Barack Obama does.
I don’t think it much matters if it’s Bachmann, Perry, Christie, Paul, or Romney. We’ll be in a world of hurt regardless. If a Republican wins the presidency, they will almost certainly win the Senate, too. And you can forget about retaking the House. If Obama is voted out, the GOP will almost definitely have the trifecta. The only thing left standing that can prevent the final victory of the Republican revolution will be the Senate filibuster, if that even survives.
The chances will be very high that a Republican president will be able to replace one of the liberals on the Supreme Court. You can forget about overturning Citizens United. It’s not unlikely that Roe v. Wade will be overturned. Environmental degradation will be unprecedented. The Justice Department will be politicized again. Our leadership role in the world will be crushed as people finally give up on us. I can’t even list all the ways we will be screwed because I am always surprised by how crazy the Republicans are. But, okay, let’s hear why we’ll be even worse off if the president is reelected.
The genteel, pragmatic Republicanism of the past has been supplanted by a pitchforks and torches mentality, a funhouse mirror distortion of traditional conservatism. Meaning, of course, the tea party.
These are folks who don’t just support the death penalty; they cheer for executions. They don’t just oppose health care reform, they shout “Let him die” to the uninsured individual who faces life-threatening illness. They are the true believers: virulently anti-government, anti-Muslim, anti-gay, anti-science, anti-tax, anti-facts and, most of all, anti the coming demographic changes represented by a dark-skinned president with an African name. They are the people who want “their” country back.
Okay, that didn’t explain it, so I guess we’ll have to keep reading.
You might think Obama’s re-election would solve this, offering as it would stark repudiation of the politics of panic, paranoia and reactionary extremism this ideology represents. The problem is, these folks thrive on repudiation, on a free-floating conviction that they have been done wrong, cheated and mistreated by the tides of history and progress, change and demography. So there is every reason to believe, particularly given the weakness of the economy, that being repudiated in next year’s election would only make them redouble their intensity, confirming them as it would in their own victimhood.
And ask yourself: what form could that redoubling take? How do you up the ante from this? What is the logical next step after two years of screaming, rocks through windows, threats against legislators and rhetoric that could start a fire?
An awful, obvious answer suggests itself. You reject it instinctively. This is, after all, America, not some unstable fledgling democracy.
Then you realize it was not so long ago that a man blew up a federal building in Oklahoma City out of anti-government sentiment not so different from that espoused by the tea party. And you remember how that tragedy exposed an entire network of armed anti-government zealots gathering in the woods. And you read where the Southern Poverty Law Center says the number of radical anti-government groups spiked to 824 in 2010, a 61 percent increase over just the previous year.And you wonder.
So, even though we’ll be screwed under a Republican administration, we won’t be dead. We should hand the keys to the government over to these lunatics before they start an armed insurrection.
Obviously, this guy is just thinking out loud, not recommending that we unilaterally disarm. But it’s still a form of stinking thinking. It’s not much different than thinking by ignoring our political fights our opponents will melt away. I think our biggest problem is that we’re letting our frustration blind us to the true nature of the opposition. If we lose next year, we don’t get Poppy. We don’t even get Dubya. We get a new country, unlike anything we’ve seen before in our lifetimes. It won’t be a pleasant experience for us, and considering that this new country will be armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, it might not be a pleasant experience for anyone else, either. I can’t think of a single issue facing the country that won’t get immeasurably, radically worse if the Republicans are rewarded for their behavior with victory.
very counterproductive way to think about the situation – let’s give in to the hostage takers. Also he forgets that the teabaggage is a minority. Let some fringe minority determine the fate of a nation? that is so 20th century.
pardon my French, but fuck this mofo.
HELL NO, we shouldn’t elect a Republican.
HELL YES, we should work to get Obama re-elected.
and, I don’t give a shyt what the crazies do if he gets re-elected.
simply put
BRING.IT.ON
like someone’s scared of these mofos
It may just be possible (probable?) that we’re so screwed up that permagov will continue to execute it’s pan-asian resource grab.
So, if Obama is willing to execute war in Pakistan and/or Iran (methinks Iran will be last), he stays in office. Otherwise (likely), we get an even more crazy Repug who nabs all the sticky black here and abroad and puts us in position to continue hegemonic rule for another generation.
In the mean time, we the people have got to hit the streets to keep the police state from over-stepping itself domestically even more.
Meanwhile, the other side never stops.
This is 2000 and the Green Party happening all over again…except far, far worse. The strategy and the organizing is exciting and it feels empowering. But the left isn’t fighting to the death hear and I mean that literally. For all of the arm-chair right-wingers, there are many who actually do go out and prepare to fight and have been planning and organizing for decades. (I know my winger mom would gladly accept becoming a martyr to overturn Roe.)
The Occupy Wall Streeters are not fucking serious. There will not be an Arab Revolution here because we are all invested in the preeminence of the USA. No one will self-immolate.
I am so pissed…and I feel quite helpless. All I can go do is register voters and tell them all the things that the media fail to report – like all the people who can now get health insurance because even though they have preexisting conditions (my father and both of my brothers) or that my daughter will have access to free birth control when she is (much, much, much, much, much, much, much) older.
I’m pretty sure it is possible to work for real change in the streets in October and still show up to a voting booth in November of next year.
What is all this opposition to street protest REALLY about?
I am delighted with the street protest. It highlights a hugely important issue. That said, I am fundamentally against anything that makes a single person less likely to vote Democratic next year. The wolves are at the door, and Obama is not the wolf.
These actions will have grave consequences.
Like..?
The 2012 election will be lost. Have you no memory of 2000 and its aftermath?
Will it?
In the mean time (before the election), we will see Europe’s debt crisis expand and the recognition of gold’s over-valuation, causing flight to US currency and gov’t bonds, allowing the fed to continue to quietly boost domestic markets without threat of inflation. Done artfully, this will result in a strong dollar and a reasonably stable stock market, which will boost the confidence of both consumers and ‘job-creators’. That would be a good thing if you want Obama re-elected.
I think it may be time to stop running around like the house is on fire and spooking people. Just like the counter-intuitive negative reaction the market had to the latest Buffet moves re:Bank of America, the more you do the more you admit how fucked the situation is.
Fiat value in capitalism (currency without a metal standard) has always been a confidence game and unless we can get back to conning people that things are great, we might as well abandon our system.
Actually, you’re missing 99% of my critique.
The president’s fate isn’t going to be determined next November. It is being determined right now, and in the remainder of the this year’s Congress. In about a week, Harry Reid will introduce Obama’s jobs bill. No, it won’t pass in its conceived form, and no, it isn’t any great shakes to begin with. But he needs to show he can do something to reduce unemployment, and he needs to make it crystal clear who is to blame if he cannot. He needs all progressive voices on board for the push, and they should have been on board for the last month.
But that’s not what’s happening. Go surf around the internet in search of a blogging community that is focused on saving the presidency and helping him win this battle over the Jobs Bill.
It’s not the people in the streets that is a problem. That could conceivably be of some help.
It’s the focus of the leading voices of the progressive movement that is a problem.
Republicans are thrilled that the left has basically walked off the battlefield and left the president holding his dick.
That’s my critique. Maybe it’s bad timing more than anything else, but it’s upsetting me.
Who are the leading voices of the progressive movement? This isn’t snark; I don’t have much time to spend OL as I used to & I’m definitely not hearing them on NPR Radio. Please advise.
Well, by breadth of audience, that would be Rachel, Ed, and O’Donnell on MSNBC, and online it would be the writers at Daily Kos, Firedoglake, etc.. And of course, Benen, Yglesias, Ezra, Weigel, Greenwald, and other corporate-employed bloggers. There’s AlterNet and HuffPost writers, too. There’s Democratic Underground.
And, of course, there’s Think Progress, which shall remain blameless.
Those are the leading voices online and in papers and teepee, not necessarily the best ones.
Union leaders are tremendously important, too. And there is the whole black and brown progressive blogosphere, which generally gets what’s at stake here.
You forget something, Boo. You even posted the other day that Ben Nelson won’t vote for the President’s jobs bill. It’s not the left that’s the problem. Isn’t being a President all about using all levers of power? So how do you put the screws to someone like Ben Nelson? And if you can’t, you might just understand Leonard Pitts’ point. Because people like Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu will be the President’s down fall, no some fucking retards on the left. Speaking of which, do you ever listen to WIP, Boo? If so, Big Daddy Graham made a great point last night, granted at it was more like 3am this morning. He was making a point about Andy Reid, but the same point could be made about our political process.
The only time I ever listen to WIP is after a devastating Eagles loss. Damn, I coulda listened last night!
OK. I’m clearly out of the loop; I don’t have a lot of time for media.
For the most part I take the longer view, which isn’t something we’re generally encouraged to do when ratings or page views are the prime interests. I’m not loyal to any network, blogger or pundit. If someone says something that jibes with what I’ve figured out over time, I agree. But their word ain’t gospel either. I’m always going to look at who they work for & where they’ve been.
I would definitely be interested in the leading voice from the teepee, though.
🙂
In any event, thanks for the list. No snark.
You left out radio. The only one I think is consistently on target there is Thom Hartman
Thom Hartmann is amazing–everyone here should check him out if they can. He is a fountain of information, context and has great knowledge about American history. He regularly has on some of the smartest, most dangerous and insidious right-wingers, many from think-tanks armed with endless talking points and skewed studies and polls. He picks them apart, fact by fact, gets them riled up without losing his own cool, and exposes them for all to see. And on Fridays, he starts the show by doing an hour with Bernie Sanders.
It’s upsetting the crap out of me too.
Are there even 50 votes for a paid-for bill in the Senate? That’s a serious question. Because there can’t possibly be anywhere near 60. So are they planning to use reconciliation to jam the House?
Fuck it, just deficit finance the thing again, like in December. You’re gonna be running another trillion dollar deficit next year anyway…
Not until they put the oil subsidies back in.
Who left who again? I’m thinking that is a serious matter of opinion. If you’re going to fail, being right is a lot better than being practical. I’ve defended decision after decision of his, but he just hasn’t carried his own water. His rope-a-dope stuff is lovely up to a point and that point is long past – his base is knocked out, even if he still stands. The idea that being dragged off the canvas is the same as abandoning the President seems a bit manichean.
I humbly suggest that if he wants us to show now and for the election, the President has to do more than scold his base (same to those here) – he has to decide who they are and serve them – you know, do his job. A change in tone in his speeches won’t work. Fool me twice and all that. He has almost no time or ability to step up, but he’s the President of the United States NOW and if he can’t get it done from the most powerful position in the world, maybe he should step aside.
Outside of spamming my inbox, he’s been too quiet lately (scary when a President, like young children, is quiet), which makes me worried something big and nasty is about to happen. If that is the case, this argument will not matter.
Yeah, his argument is toolish. But, I like articles in mainstream newspapers that keep pointing out just how crazy and dangerous the tea partiers are.
Democrats/Liberals/Progressives are currently in real danger of politically acting out the equivalent scenario of “gradually boiling a frog to death in hot water”. We all know the story. If you attempt to put a frog into hot water, he will immedaitely jump out in reaction to the temperature of the water. However if the frog is placed in cool water that is very slowly heated, he will stay in the water and eventually he will be boiled to death.
All of the American groups who generally oppose the Republican Party and its initiatives are slowly being fed increasing negative messages about how Obama’s political base is becoming increasingly disenchanted with him and his bid for a second term. The MSM offers up some specioous reasons in these messages namely that the American “lefties” are pissed off with Obama’s “cozyness” with Wall Street and the tremendous amount of treasury he gave them in the bailout. The Republican controlled MSM is busy quoting 2 or 3 black toadies who from their comfortable position within the Koch Brother’s financial largess, blast the President for his “lack of attention to unemployemnt in the black community”. The list goes on and on.
It has now tragically reached the point where even some respected Democratic leaders are expressing their “doubts about the President’s leadership” in public. And the Republican controlled MSM continues to turn up the heat on this theme in the national conversation, increasingly painting President Obama as an “out of touch”, confused, domestically weak president who is a pathetic prisoner of “Washington Politics”.
If the Democrats/Liberals/Progressives continue to sit in this Republican controlled political “cooking pot” and drink the “who is the most reasonable Republican candidate for president” cool aid being dispensed by the Republican controlled MSM, they will wind up like the proverbial frog in the slowly heated hot water, i.e., they will wind up DOA in the American political pot after 2012. If America elects a Republican President and the Republicans take control of Congress; America will have instituted a totalitarian government, and I for one will be making a permanent move to Canada.
Yep. I was arguing with a liberal in WV who “voted her conscience” the other day rather than voting for an admittedly poor Dem. She is insisting there is no real difference. Which is utter bullshit. There are too many thinking this way.
Imho, the only way one election can institute a totalitarian government is if we’re already well along on that path — which I believe we are. Ergo, both parties are culpable & Obama’s presidency will be just another casualty of that overarching destiny.
So, under the GOP we abandon ‘soft totalitarianism’ sooner rather than later. Maybe.
Now, I have these beliefs. Many folks here will assume I will not vote for Obama in 2012. Why make that assumption?
Why make that assumption about people actively protesting that slide toward totalitarianism with the power at their disposal? On what actual basis? A year is an eternity in our political life. All bets are off that far in advance, in terms of individual voting behavior.
Not that most people vote in any case.
In many cases I think those actively protesting are being scapegoated for the intrinsic failures of a thoroughly broken & corrupt electoral system.
it is thoroughly broken & corrupt. Where we now find ourselves is proof enough.
Translation: Putting a n*gger in the White House made otherwise rational racists irrational, so let’s give them what they want, a white White House, and things will get back to normal.
The funny thing is I bet this has crossed the mind of more than just a few white liberals.
Including many on Capital Hill. I don’t think it’s by accident that Nancy Pelosi is feeding Howard Kurtz a storyline like this:
“Pelosi Slams Obama Team”
The left’s dissatisfaction with President Obama is making its way into the Democratic Party’s upper ranks: “I think you need to talk about how poorly they [the White House] do on message,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi tells Newsweek’s Howard Kurtz. “They can’t see around corners; they anticipate nothing.” Obama’s team, meanwhile, blames Republicans for his woes. David Axelrod says the GOP has done “diabolically well” at creating a “dysfunctional political system” and sticking Obama with the blame.
I understand you are loathe to even consider such a possibility, but I think it’s entirely plausible that Nancy Pelosi simply is better at manipulating and handholding conservative Democrats and managing a legislative calendar than Harry Reid or anybody in the White House.
I think Presidents and Senators get too high on themselves and get lost in bipartisanship and dealmaking. House members are more cutthroat partisans, which is probably what was needed here in 2011.
Also on this NMP. Be careful with ol Abe Lincoln suit wearing Howie Kurtz.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/1011/Newsweek_retracts_Pelosi_quote.html#.TooJHNWtics.twitter
Yes, but Pelosi did not say that. It’s a bogus quote that’s now been retracted by Newsweek.
http://nation.foxnews.com/nancy-pelosi/2011/10/03/newsweek-retracts-pelosi-quote-slammed-obama-team
Not that I disagree with your perceptions, NMP, but they’re so consistently focused on race that you’re getting close to charicature.
One comment about Obama’s dick-size nearly had me thinking you were reprising Lenny Bruce’s colored-folks-at-parties routine.
I’m a member of an oppressed group as well — more than one, really — but if I were to take that as a basis for every comment I’d feel like a caricature myself.
I do domestic work. Later ..
Yes, I bring a consistent and distinctive racial perspective that would otherwise never be discussed, and I don’t make any apologies for that. And believe me I have not said anything here that’s not said everyday on Black blogs. I believe I brought up the President’s dick in direct response to a racist comment about his nose size. What was said was so jarring I intended my response to be equally jarring. I still can’t believe that a group of white liberals would be stupid enough to assess a black person’s physical attributes in the construct of a white European standard of beauty.
Caricature? You can’t believe that I would moderate my words to be acceptably Black?
Read the entire article, because some people think the first 2 sentences make the entire thesis. It is just a hook.
At no time is Pitts advocating we vote Republican because it would help the country avoid more chaos or worse.
I think he is concered about the level of violence, hatred and chaos that we need to be prepared to face when Obama is reelected. He is also showing how this level of TP idiocy has become “legitimized” as the Republican platform adopted on Capital Hill. It isn’t just a couple of crazies in the woods.
Look at his headline. I do not think Pitts is so naive that this is a new idea for him. I do think he wants to push this message out though to get people to think more about the kinds of things that Booman himself has said here many times (and in this diary) about Republican extremism.
I think Pitts is trying a low key approach and a subtle one to reach a wider audience. It’s a challenge to his readers to get serious about our politics and make sure we vigorously oppose the Teahadists. I think it is a decent article, like how it ends and I find it motivating:
Yes, indeed bow to the blackmail of potential violence!
And folks will reward that?
“Republicans are thrilled that the left has basically walked off the battlefield and left the president holding his dick.”
I have been really puzzled by reading comments like this here over the last few days. So many people here seem ready to give up completely, and this is where I usually come for calm and reason, so that’s a bit distressing.
People seem to think that Occupy Wall Street is bad for Obama, and I don’t see that at all. I see the Van Jones American Dream movement as being good for Obama, as well.
I am truly perplexed – what did I miss?
You’re not missing anything, Water Girl. Those making the comments you refer to are the ones who are missing something. Basically the Big Bad Republican Wolf is saying “boo”, so they are obligingly terrified. It’s weird. It’s like the evil of the modern republican party is the ultimate bright, shiny object. With all the examples from Cairo to Lybia to Wisconsin, and now, hopefully, OWS, they still don’t get it.
I would hope to get some positive energy and new insights from blogs, rather than just a recycling of the same propaganda we get from the MSM. But I take heart in the fact that blogs are just blogs after all, and they don’t really have much influence. Which is pretty ironic, since when Bush was still resident, I really thought blogs were going to change the world.
More and more it seems to me that a lot of “progressives” simply cannot identify with being in the majority. Psychologically they cannot deal with it. They have to see themselves as the oppressed minority, otherwise they wouldn’t really be progressives, would they? Well, the GOP wants you to see yourselves as the oppressed minority too.