The Insane Scenario Unfolding Before Our Eyes

[babylonsister]

http://prospect.org/article/insane-scenario-unfolding-our-eyes

The Insane Scenario Unfolding Before Our Eyes

Jamelle Bouie

June 1, 2012

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

snip//


If I sound frustrated—and I am—it’s because we’re in the middle of an absolutely ludicrous scenario. Under a Republican president, the United States endured eight years of disastrous economic stewardship—arguably the worst of the post-war era—that nearly led to a second Great Depression. In response, voters elected a Democratic president and gave him huge majorities in both chambers of Congress. Rather than work with the new president, Republicans ran to the right and promised to defeat this president by any means necessary. They abused institutional rules to block nominees, and imposed a de-facto super-majority requirement on all legislation. Republicans rejected stimulus, the automobile rescue, a climate bill built from their ideas, a health care bill built from their ideas, and a reform bill designed to keep the Great Recession from happening again.

This was an amazingly successful strategy. It destroyed Democratic standing with the public, energized the right-wing fringe, and led to a historic victory in the House of Representatives. Once in command of the House, Republicans pushed hugely draconian budgets, risked a government shutdown, and nearly caused a second economic collapse by threatening to default on the nation’s debt. This reckless behavior depressed the economy, prolonged the recovery, and destroyed trust in the nation’s political institutions. The Speaker of the House has even promised to do this again, if Democrats don’t bow to his demands for greater spending cuts.

Now, those same Republicans—and their enablers—are running to replace President Obama by blaming him for the entirety of our economic situation. The GOP nominee, Mitt Romney, denies the depth of the recession, unfairly tars Obama for job losses incurred at the beginning of his term, and falsely blames the stimulus for sluggish growth. His alternative to the problems of slow growth, high inequality, and stagnant wages? Juiced-up versions of policies that led us here in the first place: larger tax cuts for the rich, more deregulation for Wall Street, greater restrictions on labor, deeper cuts to social services, and less help for our most vulnerable citizens.

Because reelection campaigns are often a referendum on the incumbent, it doesn’t actually matter that Republicans lack a plan for generating broad-based growth. All that matters is that they aren’t Democrats.

The GOP plan has been to capitalize on this, and obstruct government to the point where voters will mindlessly bring them back to power. That’s what they announced at the beginning of Obama’s term, and it’s working—the presidential election is very close, and Republicans have a chance at winning unified control of government. To many of our pundits and reporters, this is business as usual. In reality, it’s absolutely insane.

[rhett o rick]

1. We must get control of a major media source and try to combat the propaganda

that keeps this information from the public. Where are the rich progressives when you need them. We need a progressive Rupert Murdock.

[tabasco]

3. So true.

But we need an outlet dedicated to providing the truth, not some mirror image of the ridiculous Faux News propaganda machine.

[barbtries]

4. it's really sad.

i can't even stand to listen to NPR's political coverage. perfectly reasonable sounding people spouting insanity. it makes my blood boil.

[2banon]

32. The Emperor's clothing of NPR was disrobed to my ears back in 2000

Although, I did continue to listen to NPR stations for other programs that I enjoy and forced myself to endure ATC or Morning/Weekend Edition... even my radio is set to a local NPR station.. despite my annoyance or outrage of their clearly Right Wing and Corporate favored coverage of any topic/issue of concern.

But I think this particular election campaign season(s) coverage seems to me more egregious and outrageous than all past election cycles in the past.

I no longer have my radio alarm on at all, and recently something happened to cause my car radio to stop working very suddenly. I think it's likely a blown fuse..

But I'm putting off fixing it... I think until after the elections.

I used to attend National Public Radio Conferences, and it would be astonishing to hear ATC/Morning Edition commentators remark on all the horrific complaining emails from listeners. They actually think, believe and promote the notion that since they're getting complaints from "both the "left" and the "right" they must doing something Right.

They are doing something Right..

Promoting Right Wing bullshit and Corporate propaganda that is.

[barbtries]

39. well put.

i'm tired of screaming at my radio...but i keep listening for all the other great programs. but still.

[Plucketeer]

48. I'm with you two on this.

I have a love-disgust relationship with NPR. I sometimes chuckle that some of their more entertaining programming would go RIGHT OVER the heads of Tea-Baggers and Repugs, and that's PROBABLY the truth of it. It might be why defunding NPR is a favorite theme for them - there's nothing ON NPR that they can relate to. And yet..... NPR keeps trying to appease them as a manuver to inhibit defunding.
I wanna gag on Munday mornings when they feature Kookie Roberts and her fetid slant. But really, there IS good stuff there if you ignore the stupid. There's only TWO radio stations I can listen to locally - NPR and Kings Radio 103.3 that plays oldies non-stop with occassional commercials and nothing else.

[2banon]

54. You're absolutely right about the funding matter..

No doubt in my mind that's the "motivating" factor in trying so hard to appease to the right.. CPB funding supposedly offers 20% of their base capital for operations but I'm thinking it's less than that much.. whatever, the amount of Korporate funding they get with their commercials (which they continue to deny airing) they like to refer to "underwriters".. technically that's true, but effectively they run it just like network/cable advertising.. I can't imagine that they're being paid less than the netwrks for the same ads at least on PBS.

I recall during Clinton's administration, listeners endured suffering through Pat Buchannon and Cokie Roberts.. on munday mornings. eck. I didn't understand why that was at the time..

but I got a real in-depth education the Media shortly after the 2000 elections and then all through the drum up to the wars... when both PBS and NPR trotted out one general after another to justify this weapons of mass destruction meme.. and the entire buisness of the propaganda and dis-information operations since those days..

Until the media in this country is freed from it's Korporate overlords, this country will remain an uninformed, misinformed, under-informed, brainwashed citzenry and electorate..

Meanwhile we do have a few courageous truth tellers, and they need our support.

[bjobotts]

65. This 33% has a very loud megaphone...

but in the end...NECESSITY is forcing people to the polls to defeat them purely for survival reasons. Driving the middle class into abject poverty and then announce plans to disown those in poverty hoping to make workers take $1/day average wages certainly gets their attention enough to say "we gotta do something". You just wait and see. '
The paranoia comes from fear and that very loud megaphone that belong to those who misinform...but you'll see and soon. Republicans will lose their House majority and lose big time. Get out the vote as if your very life depended on it and make it happen.

[Odin2005]

75. I only listen to PR for the BBC, Car Talk, and On Being.

Morning Edition is full of crap, especially when Cokie opens her piehole on Mondays.

[JDPriestly]

61. Switch to your local Pacifica station if you can find one.

The Pacifica network of radio shows is much better than NPR.

[RC]

69. Thanks. The link for the Pacifica network for the Kansas City area -

http://www.kkfi.org/

[barbtries]

83. i'll check it out.

thanks

[Odin2005]

74. NPR has gone all to Hell.

[rhett o rick]

92. I agree. nm

[rhett o rick]

21. I understand and agree, but if you merely mirrored Foxed-Up News you would be

99% true.

[tabasco]

26. LOL!

Good point!

[Scootaloo]

34. Just a small thing about propaganda

Propaganda is not, on its own, a bad thing. I know that, as a buzzword it means "lies!" but, well, that's not true at all.

All propaganda is is an effort to convince other people of your own point of view. When your dentist tells you that regular brushing prevents cavities, he's engaging in propaganda... propaganda that happens to also be factually true. Someone who's anti-toothpaste might point out that regular brushing can aggravate sensitive teeth and cause gums to bleed... which is also propaganda but is also true.

FOX news and many other sources are indeed propaganda outlets. However, so are Democracy Now! and RTnews and Rachel Maddow. The difference is in the facts underlying the propaganda. Fox News will base its propaganda off lies and falsehoods (and there are difference between lies and falsehoods as well...) while the others I named will keep their spin entirely based on facts and reality.

There does need to be a strong left propaganda outlet. You can "present facts" all you want... it won't be enough. It's like setting a new and exotic food in front of someone, it can be wonderful and delicious, but you'll have to convince them to try it. You have to take those facts you're presenting and make them interesting and worthy of attention, nad you can't do that without spinning htem and dolling htem up a bit; they're still facts, just glossy.

[tabasco]

37. Just a small thing about "news"

News is not supposed to be propaganda, it's supposed to be truth and accuracy.

[2banon]

55. Hear, Here!

[Scootaloo]

56. My point went over your head, I think

I'm saying there's no inherent conflict between "truth" and "propaganda." Truth can fuel propaganda just as easily as lies can. The default assumption that propaganda is inherently false and misleading is simply wrong. It's one of the self-crippling strains of thought that have been plaguing the left for nearing fifty years now, and it needs to be put aside.

News has always been propagandized to some degree. That's because news is information collected and written by people, with the intent of providing it to other people. Thus is has voice, angles, and context. Sure, the news could just be a bare string of factoids. But that wouldn't be very appealing, would it?

Think of it this way; the facts are the "reference" section of the library, while propaganda is absolutely everything else in the library. Some is totally false. A great deal of it draws heavily on facts you can find in the reference section. But nobody goes to read the books in the reference section for the pleasure of thumbing through a Roget's Thesaurus or the Q-R tome of Encyclopedia Britannica; they go there to collect facts to check against the other material (propaganda) that htye're reading, or to source their own material (yes; that essay you wrote about Napoleon in 7th grade was propaganda, too)

[napoleon_in_rags]

51. +1. Your post gets at some deep issues.

Propaganda is reductionist by nature, it presents complex issues as simple and therein lies its attraction for people. Not just because people are dumb and can't grasp complex issues, but because smart people don't have time to give to that cause, so they prefer the simple.

The real challenge of our time is figuring out how to make the best reductions of complex topics, so they are simple, but also point to truth. Picasso: "Art is not truth it is the lie which allows us to approach truth". We need to be able to find the small pieces of information that let people approach truth through them. Kind of like thumbnail images on a page: They take less information than the original picture, but give you an idea of what the original image (truth) is about.

[Odin2005]

76. In Europe they don't even bother with the "we are non-partisan" BS.

Their news outlets have well known slants, either to the right or left.

[Scootaloo]

84. Which isn't bad at all

so long as the consumer is informed that there is slant - and for fuck's sake, there's ALWAYS slant, NOBODY is neutral - they can get their info, process it, and not be confused.

Hell, I'll bet that's why the media over there is a little less celebrity-obsessed than ours. it's like our editors and producers are going "Crap, what's a neutral topic with nionpartisan spin, uh, uh... is brad pitt losing his hair?"

[Odin2005]

88. Yep. And also, just because an article is slanted, does not mean it is factually wrong.

The Telegraph has some very good articles, but the ones involving politics DO have a RW slant. Now contrast that to The Daily (Hate) Mail, which is tabloid crap akin to the BS in the American MSM.

[nxylas]

90. What about George Soros?

Don't you know that all the networks except Fox News are owned by him, whilst simultaneously being owned by the Kenyan-born usurper in the White House?

(I hope I don't need this, but: )

[rhett o rick]

91. Dang (face slap), how could I forget Soros. Esp when he seems to be the only name

the RW can spout. And he is such a great socialist.

back at yeah.

[onlyadream]

2. This needs to get out there

Every DU member with a twitter or Facebook account needs to get active and stop preaching to the choir.

[Mosaic]

30. I agree with you

As I am on those mass social networks, I will do my part to make this a center/left nation, it really already is but most don't realize it yet.

[onlyadream]

49. I've been going back and forth on Facebook

where most of my friends think Obama is Satan. Hopefully my posts will make them think a bit. one friend, who thinks Reagan is God, finally, after I made many posts about what Reagan really did, said, "oh we'll, no one is perfect." I told him that he was taken in by the charisma and acting.

[414]

95. Can't talk to an echo chamber constantly...

...definitely have to mix it up...

[AnotherMcIntosh]

5. If Senator Reid had called for cloture votes, I would agree with you that the Republicans

"... imposed a de-facto super-majority requirement on all legislation."

[drm604]

8. In the 110th congress there were a record number of cloture votes.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/02/10/3878726-graph-filibuster-out-o-control?lite

[AnotherMcIntosh]

27. Thank you for the additional information. Somehow, in the past, filibusters were televised as were

the roll calls for cloture votes.

At the very least, it appears that clotures were filed. It may be that roll calls for clotures were also taken. It's odd, or at least seems odd to me, that roll calls for cloture votes were not televised day after day from one election to the next.

[Tx4obama]

45. Here ya go

List of all the Senate votes, including 'cloture' votes:

2012: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_112_2.htm

2011: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_112_1.htm

2010: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_111_2.htm

2009: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_111_1.htm

[AnotherMcIntosh]

47. Thanks.

[SGMRTDARMY]

6. The single most important thing is to ensure

that Mittens is defeated and defeated soundly this Nov. and even though I live on a fixed income, ie, my military pension, I'm contributing all I can afford to Pres. Obama's re-election campaign.

[xtraxritical]

9. My dream is to give Congress back to the Democrats.

I fear it is the only thing that can turn this country around.

[mike dub]

58. Part of me says f' the Dems in Congress because...

I'm a Democrat, and Vote Democrat, but I received the most rude phonecall (begging for a donation) from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee yesterday. They called my work cell phone, as my wife and I were walking into Harris Teeter -- a regional grocery chain. There was the classic long pause on the other end of the line after I said Hello? and then the man on the other end of the phone launched into reading a script about the evil Republicans. Long story longer, he asked me SEVEN times how much I was going to donate to the DSCC on my credit card, over the phone, Today. The first amount he spit out / suggested that I donate, was 212 dollars...for some big pledge drive/help,-we'll-go-bankrupt-if-you-don't, B.S. Two-hundred-twelve dollars?! Really?!?!? Over the phone on a credit card?
I told him I wasn't going to donate anything, but if he'd like to send some information to my P.O. box, that'd be fine. I'm a Southern boy and I'm VERY polite (and I'm sure there are very polite Northerners too), but the answer was always No. How dare the DSCC hound Democrats (actually, I'm registered Unaffliated, but no way in hell I'd ever vote Rethug) for donations via credit card, cold, over the phone, and rudely, many many times, after I've told them No. The answer's still no. Question now is: when the card/info comes in the mail (they said, 'could we ask you for a 50 dollar pledge on the card that we're sending, and I said Yes), should I send a strongly-worded letter back to them, with NO money enclosed? Really ticked me off. If the Obama campaign called with this kind of slick-ass attitude and rudeness, they'd be losing along of potential donations. Sorry- I'm done venting now. If one of the moderators wants to post this as a separate rant, be my guest. I'm newly registered, so I don't know if I can. And for what it's worth, I told the guy to take my work cell OFF their call list and not to call again. Until yesterday, I had not idea the DSCC existed, but now that they've gone and been completely a-holes over the phone, I know about them, and I know to never send them a dime.

[SGMRTDARMY]

63. That would be the optimal outcome.

If the repubs get contol of the WH and the Congress, I fear we're in for some really bad, bad shit. Look for more endless wars, more union busting, economy really going into the crapper, less police and firefighters because of budget cuts which will result in more crime. Thats some scary shit there.

[rhett o rick]

24. It is equally important to elect Democratic Senators, Reps, and Governors. nm

[SGMRTDARMY]

62. Absolutely

After all. all politics are local and I'm doing my very best to get local Dems elected.

[cbrer]

7. GOP strategy shows the length they will go to

To obey their corporate masters. It has nothing to do with logic, and certainly not what's best for our nation. Citizens who can't see this are blind.

[chervilant]

10. The political landscape

du jour is owned and controlled by the Corporate Megalomaniacs who've usurped our media, our politics, AND our global economy. Too many of our Democrats are complicit in the disastrous sycophancy to these vile corporatists, which insures reelections, and increasing wealth. Isn't greed one of the seven deadly sins?

Today's Democratic Party is not the Party of my youth. Our entire system needs to be purged of all corporate influence, including the lobbyists who grossly outnumber our politicians.

[Martin Eden]

11. GOP Strategy: Obstruct economic recovery, then blame it on the Democrats

The fact that this strategy works ranks among the biggest indictments of the intelligence of the American voting public.

[grasswire]

29. yes

Americans for the most part are low-information voters; easily duped. Even progressives and liberals, in their own way.

[AnnieK401]

31. Unfortunately this is true.

People in better informed European countries would not fall for this BS.

[hfojvt]

12. a pretty good summary

except it leaves out the part about Democratic complicity.

Democrats keep using their bully pulpit to say "Republicans are right"

Will tax increases, even on the rich, hurt the economy? Republicans think so.

Major Democrats say - Republicans are right.

Do we have a serious budget deficit problem which requires spending cuts and entitlement "reform". Republicans think so.

Major Democrats say - Republicans are right.

Will tax cuts create jobs? Republicans think so (or claim they do).

Major Democrats say - Republicans are right.


The other insane part is that Republicans are offering economic policies which have clearly failed, but that Democrats are NOT offering a clear alternative. Instead Democrats concede most of the terms of the argument. They agree with Republicans that we have a problem and they agree with most of the proposed solutions. The Democratic alternative to the Ryan budget seems to be Simpson-Bowles.

Well, I guess that offers a clear choice. Republicans want to break my left arm and Democrats want to break my right arm.

Hmm, tough choice. Left or righ? Right or left? Which arm do I want broken?


Fortunately for Democrats, I am left handed, but still ...



My response as a voter to BOTH of them is "How about I break BOTH of your arms instead?"

[emulatorloo]

15. Do you have quotes from 'major' Democrats who say additional tax cuts for the rich will create jobs?

[hfojvt]

22. possible that I slightly over-stated that

Both parties say that tax cuts will create jobs.
Both parties propose tax cuts that favor the rich.
Both parties claim their tax cuts really favor the middle class.

It amounts to the same thing.

A jobs plan? - trickle down.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/160

[AndyTiedye]

38. Balderdash

Big difference in the kind of tax cut though. The Democrats want to end the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250K.
The Repigs want to double down and cut the taxes on high incomes even further.

[hfojvt]

43. either way it is trickle down

"Democrats want to end the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250K"

Well, lah-dee dah.

If you like facts, check this out http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxcompromise2010.pdf

Note where it shows the distribution of the "original Obama plan"

Note the details

13.3% of the benefits to the TOP 1%
13.9% of the benefits to the bottom 40%

26.5% of the benefits to the TOP 5%
26.4% of the benefits to the bottom 60%

It's pretty clear, to me, that both options, including the Original Obama plan, heavily favor the rich.

Oh, and lest we forget. When push came to shove, when the country needed Obama to stand up and fight for his crappy proposal, he refused even to do that. Insread he negotiated a 98% surrender and then gave a speech where he said "I know some people want me to fight, but I am not going to."

Some people, yeah, you know the people who voted for you, the guy who promised "yes, we can" deliver "change you can believe in".

And let us not forget, it was Obama who created the Simpson-Bowles commission and it is Obama who has not refudiated its results, but instead embraces things like the odious "gang of six" debt ceiling proposal.

But I realized later, it was wrong to make them equal in the metaphor. Republicans want to break my left LEG, whereas Democrats only want to break my right arm. But that kinda ruins my ending line.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

52. "The Democrats want to end the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250K." Some of us do.

Others who voted to extend the Bush Tax cuts for those making over $250K didn't.

If they again vote to extend the Bush Tax cuts for those making over $250K, it will again show that they didn't.

Actions speak louder than words.

[AndyTiedye]

66. That is Because the Republicans Filibustered the Version that Ended the Tax Cuts Over $250K

The House passed, it a majority of the Senate supported it, but the Republicans filibustered it.

The Republicans forced us into an all-or-nothing situation, and "nothing" would have meant everybody's taxes went up,
what little economic stimulus that he could get through Congress would be undone, and Obama would have gotten the
blame for the falling economy and the Republicans would sweep the elections this year.

In that situation, what choice did they have?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

72. Do you really believe that is what caused some to be Blue-Dog Democrats, DINOs,

third-way Democrats?

What about that guy called Lieberman, someone who has been a Democrat part of the time until the voters in his state rejected him during a Democratic primary?

What you say doesn't change the fact that some Democrats want to end the Bush tax cuts for the super-rich while some Democrats in the House and the Senate did not and do not.

[2banon]

33. Like!

[on point]

13. Inevitable result of backbone failure

Think where the pukes would be if we had prosecutions for torture and wall street corruption now. If they had their ears pinned against the wall instead of 'looking forward and not back'

Or if the Senate had changed the rules on filibuster. It is not as if the pukes didn't telegraph what they were gong to do.

This problem results directly from the failure of the dems to make their case, take action to put in place, and to ENFORCE THE LAW against these miscreants.

It results from the dems failure to be a dem party and their desire to play along to get along , to be the new moderate reub party and take on positions on the economy, like supply side economics, which are a proven FAILURE.

[appal_jack]

14. Yes, so true. NT.

[2banon]

35. I used to the think the same, now not so much.

Lacking a backbone doesn't explain it to me anymore.

Seems to be, simply put: Corrupt to the bone.

[crunch60]

46. Divide and Conquer. Dems are lame. but we need to pull together, vote, protest

join OWS, and do whatever we can to salvage what is left of our democracy. The Republican party of old, has been hijacked by the radical wing of the Tea party, the rich corporate elite that own us. Slamming the failures of the dems, is not going to unite us only divide us.
We need to let the dems know that we will no longer accept their apathy and compliance to the out of control, loony wingers who want it all.

[Odin2005]

77. They are not "spineless", they are doing what their corporate masters PAY THEM to do.

You don't think big donors give out of selfless virtue, do you? Whenever money is given a payback is implied. All "donations" to politicians are a form of corruption.

[emulatorloo]

16. Thanks for posting this. It describes the situation perfectly.

Despite those who want to claim it isn't true, it is.

[bayareaboy]

17. To me ...

The most significant item to real democracy is not Faux NEWs or the Superpacs, but the willingness of other citizens who seem to be goverened by one or two items that they seem to scream and rebel against, like the second amendment, abortion, or the the race of the president. I think that a lot of the neatherthals just do it out of spite as well.

The rePUG party knows that about have the voting nation is so extremely crazy and know that that is enough to bring about corporate fascism.

I wish I knew how we can change this. on the one hand it looks so much the same as the Rome or British empire, creeping into death with out going around the board.

[siligut]

18. Exactly what I keep thinking

If Mitt gets in the White House, everything will get much worse for everyone but the sell-outs, cronies and 1%. Then, as things deteriorate, even the sell-outs will start to suffer, then the cronies will turn on each other.

Why anyone would vote for Romney is beyond me, even when I factor in the skewed media and the wannabes.

[2on2u]

19. No one ever said that people who want to win by any means necessary

are sane, and if the following is true it just goes to show you how far they will go.


http://www.donhopkins.com/drupal/node/104

Barbara Honegger, a researcher with the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980, recalls being told then that "Dick cut a deal." i.e. Richard Allen. [2] [25] Mansur Rafisadeh, former Chief of SAVAK (the Shah's secret police), and CIA informer, said CIA elements loyal to Reagan arranged a deal to keep the hostages in Iran until Reagan was in the White House. [3] [25] Abol Hassan Bani-Sadr, president of Iran at the time of the alleged deal, said the meeting took place some time during the last two weeks in October 1980, and that Allen and McFarlane met with Hashimi Rafsanjani, speaker of the Iranian parliament, who was the main Iranian contact in subsequent secret arms trading revealed by the the Iran-Contra Scandal. [23] [25]

[2banon]

36. The question of Sanity doesn't really enter into it..

When one considers that we've never ever had a real democracy in the first place. (even a Republic democracy would have been far more democratic if it weren't corrupted by fraudsters and thieves)

Corporateers have been running the shop from day one... even during the drafting of the Constitution, only to be codified in corrupt political shenanigans from the very beginning. Probably not a single Presidential election occurred which wasn't actually rigged and riddled with corruption and fraud by those who run the show.

The problems are many, the solutions are few.

But the most important element on the solution side of the equation is an informed citizenry, which is not possible with a Korporate owned/controlled/monopolized Media.

If all the "tubes on the internets" become controlled by big Korporations which is where we are on the precipice of very quickly, we're all screwed.. They'll be no real freedom or democracy anywhere on the planet except possibly in the high seas. (but I doubt it even there)..

[Odin2005]

78. The Constitutional Convention itself was a conservative freakout.

The economic elites were terrified of the democratic and egalitarian movements coming to power in many state legislatures and sought to strangle them. The suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion was the victory of the 1% over the 99%.

[2banon]

94. exactly... and not a lot has changed

really..

[april]

20. all we are anymore is America Inc. its all about the money and not for democracy

[ManyShadesOf]

23. Yes it's insane

and has been for some time. Repukes knew it goin in (to a Dem admin) this time. Where is the pushback? If we had more - even one more - like Bernie Sanders it Congress, esp from a large state like CA, this scam would not work. If Joe Public recognized more difference between R and D policies, this insanity would end. How many Congress members in the 1%?

[stupidicus]

25. actually it's a product of the new normal

much like the center mark on the ideological dividing line has moved rightward, making "moderates/centrist" of kooks on that side of it, the definition of insanity has correspondingly been redefined to accomodate the new and acceptable "normal".

Historically speaking, the causes are easy enough to discern, and I'd say most of the movement in this direction began with the DLC/corporate-friendly pres Bill Clinton. During his admin was when the good cop/bad cop, faux duopoly curtain highly favoring the rightwingnuts was wove, followed up by the machinations of the Lee Atwater disciple Karl Rove. Thank dog for Monica, http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2008/05/29/the-pact-between-bill-clinton-and-newt-gingrich or the privitization of SS for example, would have been on the table in the public square before Bush tried to put it there. This no doubt explains however, the "insanity" of the palatibility of putting it on the chopping block now, despite its non-existent role in the budget problems sacrificing it is intende to cure.

I'd say "insanity" is an inappropriate characterization, given that what we're seeing is really the product of many baby steps resulting from cold calculation the truly insane are incapable of, unless the term is being applied solely to those who would vote again for the "updated" Bush/Rove policies that are not only obviously against their self-interests, but also adhere to that now famous definition of insanity -- "doing the same thing...".

While I agree with some of the other posters here regarding the role "timidity" on the part of the dems has played in all of this, I'd part company with them if that timidity is seen as the product of fear as opposed to largely being the complicity that it is in the furtherance of the good cop/bad cop game the girls and boys in DC are playing. "Impeachment is off the table" they said, despite the then and now rightwingnut friend BC being the victim of such for far lesser crimes against this country, much less humanity, or that thing called integrity the lack of which has grossly undermined the faith in government rightwingnuts exploit, and quite energetically as exemplified in the case at bar here. It not only fires up their base, but also undermines the faith and confidence those on the left have in their leaders to pursue their interests.

That's what the OWS is all about -- a brewing and growing fight against the tag teaming that's being done against us all for the monied interests. So while "insanity" may be an appropriate characterization/description of the current political condition, the responsibility for it cannot be laid at the feet of the rightwingnuts in its entirety, and the days of ignoring the role of the enablers on the so-called "left" in DC these days who exploit the only choice we have "left", even if their guilt doesn't extend beyond their guilt of ignoring the maxim "all evil needs to triumph is for good men...."

This is why I get so frustrated and disgusted with with "lefties" that are intolerant of legitimate criticisms of their leaders, like that wasn't the same dynamic that gave Bush four extra years, and the road to hell isn't paved by good intentions that intolerance is, despite being grosssly wrong and misguided.

[juajen]

64. WOW, what an unintelligible post. Perhaps you could simplify this somewhat.

Honestly, I could barely understand a sentence, and I don't believe I have ever written those words in response to a DU post.

[stupidicus]

71. sorry, I'm not a teacher

but if I were, I refer you to one that specializes in your obvious challenges.

After all, a command of plain and simple english on your part would be a prerequisite to your being able to grasp the not so complex concepts and facts I wrote about.

[Odin2005]

79. Huh? I understood it just fine.

[Kablooie]

28. Once again I feel the Republicans are starting to dominate the public discourse.

The shrill, adrenaline packed right wing shrieking is just beginning to overtake rhe Democratic message.
I'm hearing more about how the Democrats failed the country than I do about the Republicans deliberately destroying the country for political gain.

Why can't the Democrats present the truth in a way that it drowns out the other side?
They never do.

The Dems present reasoned views, the Republicans scream empty propaganda.
Screaming empty propaganda wins every time.

The country could be screwed - again - in this election.

[toddwv]

40. You know what? I like President Obama but

he has made a few crucial mistakes.

I want to say outright that I don't agree with everything he has done BUT I understand that compromise is necessary.

However, he has made one fatal error that has made his run for a 2nd term more difficult: He obviously thinks, or at least thought, that Republicans would work with him to help the country.

He was wrong.
He was wrong in a BIG way.

He along with the Democrat leadership in the House and Senate, should've just said "fuck you Republicans" and did what was necessary, spent what was necessary and pass what was necessary to get the job done.

Instead, he's getting "Carter'd" by the media and blamed for a situation over which he has minimal control.

And the American People will fall for it once again.

[Brigid]

73. Judging by the way Obama (and Biden) have been sounding lately,

I think they've finally abandoned the idea that Republicans would work with them. Agreed, they should have abandoned that long ago; but I think it's finally happened.

[earcandle]

41. Sounds like the Republicans have become bullies, not stewarts of the public interest. I am not

clear how the rules and regulations of our constitution can allow this fraud and mismanagement.

I don't understand how and why we are allowing congress members to perjure themselves without consequences?
Is it that they were not sworn in? Therefore they feel not beholden to their oath of office?

Our constitution has protected us for hundreds of years against this kind of coup d-etat. Is it a matter of
not funding and staffing departments that carry out the rule of law?

How is it we find our leaders guilty of treason, guilty of mismanagement, guilty of perjury, guilty of dismantling
the people's treasury and how do we put liens on their property and wealth to repay the loans they made to
barely keep our government running while they went derelict on their most important job: to levy compulsory
tax without favor and to use the rule of law to place liens on those citizens funds who have not paid their fair share of
tax to keep our country prosperous?

We must have our revenue to proceed according to our democratic rules of law and to protect our rights and privileges through the delivery of services mandated and budgeted for on an annual basis. Is Obama in cohoots with ignoring our rule of law and constitutional protections as well? Why don't the investigative reporters simply point out, if congress doesn't collect our community paycheck, we cannot pay our bills?

Why are we forced to pop a fucking cork in our blood pressure as we watch them lie repeatedly and pass laws that dismantle our rights and privileges?
Where are the accountants and the attorneys who know the language to put these folks in jail? Are they paid off as well?

We don't need cuts. We need our goods and services back. And we need government union jobs to track what legal fair wages are to date. These greedy bastards must be held accountable. Parading them around as if they are legitimate undermines our democracy and makes fools of both our intellectual class as well as our hard working middle class.

Glass Steagall and the Fairness Doctrine need to be put back in place and we need to round up these criminals and prosecute
them. Follow the money. If they are taking bribes, they are committing a RICO violation.

Is anyone out there or are all of you fuckers paid off?

[earcandle]

42. Atlas Wept

[earcandle]

44. I don't understand how the cripplers of our democracy get the credibility to lie, cheat, and steal?

Why do we allow their nonsensical idiocy on TV and on our airwaves?
How is it that Americans are subject to lying thieves in office, where they believe they have trusted servants?
Is the newspeak? Are we there now?

Kill the rat.

[Skittles]

50. we could have, should have done MUCH BETTER

it's criminal to be in this situation considering how FUCKED UP repukes left America

[blkmusclmachine]

53. And who pushed the Catfood Commission I/II?

[stupidicus]

70. those kinda things must be ignored

in the interest of preserving innocence and non-participation in the promotion and perpetuation of the problems.

quite frankly, I'll reluctantly vote for BHO again this year, but that's no reason to not be realistic about what I'm voting for and why, and this ain't it http://www.americablog.com/2012/05/obama-2006too-many-of-us-have-been.html

I'll vote mostly for his SCOTUS picks, as I've done in every pres election since Carter

The last thing this country needs is more rightwingnuts on that increasingly political body

[Odin2005]

80. I'm only voting for Obama because the alternative is the ABYSS.

[stupidicus]

85. lol

I can't disagree with that too strenuously...

I won't bore you with all the things I think he's gotten right or the things I agree with him on. You have however identified why I've argued almost since the beginning of his presidency why his reelection is assured, despite all the disappointments some of us anticipated because of the things like the material in that link provided --- the fear of rightwingnuttery.

The reality is, this is another reason why all of this "repub insanity" stuff should come as no surprise to anyone, because it all flows from the comments from their congressional leadership about how their "#1 priority is to make him a one term president!".

That's why I've long thought and argued, that every ad pertaining to the economy he runs should use that as a lead in, if as seems to be the case, he wants to play the blame game, and use their intransigience and obstructionism as the proximate cause for the lack of remedial action on the economy.

There's no reason whatsoever why "The Big Truth" can't have the same impact as their "Big Lie" technique, so I'd be saturating the the airwaves with it until the electorates brain is permeated with it.

It would be like a criminal prosecutor harping on the known and uncontestable hate the indicted murderer had for the victim, to establish motive. And that's what they need to be framed and prosecuted as -- murderers of the economy -- because they are.

[patrice]

57. Not just irrational, but ANTI-RATIONAL. Pathological. Cthonic energy. nt

[AverageJoe90]

60. It's time for more recalls. nt

[KurtNYC]

67. The GOP drove the economy into a ditch and when the tow truck came they flattened its tires.

If they win in 2012 they will bring the backhoe so they can dig the ditch deeper.

[crazylikafox]

82. Love the tow truck analogy. hadn't heard that before.

[KurtNYC]

86. It is a re-work of an earlier line from when Obama started and they kept whining

--> If you drunkenly drive the economy into a ditch, you don't get to drive the tow truck.

[crazylikafox]

87. Yours is better.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

68. but ... but ... but

Gay marriage!

The war on Christmas!

[graham4anything]

81. don't believe the hype, matter of fact, tune out the rightwing spin altogther

don't believe the spin, most people who are Obama fans aren't listening to the rightwing spin
in the first place and Obama will win a landslide victory in November

Just don't listen and its like the Fox/republican/and all the other networks don't exist

It's summer. Go swimming. Go shopping. Listen to music. Tune out politics and Obama already won.

BTW1-media got you down? Where were you all when they killed off Dan Rather?

BTW2-why is Jeb Bush making so much noise, if they actually thought Mitt stood a chance in hell of winning this time?

DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE
Obama has the woman's vote, almost all minorities kids and college grads
Where is Mitt coming up with anywhere near 270 electoral votes.
Mitt can win Ohio and Florida and still fall 40 short. YET if Mitt don't win both, he would be totally without a way to get to 270.

ADVANTAGE and victory- Barack Obama. 2012.

[opihimoimoi]

89. Don't believe the GOPers...they will lose their asses come Nov

[drynberg]

93. THE PRESIDENT IS SLOWLY LEARNING HIS FDR LESSONS...

like telling the Truth, and not caring whose GOPer shoes he steps on. Perhaps he'll steel himself to the point of saying, "I welcome their hatred, it defines what I do and who I am". Wishful thinking just wasn't getting the job done with a crew of RW shipwreckers that never forgot "Our main political objective is to make sure Obama is a one term President". And those SOBs really believe it, plus you gotta remember good ole American Racism.