Friday, August 10, 2007

How the Ship of State Became the Ship of Fools

The US has caught a nasty virus the symptom of which is running punditry. It's like cruise ship diarrhea without the satisfaction at the end of ordeal or even panic. Some quick notes: Barack Obama is the most shallow, non-descript, boring politician to ever come down the pike --an intellectual lightweight whose soul has been coached out of him by media consultants. In Barack Obama, I find the vacuous echoes of Ronald Reagan, a previous lightweight who had mastered the art of reading buzzwords off a cue card. My skin crawls.

I have stopped listening to what passes for debate these days. It's become a matter of stringing meaningless platitudes together such that they sound like real human speech. Or is it a Japanese robot?

More quick notes: I wish John Edwards were uglier. Hillary Clinton is damaged goods. Ron Paul, still a Republican, has many more scales to shed before he can change his repitil..uh...Republican skin.

God help us --the only intelligent politician in the field is Dennis Kucinich who has only a snow ball's chance in hell of ever becoming President. It's our loss. Watching Democrats is akin to medieval debate about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

I am sick to death of tedious debates about the conduct of the war of aggression against the people of Iraq. The "conduct" of the war is not the issue. Why we continue to stay is! Why we haven't impeached, tried, removed and imprisoned George W. Bush is! Why a grand jury has not been convened to investigate the GOP crime syndicate is! Why corporations rule the US government is! The validity of the electoral process is! Why bother going through the motions until paper trails are mandated at the polls?

I am sick to death of Congress kowtowing to a President who has the support of little more than 25 percent of the American people. Carl Jung predicted our malaise in 1957 in his "The Undiscovered Self", decrying "...apocalyptic images of universal destruction" brought on by WWII and an atomic age ushered in when the United States dropped weapons of mass destruction on two cities in Japan. In its wake, Jung was fearful that 40 percent of the population —called a "mentally stable stratum" —might not be able to keep the lid on mass psychosis; it might be unable to restrain the spread of "dangerous tendencies", presumably: fascism, fanaticism, militarism, and intolerance. Jung seems to have been less concerned with external threats. The more dangerous tendencies he feared were home grown. There are some real issues to be addressed but all have taken a back seat to punditry.
The theme of collapse seems to have reverberated around the world, now manifesting its symptoms in the scientific community’s latest dramatic reports on global warming, the issue of Peak Oil coming further out of the closet — being discussed openly in mainstream media, and the bursting of the US housing bubble that now finds 1 out of every 264 homes in the nation facing foreclosure as each day the value of the dollar decreases and the value of precious metals soars.

--The Cycle of Time

In the meantime, Democrats have failed to challenge Bush's exploitation of the ultimate strawman: terrorism. Bush owns the issue of "terrorism" even if he had to make it all up. As long as Democrats buy into the paradigm, they have no place from which to launch a counter-attack. Democrats too easily conferred legitimacy upon an illegitimate usurper, credibility when, in fact, Bush lied about everything. They are now paying the price for having played Bush's game. The spectre of terrorism has been of greater benefit to Bush than "real" terrorists who share with O.J.'s "real killers" all the characteristics of a phantom menace.

Political rhetoric is just more of the same when, in fact, nothing is the same. How could the Democrats have missed the sea change that has taken place, the fundamental challenges to Constitutional government? What are the implications? Simply, the Bush junta has challenged not only the Constitution but almost 1,000 years of progress. Principles mouthed by Bush simply fly in the face of the Magna Carta, the English Petition of Right, the Mayflower Compact, The Virginia Declaration of Rights, The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights, The Nuremberg Principles, and every US Supreme Court decision that has upheld the right of persons to be free of arbitary rule, to be secure in their homes, to be free of unreasonable arrest in the absence of probable cause that a crime has been committed.

Significantly, totalitarian states have their philosophical roots in Hegelianism, a straight road to both Nazism and Stalinism. There is, by contrast, another road that runs straight from Magna Carta to our own Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights.

If the Magna Carta is not the birth certificate of Democracy, it is the death certificate of despotism. It spells out for the first time the fundamental principle that the law is not simply the whim of the king. The law is an independent power unto itself. And the King could be brought to book for violating it!"

—Simon Schama, History of Britain

Bush's demogoguery is an issue and the Democrats should be on the offensive. Instead, most members of Congress lined up behind what Gore Vidal called an "un-American" administration.

Instead of bullshit and platitudes from Obama --nonsense talk about attacking Pakistan, Barack should have been screaming about America's enemies inside the White House --George W. Bush and his every supporter. Do the Democrats get it? Have they not understood what Bush has done? Is Congress without a clue?

The Constitution itself is explicit when it establishes the sovereignty of the people. But, if that were not enough to dispel notions of the "state as absolute", a Bill of Rights was insisted upon and ratified by the people. In the 1960's, Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas believed the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights to be absolute —beyond the power of Congress or the executive to modify or infringe in any way. We could use someone like Douglas today. As his friend Tommy Corcoran pointed out, Douglas had "wanted the Presidency worse than Don Quixote wanted Dulcinea" and Franklin Roosevelt believed that Douglas would have been the strongest running mate in 1944. It was Democratic bosses who persuaded Roosevelt to pick Harry Truman instead. Oh well! "To err is Truman!"

Democratic "opposition" to Bush seems less naive than irrelevant, locked into the GOP paradigm when Democrats should be forcing a defensive GOP to debate on Democratic turf, on Democratic issues, indeed, the very future of Democracy in America. Tragically, the Democrats will get suckered into debating the "conduct" of a war that should never have begun, a war that is itself a crime, a war that has, in fact, no good end, a war that is, in fact, lost!

Democrats are in danger of blowing the last chance they will ever have to forge a new and better future. It's become a cliche that the Chinese character for "crisis", literally translated, means "dangerous opportunity". If the Democrats fail to make the most of this opportunity, the people of the US will be no better off, nothing will have been gained for the ordeal we have suffered, nothing true, lasting or valid will have been affirmed. What a waste if this should all turn out to be the most irrelevant presidential debate in this nation's history!

And now for something completely different:

Additional resourcesDiscoveries


Add to Technorati Favorites






Why Conservatives Hate America




Spread the word:

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

"Dubious Dupes of Hazard"
www.ilovepoetry.com/viewpoem.asp?id=93081

Fran / Blue Gal said...

re Kucinich and his snowball's chance:

Kucinich's "chances" increase exponentially if we bloggers grow a pair and endorse him and his message unequivocally without the "yeah but he can't win" crap.

This isn't The Preakness or American Idol it's our country. And who gets elected is who gets the votes. If Democrats vote their conscience instead of "betting on the winner" we won't have to hold our nose on election day.

As Manila Ryce said at my blog:
This [defeatist re Kucinich] mindset may be encouraged daily through the MSM, but I'm tired of experiencing the same crap on the blogosphere. No real change will come from independent media if we give up the fight before it begins.

Unknown said...

Blue Gal said...

Kucinich's "chances" increase exponentially if we bloggers grow a pair and endorse him and his message unequivocally without the "yeah but he can't win" crap.

Please don't be offended, we are on the same side. Ahem! Having said that -- the lyrics of Don McLean's Starry, Starry Night apply to Kucinich. They go like this:

how you tried to set them free.
They would not listen
they're not
list'ning still
perhaps they never will.


It's not Kucinich's fault. Still more poetry applies:

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings"


The game had all been lost before 1980. Nixon fell on the sword for the GOP revolution. The nation has been dominated by the big corporations and the increasingly rabid right wing ever since. Everyone else has lost ground --financially, politically!

This isn't The Preakness or American Idol it's our country. And who gets elected is who gets the votes.

It was our country. It belongs to the big corporations now.

If Democrats vote their conscience instead of "betting on the winner" we won't have to hold our nose on election day.

But --the Democrats either don't get it or don't want to get it. Especially Hilary and Obama. Both make my skin crawl. The rest of the Democratic field cannot expect adulation because they get less corporate money than does the GOP. Democrats cannot expect the electorate to get excited about a candidate who is only somewhat less corrupt! Sheesh! What do the Democrats expect of a people who have been lied to and swindled by both party apparatuses for at least 40 years?

Some choice we have !!!! The GOP is irredeemably evil and the Democrats are irretrievably clueless!

As Manila Ryce said at my blog:
This [defeatist re Kucinich] mindset may be encouraged daily through the MSM, but I'm tired of experiencing the same crap on the blogosphere.


Mere positive thinking won't change a thing. I've been fighting this war for almost 40 years now. Unless the Democrats wake the fuck up, America is finished.

Even if Kucinich won, he can't change the unfair electoral system, the coporate hegemony, the stupid primary system, the unfair method by which votes are counted (I am not referring to stolen ballots), gerrymandered districts, the domination of the corporate media, corporate "person-hood", campaign finance, etc etc ad infinitum. And Kucinich could not --without the help of Congress and a court that is already packed --UNDO the harm that Bush has already done.

Tragically, Bush will retire to his ranch like Tiberius to Capri. And, one wonders, will Bush, like Tiberius, bugger every thing that moves?

As a working reporter, I "infiltrated" several GOP campaigns and since that time, it's only gotten worse as the GOP has gotten richer by virtue of corporate largesse. Fairness means nothing to the GOP. These are ruthless scoundrels to a person.

The GOP leadership should have been prosecuted under RICO statutes a long time ago. Not only are they crooked, they are a kooky cult.

They are utterly committed to the complete domination of the US and, with Bush, they have very nearly pulled it off.

Gathering 'round the camp fire to sing Kumbayah does not change a thing. It will take a revolution to change things and I just don't see any Ghandis, Nelson Mandelas or Che Guevaras on the horizon. Consider the fate of our own "great" leaders --JFK, Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, John Kennedy Jr, John Lennon, Paul Wellstone, Steve Kangas, and many, many more.

I put forward a verifiable proposition: the number of suspicious deaths and outright assassinations is STATISTICALLY high among those of a liberal persuasion!

Bluntly, I don't see the American people facing up to the deprivations they will have to survive in a real revolution. The Democrats are just the lesser "paid" wing of the same party.

Kucinich could be the Messiah, but until the Democrats, indeed, the people themselves, at last, grasp the magnitude of what has happened NOTHING will change.

A final point --you may recall, the lesser Bush said he looked into Putin's eyes and saw his soul. Well, I met the Senior Bush on several occasions during which he regaled me with his views on law and order (when he was running against Lloyd Bentsen for the Senate) and dinners in the Forbidden City (as US envoy to China). Less than arm's length from Bush, I looked straight into the senior Bush's eyes. Guess what! He didn't have a soul.

Anonymous said...

Sorry Blue Gal, you are hopelessly naive.

Try some literature about Germany of the early 30-ties. Same hopes hung on one party or another and all the moral high grounds.

The ones who made it to May of 1945 were the cowards that smelled what was to come, and - left, for a safe place.

Why should it be any different this time around? Have you been to Ecuador yet?

jurassicpork said...

It's funny how great minds think alike, Len. I'm in the middle of writing a kick-ass post of my own (that may not measure up to this) that does what you've done- take a squint-eyed view of the Democratic candidates.

While I don't completely share your appraisal of Senator Obama, I nonetheless would feel kind of nervois voting for him should he get the Democratic nomination.

But your apprasal is pretty much spot on with the others. It's risky taking on Hillary from this side of the fence (or either side, actually, especially considering the fanatical centrist wing that protectively cloisters around her, mindful of the Bill Clinton witchhunt days). It takes balls to take on Hillary but you've got a brass set that you can bowl ten pins with.

Unknown said...

jurassicpork said...

But your apprasal is pretty much spot on with the others. It's risky taking on Hillary from this side of the fence (or either side, actually, especially considering the fanatical centrist wing that protectively cloisters around her, mindful of the Bill Clinton witchhunt days). It takes balls to take on Hillary but you've got a brass set that you can bowl ten pins with.

Thanks, jurassic. As for it being risky to take on Hilary, I no longer give a shit a shit who I piss off anymore. I've stuck with the Democrats, grew up with the Democrats, bore LBJ's shame with the Democrats, paid my frickin' dues with the Democrats!

Now I am betrayed by the goddamned cowardly Democrats who don't have enough guts to take on an idiot!!!!!!!!

I've paid my dues. If a Democrat should read my blog and get pissed off, well ---screw 'em!

It's time the Democrats grew a spine!

hizzoner said...

Excellent Post Len!

I put the link on this site:

http://www.woodcodems.blogspot.com/ to wake up our locals to quite debating among the hand-picked candidates and start thinking in more global terms.

hizzhoner

Christopher said...

At the request of the people at Truthout, JFK’s speechwriter, Ted Sorenson, recently wrote a speech which the Democratic nominee, whoever it is, might give at the Democratic nominating convention next year.

As I read this very rousing speech I could almost hear JFKs voice.

Is it too much to dream that Hillary or Barack or Al or Dennis, would summon up the courage to read this speech at the convention? It would give whoever it is, a big headstart against their Republican opponent, whether Rudi or Fred.

Here’s the link to Sorenson’s speech. You don’t want to miss it:

www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080 807E.shtml

Diane B said...

Len, Thank you for the wonderful music. it brings back wonderful times and memories.

Now, to politics last night I had the pleasure of attending a rally after the forum in Los Angeles. John Edwards appeared at the political rally for his campaign. It was wonderful. John would make a terrific President.

He's bright, charming, truly cares for the average American. Which is struggling in todays world. Which I am very much a part of!

I agree, if something does not change, we will not survive as a nation.

I couldn't believe when he sent the message to me, that we were only asked to donate $15.00. Yep, you heard it $15.00. It was held at a nice restaurant. Very close to Obama's.Obama invited 500 people and charged big bucks!!

Yes, John Edwards is my kind of President!

Unknown said...

Interesting comments, all!

Christopher, I haven't been able to find Sorenson's speech but remember him well. I suspect it is a good speech and I would hope that it recognizes the revolutionary nature of what has happened in this country. Living in the media bubble, most have missed it.

Obama's handlers would be well-advised to lay off the comparisons to JFK. With apologies to Lloyd Bentsen who shot down the Quayle, Obama is no JFK.

Hizzoner, I checked out your blog. I "got" the inclusion of the "Man of La Mancha" poster. Excellent point. And thanks for the mention.

Diane, Crystal had been too middle of the road for me at the time --to much involved was I in jazz and rock n' roll. But I've grown to appreciate her work more and more. She had a rare, fine voice.

Anonymous said...

Chinese saying;

MAY YOU LIVE IN INTERESTING TIMES!
(Lao-Tsé, or Confucius himself)

Len Hart says this, and Blue Gal says that.

Len (a man, a existentional cowboy)seems to want a total-recall, a total-moral-cleanup by a Jezus-like figure that cleans the house (of the political gods) from money-lenders (lobbyïsts) and other scum, but Len is (very) pessimistic about the results.

Blue Gal (a woman) seems to want to promote the most sincere possible candidate (Kucinich), and hope's for the best.

So far so good.

But you cant always get what you want (Rolling Stones)

YOU GET WHAT YOU NEED!

Its not just the US of A. wich is in dire-straits. Here in Europe (i'm from The Netherlands) we see the same corruptions, the same greed and crumbling moralities, just a bit better covered by our social standards, but even so!

Next year's Olympics are in China, next to China there's India, almost half of the World-Population is living there, they're grooming and blooming, they followed 'THE WESTERN WAYS OF GREED', corruption was and is common-place, the only thing they do is 'COMPETE', and we, here in the West, 'WE CANNOT COMPETE' with theyr endless commodity of 'cheap-labor'!

In the mean time, the World (EARTH)is changing it's climate, economic resourses like oil and steel and and and and, are ripped and spilled by the greedy-crazy's like there's no end in sight!

Next generations, but only if this whole thing is NOT going to explode in our faces, next generations shall need the Len Harts and the Blue Gals, and all the innovatives in any field, to survive!

Len Hart says this, and Blue Gal says that.

Unknown said...

Great post, Jackassistant!

Let me get the nit picking out of the way first of all. The term is "Existentialist" cowboy. "Existentialist" denotes the philosophical system associated with "Existentialism". "Existential" is commonly used to denote "existence" but may also mean "of or pertaining to existence" or, even, "...as conceived by existentialists". And existentialist might describe something as existential but so might a transcendentalist, an empircist, or even a Platonic idealist.

Now --believe it or not, bluegal and I on on the same side. The honorable disagreement here involves one of tactics. Her point is well taken --I just happen to disagree about how best to achieve a common goal about which we most certainly agree.

I consider the current situation to be dire. The consequences of NOT undoing the harm Bush has done is too terrible to contemplate. It is not merely a question of greed and corruption but of survival. Mainstream Dems have failed to understand that the US government has, in fact, been overthrown. Bush is illegitimate by virtue of numerous and provable election thefts, unlawful signing statements, and more unconstitutional usurpations than I can count. Even the GOP called his ascension a "coup d'etat" and they were not kidding or being cute. As it stands now, Bush may order the arrest of people disagreeing with him; he need only define them as "terrorist", a power that he has arrogated unto himself. Likewise, habeas corpus, is now history. By defining a political opponent terrorist, Bush may deprive that person of all due process of law. This is anathema. Another population would have rioted. Fatted Americans have apparently done nothing even as the very foundations of American Democracy were overthrown in full view of the world.

When one person assumes the powers of all three branches of government, it is not business as usual. The Dems have not only NOT "gotten it", they are not even talking about it.

BTW --the Chinese saying "May you live in interesting times" is not just a saying; it's a curse!

Your points about the Netherlands are well taken. But, with all due respecct, the Netherlands are much, much more liberal than the increasingly reactionary US. The Netherlands are not threatening to invade, bomb or nuke other countries. The Netherlands most certainly have more liberal "drug" laws. The Netherlands, like Switzerland and other European nations, seem to have a cultural commitment to free speech and representative government that is at odds with the little written about totalitarian strain that keeps popping up in the American right wing. The populations of Europe also seem less obsessed with guns and gun play. Switzerland, for example, is a true federation. The US most certainly is not.

Unknown said...

A final observation about China.

I have been watching China from afar since Bush went there, presumably to lay the groundwork for Nixon's visit.

You mention that China has adopted the Western way of greed. But this has not been a good thing for America. See my article: Appearing Now in a Neighborhood Near You: The Budget Deficit that Ate America or How Walmart Robbed 200,000 Americans of their Jobs

If I stated that the Chinese entered into a Faustian pact with Bush and Nixon, I would be called a conspiracy theorist. But, in fact, Nixon opened up the American market to the Chinese not long after he took the US out of the Bretton Woods protocol which had established the gold standard. Since that time, China has increasingly looked like suburban Houston even as the dollar has lost value. I believe the US dollar today is worth less than ten cents measured against the dollar of 1898. I would be more interested in knowing how much value has been lost since Nixon took the US off the gold standard, and, secondly, how much since China has begun dumping in the US consumer market.

The US has become the China's cow, to be milked. It will be abandoned and left to fend for itself when China finds stronger economies and higher prices. More ominously, the US will be left to fend for itself when the dollar collapses and even US rich cannot afford to buy a cheap pair of Chinese binoculars that are not worth a shit anyway.

Life As I Know It Now said...

Oh my god! Len this is like someone was reading my mind, the whole post, only you wrote it better than I can even think it. Bullseye! And then the comments get even better.

Anonymous said...

FuzzFlash sez...


Sez Len:

"It was our country. It belongs to the big corporations now."

"Everyone else has lost ground --financially, politically!"

"Gathering 'round the camp fire to sing Kumbayah does not change a thing."
(but,Len,it feels good so I'm gonna keep doin' it, man.)

I dig it the most when you talk dirty, comrade;
"It will take a revolution to change things and I just don't see any Ghandis, Nelson Mandelas or Che Guevaras on the horizon."

But none of these people had access to cyberspace, like we do. Tommy Paine would have ovulated on the spot, or at any rate have gotten inordinately excited if similar pamphleteering potentential were available to he and his dissident peers.

In a way, the smoke signals of cyberspace are all we've got left. When they shut it down, the remaining vestiges of Jeffersonian Democracy will be rendered redundant. The last and greatest of human dreams, snuffed, and our human remains gobbled down by Moloch.

Meantime, remember how we used to groove with Gargantua and party with Pantagruel?

I do.

“carnival, in Rabelais work and age, is associated with the collectivity; for those attending a carnival do not merely constitute a crowd; rather the people are seen as a whole, organized in a way that defies socioeconomic and political organization (Clark and Holquist 302). According to Bakhtin, “[A]ll were considered equal during carnival. Here, in the town square, a special form of free and familiar contact reigned among people who were usually divided by the barriers of caste, property, profession, and age” (Bakhtin 10). At carnival time, the unique sense of time and space causes the individual to feel he is a part of the collectivity, at which point he ceases to be himself. It is at this point that, through costume and mask, an individual exchanges bodies and is renewed. At the same time there arises a heightened awareness of one’s sensual, material, bodily unity and community (Clark and Holquist 302).” From wiki

Imagine what would happen if millions of Americans took to the streets wearing masks of Bush and Reagan and Nixon et al. demanding that BushCo bow to our constitution. Flash mob assembles, demonstates peacefully and loudly. Clips go straight to You Tube. World takes a peek. People feel empowered. Crowd disperses, demasks and resumes SOP as law abiding citizens. America suddenly begins to undergo an epidemic of rolling flash mobs. While we can still move around freely, (despite cctv and gps chips and NSA) and organise, the MIC/BushCo/ HilCo/ will have an insurmountable problem called We The People.

They can’t incarcerate 100 million Americans all at once.

Time to see the film “V for Vendetta”. Forget the DC Comic-book hyperbole stuff. We don’t have to blow anything up. We need to reassure each other who the fuck we really are and to act together. Recently there was a revolution in Ukraine. Not a shot was fired, but gee willikers, there sure was a shitload of people who took to the streets.

SadButTrue said...

I think the point that reverberates the most is this, "It will take a revolution to change things." Just as Keith Olbermann expressed in his lament about the Military Commissions Act, and the suspension of habeas corpus. "Depriving us of trial by jury was actually considered sufficient cause to start a war of independence." Such an undertaking was perhaps easier in 1776 than today - the oppressor is no longer across the Atlantic - but no less necessary.

I could see the American people winning against a narrowly defined enemy in the short term (ousting the current Republican regime, say) but that would still be a minor battle in a a much greater war. How to dislodge the neofeudal global status of multinational hypercapitalism is another question entirely.

Anonymous said...

Regarding Obama... well said! I haven't been paying much attention to the man--not qualified, but now that you mention it he does give eerie sense of creepiness, just like The Gipper.

Unknown said...

Kvatch, "creepiness" is a good word. Smarmy is another. He has about him a definite stench that says: MADE IN AMERICA BY MEDIA CONSULTANTS WHO NEEDED THE WORK!