Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
A Country in Shambles, Under GOP Rule
There are few things that make political coverage more unbearable -- and more distorting -- than The David Brooks Syndrome: the extremely patronizing and ill-informed pretense, shared by media and right-wing elites alike, that they can study the Little Common Person like a zoo animal, and then translate and give voice to their simple-minded, good-hearted, salt-of-the-earth perspectives. Rarely has this mentality been so transparent as in the wake of the Biden-Palin debate, as pundits and right-wing polemicists like Brooks, Peggy Noonan and Rich "Starbursts" Lowry rushed forward to proclaim giddily that Regular Americans would love Sarah Palin and this love could even help McCain win, despite -- or, really, because of -- her vapid, content-free telegenic presence.
Actual empirical evidence -- called "polling data" -- has almost uniformly demonstrated how false these condescending pats on the head are, as every single poll conducted thus far (at least that I'm aware of) found that Americans believed that Biden won and is the far more serious candidate for office, and huge numbers continue to have profound doubts about Palin's fitness for office. And the first tracking poll to report a full post-debate day of polling -- the Research 2000 poll for Daily Kos -- finds Obama with a 13-point lead, his largest ever. This joint right-wing/pundit claim that Americans would swoon in the face of Palin's empty chatter, self-conscious folksiness and chronic, seizure-like winking says much more about those making the claim than it does about their Regular People subjects.
As polling data conclusively demonstrates, the mindset of the voting public is infinitely more rational and substance-based than the pundits and the Right fantasize when they lyrically praise the Regular American -- at least it is in this time of perceived (and actual crisis). What's happening in this country, and in this election, is rather simple and easy to see: (1) the country is in total shambles -- possibly far worse than what people even realize; (2) we have lived for the last eight years under virtually absolute GOP rule; (3) the public knows this; (4) the Republican President and his party are therefore intensely -- historically -- unpopular; and (5) the voting public doesn't want to continue living under the rule of the same faction and same political party that has driven the country into the ground. Having Sarah Palin drop her gerund endings and desperately trotting out the standard, tired GOP attack ads to depict Obama as a radical, fist-pumping, America-hating, unhinged socialist -- when everyone can see with their own eyes that he isn't -- won't change any of that.
That the Right believes in the fundamental stupidity of the American voter while simultaneously pretending to revere and speak for them them is reflected in their belief that they can successfully blame the financial crisis and the country's woes generally on Democrats, who -- while hardly covering themselves with glory -- haven't had any meaningful power in this country for as long as one can remember. Ponder how stupid you must think Americans are to believe that you can blame the financial crisis on the 2004 statements of House Democrats about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when that was a time when the GOP controlled all branches of the Government and nothing could have been more inconsequential than what Barney Frank or Maxine Waters, languishing in the minority in Tom DeLay's tyrannical House, said or did about anything.
In sum, Americans hate the way the country has been ruled,
the economic crisis is making them hate that more by the minute, and
the country has been dominated by Republican rule for the last eight
years -- at least. It's just this simple:
And
the reality is even more imbalanced than that graph illustrates:
between (1) the tiny margins the Democrats have had when controlling
the Senate, (2) the true functional majority of "GOP + Blue Dogs" in
the House, and (3) Democratic complicity and fear, it is GOP policy which ends up prevailing in virtually every instance of alleged "bipartisanship" even during those tiny slivers of ostensible Democratic control.
The overarching reality of the country is that we've lived under unchallenged Republican rule and the country has virtually collapsed on every level. No matter how dumb Rich Lowry and David Brooks fantasize The Regular People to be, those facts are far too glaring to suppress.
- Posted in
242 Comments so far
Show AllI thik Glenn got this right.
And the proof should come in just a few weeks. Frankly I believe Obama won this election at 1:22 pm Friday.
If a majority of the trash that voted for the Shame of the Senate bill are not defeated then we deserve what we get.
You are aware that Obama, not only voted for the bill, but was "calling" to convince others to--arent you?
nope. the DPAs seem to have a short memory when it comes to the voting record of BO. AND the fact that he lead the charge to get some of the members to change their votes! that's not even taken into consideration....
The ability of rapacious elite types to harness the "common people" while working against their interests is nothing new: the Roman republic fell because of this. The hardest type of citizenship is to be an informed and involved one of a democracy, and quite simply, too many Americans have taken a pass on it. It remains to be seen if this will repeat itself come November 4.
Sorry Glenn, your analysis if fundamentally flawed. What you have failed to mention is that these polls never include anyone but the Republicans and Democrats who are running for office. If the MSM would actually show Nader's 6% nationwide (10% in some states) that would make people understand the whole truth. Pretending that there are only two candidates running distorts reality and hurts the democratic process. It is absolutely rediculous that these debates are not open to third party candidates.
Instant run-off voting is the answer. Example: If I voted first for Nader, then second for Obama, Obama would still win, but Nader's strength in "first votes" would send a huge message to the country. I then have not thrown away my vote for Nader as in conventional voting. All voters as well as third party supporters should be working on this, it would change American politics.
I did not know that that was the meaning of the term. Very interesting. Like proportional representation? Do you have any links??
Thanks
.Here you go, K, a primer on the subject:
http://www.fairvote.org/irv/faq.htm
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
There are lines that will not be crossed. While I commend Glenn's writings, his can't cross his own clubby line of giving any time or words to Nader. To do so would only give Ralph credibility. Its a line that his employer and his peers won't let him cross. He's just not allowed to do that. There cannot, and will not be, a "Perot moment" of any kind.
Glenn is just doing his job, earning a paycheck and maintaining a market share for his boss. Don't give him too much of a hard time.
FWIW, I disagree to the extent that I believe that Glenn is much more independent than you suggest; he's miles above the vapid moderate-liberal Joan Walsh and her stable of hacks at Salon.
As skeptical as I am about deals with the devil, I believe Glenn's assertion that he is not directed or edited by Salon, and has a free hand in writing what he likes; I presume that his presence there is financially rewarding, and gives him more exposure than he had as just another independent blogger.
Thoughtful, articulate, and insightful bloggers, e.g. Arthur Silber, seem to always be barely scraping by, and dependent on the kindness of strangers. I can sympathize with a desire to find a more stable platform.
All that said, as one who's read Glenn's blog articles and books, I do agree that Glenn's pragmatic nature blocks him from giving up on the duopoly. I often think of Dylan's phrase from "Queen Jane Approximately": "trying to prove that your conclusions should be more drastic". Thus, Glenn does, sometimes maddeningly, continue to express support and hope for the Democrats, and stops short of rejecting the Democratic Party as a potential agent of true enlightened, progressive change.
Like a diminishing, but still present, bloc of commenters here, Glenn strives to give credit to a crumb here, a crumb there, in the belief that a slice in the hand is worth two in the bush.* And that diligent support of the better crumbs might add up to half a loaf someday.
I have a decidedly different view, but I still like Glenn and admire his work.
* I never understood the schoolmarmish condemnation of mixed metaphors, which I believe ought to be judged on a case-by-case basis.
Shit. I think that I do that.
If the shoe fits, wear it, I guess, but it is most uncomfortable.
My logic , i my post above, was, I admit, somewhat tortured.
I am just terrified of another GOP Congress. But, in all fairness, I guess that that is what we have now. Thanks for dashing my last bit of false hope!! LOL=--just kidding , of course.
Touche'.
Now, about that instant run-off voting--anybody know more about it than i?
KDelphi,
Please check http://www.fairvote.org/irv/ for some information on IRV. This is a voting method that has been championed by the Green Party (and probably many others) for years.
Regards,
Simon
Thanks! It would be nice to not have 50% of the populatins (or more) unhappy with the direction of the country all the time, wouldnt it?
PS--I still detest the fricking GOP
Let me say that GG's post is usually the first I read at CD. He comes the closest to anyone of crossing the "line". My god, his FISA pieces were great. What I meant was, don't expect ANY of the MSM progressives (and that's what they are) to say, write or support anything about anyone who will really, ever, honestly, realistically, change ANYTHING, and that can only happen by going outside the box, or across their boundaries. Its just not gonna happen.
Gee, what if Zinn, Moore, Goodman, (and Glenn) and ALL the rest of "them" decided to endorse Ralph Nader?
Now, THAT couldn't happen, could it?
Its really funny. We have our man right before us, and no one has the nads to give up their little piece of the pie and the security of The Pack. Its their market. Its their niche. I get it. Good for them.
But, as long as they hold democracy back by their never ending support of these criminals --and thats what they are--, the poor will continue to go hungry, the poor will get substandard healthcare, the poor will get ripped-off by the banks, the poor will get crappy schools, and on and on we go.
Our Common Dreams are fine. But let's stop just dreaming, and start making things happen. I'm tired of just Dreaming. Its time for action, and that won't happen with an Obama. He's a suit. That's it. A suit. A puppet. Puppet Man. Just like GWB.
Sorry for the rant. But what's the point here if people aren't, at some point, gonna quit bull-shitting each other and instead, start the process of changing things?
Sometimes you have to just jump. Either you have the guts to, or not.
So many well meaning American Republicans and Democrats are so politically, sophomoric and are kept that way by the MSM presstitutes, that they have just about ruined this country by their ignorance. They keep electing the same old duopoly, and with very few exceptions, you are correct Thomas,we get the government of the corporations;for the corporations; and by the corporations; that we deserve.
"GOP rule"? Hello!?? Democrats have the majority in both houses of Congress. Throughout Bush's eight years in office, even when they haven't had a majority in either house, Democrats have had enough votes to block most of Bush's agenda, because usually not every Republican votes for it. Most Democrats have supported the majority of the Bush Administration's key policies, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Patriot Act, and of course the bailout bill, which was supported by a higher percentage of Democrats than Republicans.
In fact, ironically, the changes made in the bill after Monday's defeat in the House were designed to persuade Republicans to change their votes, yet DEMOCRATS were the ones who overwhelmingly supported it Friday, by nearly a 3-1 margin. Republicans still voted against the bailout, 108-91, even though this was a bill introduced by a Republican administration. Although the Democrats are preferable to the Republicans on certain issues such as abortion rights, Congress' passage of the bailout bill with overwhelming Democratic support in both houses makes as clear as it could possibly be that the Democrats are just as corrupt and venal as the Republicans.
Relatedly, the comment: "Frankly I believe Obama won this election at 1:22 pm Friday.If a majority of the trash that voted for the Shame of the Senate bill are not defeated then we deserve what we get" doesn't make sense at all. Thomas, did you not notice that Obama not only voted for this bill, but was among the "leaders" lobbying most heavily for its passage?
I did. But it was the change by the Republivcan conservatives that really passed this bill.
In any case I believe many Independents will now swing to Obama. With the astounding revelation that I am not always right....I'll stand by my statement. Barack Obama became President of the United States at 1:22 pm, Friday, October 3rd.
I suggest that you read this article in order to understand why an Obama presidency will prove to be such a disappointment to both liberals and the average American.
http://prisonerofstarvation.blogspot.com/
Thank you.
But, nobody wants to do anything about it.
Its fun to be enamored with someone. But, from my experience, when you love only one to the exclusiosn of al others, and will accept no criticism about them--you always get hurt
32 Dems switched their vote in the House on Friday.
This was more than double the number of votes the bill needed to pick up in order to pass.
Barak Obama will become "President of the United States" as the Scepter holder of this disgusting Empire is still called on January 20th 2009.
This will make things neither better or worse.
I am no longer a Dem, but, the vote was extremely close on several issues. The SCHIPS program, the credit card reform bill (I know that Biden spearheaded it--one more reason not to vote Obama), minimum wage (they barely passed it), and the Bankruptcy Reform bill.
I am just concerned that progressives ( I am not sayin gthat you are one), need to think very carefully about what a GOP majority in both houses, might mean,once again. Forget health care reform--their plans wil privitize it all. Forget taxes on the Big Boys--they are all "libertarian":--but only when it comes to money for the rich. Overturn Roe v Wade. Overturn the Voting Rights Act. Overturn Brown vs, Bd. (oh yeah, they already did). Institue a draft (mayeb we should--this is the only war that the poor are fighting AND paying for).Censor the internet. Teach th Bible in schools. No invesetigation into anything that has happened. (Well, I have to admit, there probably will not be anyway).
I dont think that progressivse should let neo-cons take this as a sign to flap their hawkish wings and charge the working poor to pay for this, and others, wars. This should be an indictment of the "free mkt system". Not proof that it would work, if everyone just left it alone. They have had a chance to do taht.
Thes "fiscal convservatives" slammed through a crappy Medicare Rx drug bill, that allows for only name brands, no re-imports, etc. It was an $85 billion giveaway to Rx drug cos. They have totally shredded our Bill of Rights. They "protect" Bush, evn now, and are all invested in Blackwater.They want to privitize social security. They support "Medicare Advantage", which is just a step on the road to privitize everything.
I know that only a few Dems stand up to them. It is unbearable. But, if you are progressive, if you care about the poor, the dying in the wars, (they just stopped a bil to give the troops a 3% raise.)people who have been robbged of their homes, the elderly (what if we had "privitized" social security? What would have happened to it this week?) Most think that global warming is a fraud.
And, it is not true that they have enough of a majority in the Senate to block a Bush veto. I wish one of the mroe liberal Dems was running for president. But, the people only like the flashy ones.
Maybe it is easier for me, as, my rep. is Turner (barf) and senator voinovich (he's not THAT bad). I wouod love to see Boner gone, but not Kaptur or Kucinich.
Please think.
The reason I fear Obama more than any other: BIPARTISANSHIP. When he says this what I know: all the compromises will be rightward. Obama will win in November and we will have all Democrat control; yet I don't expect much to really change (I have no "hope" for "change")!
It is true.
That is one thing that scared me off of Obama, almost right from the start. (Well, I had high hopes for him, after his convention speech--but, soon after--when he made the Senate a place to drop off his clothes, to go run for presidency)
Here he was, in a democratic primary, touting one of the fathers of all this hell we are in, REAGAN! He kept talking about "reaching across the aisle" (more like a "reach around"), and, all I could think of , was, "what, the Dems are not going to get anymore progessive than THAT, adfter 8 yrs of W??? Well, forget them!".
Obama and his Blue Dog friends, are centrists (and that is being kind) to the core. They have shown it over ands over, as they vote, and, as they campaign. They state what problems are, but always go along with the laisswz-faire capitalism approach to everything. The circle-jerking that went on between the two parties this week, was an amazing thing to watch.
Gawddamn those stupid, homebuyers, and people who accepted medical care they coulndt afford".If that is the type of society you want, you shoudl vote duopoly.
Outside the box,
I would have loved more than anyone for Nader and McKinney to be included in the debate and the polls. However this article was focused on the American public's ability to distinguish between substance and bluster. On that point Glen Greenwald has nailed it. The public is deeply concerned about the economic morass that it is in and has the mental faculties to distinguish between a coherent presentation and a presentation absent of meaningful content and heavily reliant on rhetorical tricks, outright lies and faux folksiness. Beyond Palin's base the public isn't buying her.
.
http://www.counterpunch.org/martens09302008.html
Congress Didn't Dare Say Yes
What Wall Street Hoped to Win
By PAM MARTENS
( about late CHANGES to the bill )
.
.
Bush played '' GOTCHA" again...
What say you America ?????
VOTE NADER/GONZALEZ 2008… You’ll be glad you did and so will I…
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
.
Correct the graphic!
Bush isn't a Democrat! The White House bar should be RED!
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
"Shambles" is a diplomatic choice of words, a euphemism. A new word must enter the language to describe the United States after a generation of rule by the most corrupt, inept, brutal, stupid and evil gang of homicidal, thieving, egocentric (expletives deleted) to plague this country since the Gilded Age and the Robber Barons.
P.S. Thomas Frank tried to get a handle on this in his book
"What's the Matter With Kansas" and really couldn't because it defies all logic.
"after a generation of rule by the most corrupt, inept, brutal, stupid and evil gang of homicidal, thieving, egocentric (expletives deleted) to plague this country since the Gilded Age and the Robber Barons."
Frankly Mordechai, I'm surprised you think so much more of them than I do.
A shambles is a slaughterhouse, and when you think about it, actually quite a strong descriptor (what with all the blood and guts and such as associated with a slaughterhouse) rather than the weak one you imply by calling it a diplomatic choice of words and a euphemism.
One thing is certain. It's time for change.
.
Nader can win....... The voters will decide.
Nader will change things.
Nader is our only hope.
Nader is the only choice.
Fight the Two-party system.
VOTE NADER 2008… You’ll be glad you did and so will I…
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
.
NADER IS RUNNING NECK TO NECK WITH A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE!
It isn't Obama, it's William Jennings Bryan.
Both Nader and Bryan have lost three Presidential elections!
Can you help Nader pull out ahead with loss number four?
VOTE NADER/GONZALEZ 2008… McCain’ll be glad you did and so will Palin…
.Same old tired rhetoric, dont you get tired of it like the rest do? Give it a rest why dont you? This sort of nonsensical posting, coupled with the endless repetition makes you sound more like Rove, repeated the lie until it would seem to contain a truth it certainly has no right to claim.
Better to lose an election, even four of them, or ten, than act like you do, close your mind to the facts of the matter and continue to vote for those who have betrayed you, will betray you again and again and again.....
One day you may mature enough to understand complex and nuanced issues, one day, perhaps....
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
RichM
This article backs up your assertion that very little change will occur if and when the [alleged] agent of change becomes president.
http://prisonerofstarvation.blogspot.com/
nadervoter
"Correct the graphic!
Bush isn't a Democrat! The White House bar should be RED!"
True but the distinction becomes blurred with bipartisanship.
C.D. EDITORS: you need to change the color of the Whilte House bar.
Thanks Glenn. I am increasingly disturbed by Brooks and his ilk, who constantly push for authoritarian rule.
Proper to give cowardly and traitorous Democrats their due, however. "The Party" is the only party and it is overtly complicit in all that is done to "serve" the electorate.
Toast!
Your post has a Talking Points Drinking Game Score of 1:
Dems and Repubs the same/Duopoly
Drink up!
I am somewhat optimistic in that I believe that the United States (the people) will eventually pull itself/themselves out of this mess. The question I ask myself is; what comes next? The United States appears to be under going a transition phase (from/to) but exactly where the nation is headed after this phase is complete I have no idea. I wish you all good luck.
You are exactly correct. We will. I'd be glad to tell you where we are heading and what the result will be. Unfortunately my crystal ball is on the blink too.
But thank you so much for your best wishes. (we need all the luck we can get)
Wherever "we" are heading it is important to acknowledge where things are NOW.
This week a "law" was passed and signed with complete disregard for either the Constitution or the will of the People. A "law" that enables an unelected official in the Executive to rob the People's Treasury at will in order to protect the wealth of his cronies and foriegn bankers.
BOTH of the claimants to the Imperial Scepter participated in and encouraged this, the leadership of BOTH of the "major" private political Parties participated in and encouraged this, the "Independent" Corporate Press participated in and encouraged this, only a bare majority of our Representatives in our most-often-up-for-election Congressional Body resisted in any way.
And when -in the most disgusting part of the whole debacle- enough bribes in the form of tax-breaks for THEIR cronies were added to this "law" a bare majority became a stark minority.
I have no crystal ball at all, but I can tell you that "we" are not going anywhere good until we face the harsh ugliness of all of this. Until we admit that the place we were told we live in in our Government Schools is a shining lie, and the place we truly live in its dark mirror.
Oh, and to top it all off, other than a temporary reprieve before the foreign bankers dump their dollar-based paper and spark rampant inflation, this "law" DOESN'T DO THING ONE to "bailout" anybody, "solve" anything, or "rescue" anyone.
Don't Panic,
-matti.
One thing that ticks me off about Democrats and left/liberal commentators is the issue of competence. They tell us that Bush and his gang are incompetent and Lord knows that's true...if competence is measured by how well they serve the vast majority of Americans.
The Bush administration has been very competent at doing what they really wanted to do: Loot the Treasury, Shread the Constitution, Invade Foreign Countries, Enrich Their Friends, etc, etc.
What we are seeing now is not a failure of competence. It is a failure of Ideology...conservative ideology which has been ascendant in this country since the Carter Administration (yes,Carter...should we really call Carter and Clinton Progressives?).
It's the ideology that JK Galbraith characterized as an "...exercise in Moral Philosophy that seeks ever more justifications for Greed and Selfishness."
Inasmuch as Conservatism presents itself as a way to benefit all people, to unleash creativity and entrpeneurism and cause the "rising tide to lift all the boats" it is incompetent because it really can't do those things.
It is really a Fraud. It needs to be exposed as such. It's the Ideology, Stupid!
http://www.chicagomaroon.com/2008/10/4/naomi-klein-lambasts-friedman-institute-plans
I wish I knew more about pcs. I had a post about not needing a "smarter, more efficient capitalist", but needing to change the economic system., but it went "whooosh!"
I agree with everythihg stated above, and , there is a "Friedman Fair" type thing on C-DPAN.org (3) instead of Book TV. Keep a barf bag handy.
Also, please, if you agree, sign a petition that Naomi Klein is promoting asking the Chicago School to NOT "further honor", the "father of our modern, morally bankrupt system.
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2008/08/milton_friedman_institute_plan.html
"but it went "whooosh!"
when that occurs, you can probably get what has been "whooshed", by keying in ctrl-z as your next action. That takes you back one step in "history" for most apps. and most times will recover what you've lost.
"What we are seeing now is not a failure of competence. It is a failure of Ideology. . . ."
No, son, we are watching the most hopelessly incompetent as well as doctrinally constipated administration in US history. They couldn't manage even one of their idiotic efforts.
Please tell us what program or action this administration has executed competently.
q
Rich M.
I agree. The bumbling personae of this fucking criminal has been the charade of Chevy Chase's Gerald Ford. Confusing the t.v. image of a President, which is very intentional, to his actual personality as he off screen sodomizes the Constitution, the economy, human decency, while committing crime after crime. Meanwhile the Repigs and Dimfucks hand him unconstitutional protection, encouragement and pederastic idolation.
Excuse my rant. The truth is in there.
And basically only 113 years after the last of the Native Tribes were murdered off with the remaining rounded up & put on Reservations. Caesar's world not all it seems to be upon the earth?
I think the David Brookses are just paving the way for the GOP to steal another election. They want everyone to believe that "regular Americans" are simple-minded etc. and will love McCain/Palin to explain their wins in crucial districts. The "others" did it.