On pandering, roping dopes, and the hidden message

*
My apologies for not providing an pre-Obamacare-speech analysis before tonight. My punishment is loss of any predictive cred I could have gained by being punctual, but I've been a little run down for a few days. Anyway, the text of Obama's speech is here for your reading pleasure in case you're interested.

First, the pandering: people much more clever than StuporMundi, including the Chief himself, determined that the speech had to include a dram of denouncing "partisan spectacle" and a small overdose of "the time for bickering is over." It makes the President look diplomatic, which is a high priority in this hateful environment, but it also panders to right-wingers by implying that liberals were behind some of the fear, uncertainty, and distrust (and bare hatred) we've been reading and hearing about for months. No: the incivility and lies are the exclusive creation of people who call themselves conservatives, paid for and incited into violent expression by organizations with strong ties to the Republican politburo. OK, whatever. At least he got it out of the way early.

Second, the dope-roping: I think he did a pretty good job of taking down the big Republican lies about healthcare reform, namely the "death panels," the "free lunch" for brown-colored illegal immigrants, and the "government takeover" canards. He and every Democrat will have to repeat these points relentlessly every day from here to eternity in speeches and news network appearances, of course, but his concise handling of them made the official Republican rebuttal afterward sound especially puny. It won't matter, though, without public pushback each and every day. Because this current breed of Republicans will never, ever stop lying about anything, period. (Big dope-roping bonus: here's the website of the troglodyte from South Carolina who called Obama a liar during a joint session of Congress on national television. Tomorrow he'll be the new Sarah Palin.)

Third, the hidden message: I think it was real, but admittedly it may have been perceived by StuporMundi in his zeal to find friendly faces in the wallpaper. Starting four paragraphs from the end, BHO seemed to fire a warning shot in the direction of Ronald Reagan's casket. Honestly, I hope that I'm correct, and that he's loaded for bears, and that he has a bad-ass (and highly caucasoid) posse help him take it to the streets. In my view, Obama may have explicitly opened up on the entire malignant premise of the Reagan Revolution by proposing that "the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little," and by supporting this novel point with references to the collapse of our predatory economy. Hundreds of thousands of middle-class, middle-road Americans are going bankrupt or insane from worry about their loss of financial stability.

Obama better not have stirred that pot without being prepared personally to lead the emancipation of us unwashed masses, and especially those loathsome political creatures called "centrists" and "Blue Dogs," from the delusion that the market can provide everything a democracy needs. He can't accomplish this using traditional leftist-sounding rhetoric, though. I'd expect him to edge toward a sort of civility-tinged populism, undeniable in its intent, but performing a sort of lethal surgical strike on the Reaganomics Mother Ship while tastefully avoiding the blanket demonization of Establishment players whose indulgence he needs in order to survive. I think Obama may see his historical task as the repair and even advancement of a national consensus where everyone understands that government, corporate, and individual interests must be well enough balanced for all to coexist and prosper. That would be a huge job after 30 years of American political dementia, the Reagan gift that keeps on giving.

This time the terrorist really *has* won

*
For real.

Unlike a fertilized egg, Dr. Tiller did not have a right to life. Scott P. Roeder is a freedom fighter.

The outcome of Dr. Tiller's murder has been declared "bittersweet" by Kansas "abortion opponents." It is not really clear which part of it they thought was "bitter." The arrest, maybe. After all, the most important thing is that the "prayer was answered."

And in the article, the New York Times does a really nice job of balancing the viewpoints of physicians and advocates of reproductive rights versus people who support domestic terrorism.

The five strands

*
A guy named Drew Westen has an insightful article about modern "conservatism" on HuffingtonPost that I might have written myself if I had better analytical skills. Westen identifies five strands of thought --- each one incompatible with one or more of the others --- twisted into a chimera ideology that really shouldn't exist in the real world. (Pardon me for my chimera of a metaphor.)

Westen refines the "three-legged stool" concept that we often hear about Republicanism: that it is supported by the triple pillars of religious fundamentalists, gunslinging libertarian refusniks, and captains of the military-industrial complex. He also identifies a somewhat well-intentioned (or at least intelligently self-interested) fiscal conservative who accepts the general New Deal style of federal governance, but with a stingier safety net. And, finally, he points to the unrepentant bigot strand of modern conservatism, which tries to stay out of the view of polite society but considers the Republican (and presumably Libertarian) party to be its political home.

The article does a nice job of arguing a point that most regular observers immediately feel in their guts: this whole complex of ideologies that goes by the name "conservatism" simply has never made any sense... except for the fact that they have managed to convince the nation otherwise since the days of Nixon. I agree with Westen's warning not to underestimate their ability to pull it back together and sell it to 51% of the voters again in the future. But, still, it is encouraging to me to see these lunatics and their sinister political cartel falling apart faster than a Chevy Cavalier.

Rahm Emanuel: radic-lib

*
If anything there seems to be a proliferation of stupid talk now that Obama is President Elect. I heard a bite by John Boehner on the BBC World Service this evening (via local NPR affiliate; sorry, no link) complaining that Obama's first appointment --- Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff --- was "ironic" since Barack had promised to "govern from the middle." I guess Emanuel is being characterized by the corporate media as some kind of radic-lib who engineered the new Democratic House majority a few years ago. Coupla things:

First --- the "middle" is not whatever John Boehner thinks it is. And Obama can do whatever the fuck he wants without the blessing of John "Boner," as the BBC reporter pronounced it, because he'll be the fucking Unitary Executive soon. And Boehner needs to mind his own chief of staff, who rumor has it is possibly a gay Teletubbie.

Second --- Emanuel is no radic-lib, but a full-fledged member of the DLC. As such, he is closer to being a Rockefeller Republican than a Roosevelt Democrat. (And I'm not as worried about Emanuel as Mick at DLCWatch, either, for reasons given below.)

Third --- Emanuel had basically nothing to do with the 2006 Democratic insurgence back into the House. His defeated pet 2006 candidate, disabled veteran Tammy Duckworth, calls herself a "fiscal conservative and a social moderate" (i.e., a "new kind of Democrat" like the Clintons).* Significantly, Rahm is also responsible for this character getting the backing of the DCCC to run for the seat Mark Foley (another person reputed to have sexual impulse control problems) in Florida. Everybody who has closely followed Democratic politics for the past 6 or 7 years knows that Howard Dean is the unsung hero of the new Democratic majority, and that Everybody includes the President Elect.

Fourth --- I really think Obama is too smart to give his administration away to the DLC or any other faction. He knows where his contributions and volunteers come from, and it's not from the DLC. In fact, I believe the DLC may already be in hock to the Obama campaign for helping to bail Hillary Clinton out of some campaign debt. Although the following may be wishful thinking, I think as a former con law professor, Obama will strive for something analogous to a balance of power between the DLCers and traditional lefties in his administration. A coalition is a coalition, and it needs to remain intact to stay successful; by definition, they are formed by divergent interests to promote a candidate or a policy that they all are interested in. The coalition won't hold together unless every major faction --- including small campaign donors, collectively --- has a vested interest in the project. Other than Machiavelli Himself, who better to manage that sort of group than a community organizer?

Fifth --- The COS is really not a policy position; it's a execution position. The COS is there to things done, but they're the things that other people tell him to get done. Of course the COS is influential, but Obama is 10 times smarter than Emanuel, so I don't think Rahm will be in a position to do anything too pernicious while COS. If he pisses off too many members of the coalition, I'm certain that Obama would reassign him to other duties.

So, in conclusion, John Boehner is an ignorant jackass who needs to watch his mouf. Don't you agree? I do.

____________________

* I don't remember the exact amount of money, but Rahm wasted somewhere on the order of $2 million in DCCC funds trying to help elect Duckworth, but not surprisingly she was out-conservatived by her GOP opponent. I might expect to see Duckworth nominated by Obama for Secretary of Veterans Affairs, with Emanuel's blessing, which would be fine by me.

Good riddance...

...to Bill Buckley, whose Cold War-era hallucination of conservatism (e.g., blacks shouldn't have civil rights, government spending is Socialism except when it's an investment in Empire, corporations shouldn't have to follow laws or pay taxes) played a key role in helping to create half a dozen intractable real-world national and international crises. His charming, polysyllabic patrician demeanor and "genius for friendship" was eulogized by David Folkenflik on NPR this afternoon. (Click the "Listen Now" link at the NPR page if you can stomach it, but I don't recommend it.)

"He drove the kooks out of the [conservative] movement," said Buckley's son, Chris. "He separated it from the anti-Semites, the isolationists, the John Birchers. He conducted, if you will, a kind of purging of the movement." Well, actually, no he didn't, Chris; he only got rid of the isolationists because they're not good allies when a guy is trying to intellectually justify turning a republic into an empire. And all those other "kooks"? They've been ruling us for 28 years.

I'm not a person who believes we are obligated to be polite about the dead if we strongly feel they were premeditated assholes who left the world a worse place than when they entered it. I will, at least, wish Mr. Buckley luck with his "genius for friendship" as he shakes hands with The Devil.