In the previous posting where I encouraged liberals to think boldly and expansively, I quoted something I wrote on somebody else's blog:

I don't really think the only choices are to put up with Obama's crap or go back to the Bush era. The corporate media work daily to try to limit our imaginations and make us feel utterly helpless. We should not let them win.

Some might accurately point out that, on most matters of substantive policy, Obama has kept us in the Bush era. Given the reality that Obama is a political opponent of liberals most of the time, and the Republicans are political opponents of liberals all the time, what do we do?

Become Swing Voters Between the Democrats and the Greens
One of the reasons Democrats tend to provide lip service but little else to liberals is that they can take most of our votes for granted. Swing voters get disproportional attention. Does this mean we should vote GOP sometimes? Setting aside the moral concerns, there is a strong practical reason why no liberal should ever, ever vote Republican, no matter how frustrating the Democratic opponent might be. When you vote Gopper, the message the Democrat running against the Gopper gets is that they are too far to the left, which is precisely the opposite of the reason you don't want to vote for the Phonycrat.

Voting Green in cases where the Democrat isn't actually a Democrat is much more productive. It sends a message to that Democrat that they have gone too far to the right need to move left to regain your vote. Being a swing voter between the Democrats and the Greens also gives the Republicans a reason to move towards the center. They are better off if you vote Green. So, it is in their best interest to minimize the differences between the Democrat just as it is in the best interest of the Democrat to maximize the difference. In other words, voting Green part of the time nudges both major parties to the left.

We tend to think of voting exclusively in terms of who wins and loses that specific election. It is so easy to forget the use of the vote as a behavior modification tool.

I should also mention the long term benefit of voting Green, since voting behavior affects the distant future in addition to the immediate present. Voting Green helps build an institution that may one day be a major party challenger. Our country hasn't always had a two party system, and the second party within the more common two party system haven't always been the GOP.

Stay a Registered Democrat
From a practical perspective, the only significance of partisan registration is the ability to vote in primaries. Even if you end up voting Green in the general election, it still is useful to push the Democrats towards the left, especially in contested primaries. Being an independent just minimizes your political importance, no matter how emotionally satisfying it is, given how rotten the vast majority of Democratic and Republican politicians are. Green Party primaries are usually uncontested, and the candidates almost never win in the general, so Green registration isn't terribly productive, yet.

Note: if you are in a state with open primaries, then you might as well disregard this point since your partisan registration has absolutely no practical significance whatsoever.

Support Liberal Primary Challengers
I'm not just talking about voting. I also mean giving money and volunteering if you can. Blog in favor of them too, while you are at it. The Democratic Party desperately needs improvement at the moment, and supporting primary challengers sometimes brings in new people. It usually pushes the Phonycrat away from obsessively following the GOP party line too.

Support Independent Social Movements
This is critical. We can't rely on politicians to push our agendas. We need to get out there and push for things ourselves. Social movements played enormous roles in pushing presidents like FDR, Truman, Johnson, and Nixon to the left. We need to be the people who continually piss off all political parties. In the bizarre area of human interaction known as politics, you get a lot more with vinegar than honey.

When the Republicans Are Reprehensible, Attack Them For It
Being understandably pissed at the majority of Democratic politicians doesn't mean that you should let the Republicans off the hook for their behavior. When the Republicans support corrupt or bigoted policies, condemn them for it. When they make up nonsense to stoke racist, misogynistic, or heterosexist fears, condemn this behavior in the strongest terms. This isn't spectator sports. You are under no obligation to picks teams between the Republicans and the Democrats. Give the birthers and the religious extremists heck.

When the Democrats Are Reprehensible, Attack Them For It
Hateful, corrupt, and bigoted behavior are wrong regardless of who is involved. When Phonycrats act like the most brain dead of Goppers, don't let them get away with it.

When the Democrats Do Something Worthwhile, Praise Them For It
It can be easy to forget to do this when you are pissed off at the Democrats, and most of the time you don't have the opportunity. However, it is important. There is one catch, though. When Reid, Pelosi, Obama or any other conservative Democrat appears to be doing something good, there often is something nasty in the fine print. Be careful. Don't trust. Verify.

Fortunately, we do have Dennis Kucinich and a few other Democrats that we can hold up as models of what we actually want Democrats to do. We should publicize their views and their behavior. Liberals need to be bold enough to say to the Democratic Party that we deserve entire caucuses of Democrats as compassionate and incorruptible as Kucinich.

The Upshot
The overarching point of this all is that we liberals need to think of ourselves as bold, independent agents, not tied to any party and tied to very few politicians. No matter how hard the corporate media try to marginalize us, we need to get out there and champion our values as passionately as the right does theirs.

 

This posting is part 1 of a response to a discussion that has jumped between the blogs of Writer at This And That and myself. You may find the background helpful for putting this in context. If not, skip to the main posting.

Writer was discussing a posting on the Daily Kos, which I freely admit is a blog I generally try to avoid, because I find it so annoying. The gist of the posting Writer was discussing was that we are somehow obligated to support President Obama in a way that reminds me of sports fan for fill in the blank local team. The arguments for doing so were (stripped down to the actual substance):

1) Look at the nice symbolic gestures President Obama makes.

2) Obama inherited difficult issues which justify his generally conservative approach to policy.

3) The right's attacks are so reprehensible that we must support this president.

The posting, as is usually the case on the Daily Kos, reflected a lack of liberal values and very low standards. Here was my comment (on Writer's blog):

I don't really think the only choices are to put up with Obama's crap or go back to the Bush era. The corporate media work daily to try to limit our imaginations and make us feel utterly helpless. We should not let them win.

Writer asked in response:

...you mention there are alternatives, and I agree that there are, but what are they? We have this dicotomous government and we've had it for so long that other options (practical, doable, not having to change the very basis of society options) are hard to see. I then I have friends (you among them) who say there are options, but typically don't say what they are.

One of the reasons that liberals and progressives haven't gotten very far since the 1970s is that the only people who have taken seriously the notion of making structural changes in our society have been on the right. One question that you might want to ask is:

Is it possible to dramatically change the structure of our society?

It is easy to see one area of human endeavor that has changed the very basis of society: technology. Twenty five years ago, the Internet was pretty much limited to email and USENET in universities, the military, and other institutions that did research. Most people never had used a computer to do anything. Penmanship was a very important skill, one that I admittedly wasn't terribly good at. Most people still watched broadcast TV instead of cable. Remember what it was like before cell phones?

Technology may seem too impersonal and apolitical to sufficiently address the point. What about something that has made major changes in the world of politics? Well, corporate/wealthy interests and their pawns on the right side of the political spectrum have dramatically restructured our economy. In the name of the mythical "free market" and "free trade," tens of millions of jobs have been exported to other countries; the rich have seized a far greater share of our nation's wealth and income from the middle class and the poor; major media have become much more concentrated and propagandistic; civil liberties have been sacrificed to corporate interests; and officials in both political parties are trying to keep us locked in a perpetual state of war that reminds one of the endless wars described in Orwell's 1984.

We have been fed pablum from the media avoiding these issues or discussing them as if they are the results of impersonal forces of nature when they actually have been the result of a relentless jihad by far right pundits, academics, and organizers, all very well paid by rich people whose investment in this political machine has more than been paid off in enormous, unearned wealth. (Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine provides a coherent and compelling roadmap through much of this.) This professional far right elite also has been supported strongly by easily manipulated drooling knucklewalkers on the fringe right as well as by some more ordinary middle class conservatives who live in a fantasy world where they subconsciously identify themselves with the people who are screwing them over by blindly doing their bidding.

If the right can dramatically reshape our society, why can't the left? By giving up on this entirely, Americans to the left of center have ceded the life affirming initiative and sense of hope that the right so readily provides its morons and fantasizers. Given the fact that the policies we support are in the interests of the overwhelming majority of the people in our country, our fearful and reticent approach to politics is something can only be maintained by relentless brainwashing by corporate media.

We need to stop them from getting away with this.

Going outside of economics, think about the huge social impact of the queer civil rights movement. Two areas which we have made a huge impact during my adult lifetime are the vastly improved self esteem and confidence in many lgbt people and the distinctly improved treatment of queers in our society, though I would be the first to admit that both are areas where the is a whole lot more progress must be made.

The other area that gets less attention is that the queer movement has asserted and institutionalized the pursuit of happiness and fulfillment as political goals worth fighting for. This assertion obviously has its roots in the social movements of the sixties, but the queer movement is the only one which, to date, has persisted in making this structural claim in our society in a sustained fashion. Other civil rights movements have made tremendous contributions to the notions of equality and justice which are nothing to sneeze at, but the queer one has made meaningful happiness something that is considered worth fighting for rather than frivolous.

This also is part of why lgbt civil rights find their most rabid opposition among people who are unhappy and unfulfilled and among religious groups that promote misery among their flocks in order to keep them desperate for relief in afterlives that don't even exist. Make no mistake, many of our heterosexual supporters are pushing for us in order to assert their own rights to the pursuit of happiness. I say, more power to them.

Seen in this context of people being able to modify our social structure in important ways, the notion that all we can do is to strongly support center-right politicians who are in conflict with far right politicians is not consistent with the historical record we have seen in many of our own lifetimes. If you go farther back in time to the union and civil rights movements before the sixties, you again can see that the ability to reshape society can be found among the sufficiently motivated and dedicated.

We need to use tactics in the here and now to try to achieve that vision, no doubt. I'll talk about tactics in the next post.

 

Photo: foxypar4

It's not often that someone says something in blog comments that is beautiful and profound. Yet, it happened on my blog. I'm delighted to do a posting featuring it in order to give it the attention it deserves. It was a response to my post on the Deceptive Nature of Appearances. I'm giddy to have gotten such an amazing response.

One of the things I love about the internet is that someone's physical appearance has nothing to do with my opinion of them. Most folks that I admire or downright love I have never seen a picture of.

- Dusty (of It's My Right to Be Left of Center)

It is utterly amazing what the US right believes:

Katie Couric was persecuting Sarah Palin during the famous interview when Ms. Couric was desperately trying to help Palin answer the questions but Palin still screwed it up.

Japan's Emperor Akihito, who has no governing powers, is a "despot."

Anyone who stands up to a rightist bully is just plain mean.

Abortion is "murder," but letting people starve without food stamps is just fine.

Global Warming is a "myth" but supply side economics is not.

Governments ration healthcare, but insurance companies do not.

Rudy Giuliani is the "hero of 911" despite the fact that he put NYC's terrorism response center in the World Trade Center after it had already been bombed by terrorists.

It is intolerant to speak out against intolerance.

"Free trade" creates more jobs for Americans.

It doesn't matter if you make the correct decisions, as long as you make them quickly.

Their marriages are miserable due to same sex couples.

Women shouldn't vote, but they should be pundits.

Science is an evil, liberal plot.

It is intolerant to speak out against the rape of children by Roman Catholic priests.

Washington Post propagandist David Broder actually wrote this (bolding mine):

The more President Obama examines our options in Afghanistan, the less he likes the choices he sees. But, as the old saying goes, to govern is to choose -- and he has stretched the internal debate to the breaking point.

It is evident from the length of this deliberative process and from the flood of leaks that have emerged from Kabul and Washington that the perfect course of action does not exist. Given that reality, the urgent necessity is to make a decision -- whether or not it is right.

That is a really dumb thing to write. It's as if he doesn't even read over his columns before submitting them for publication.

People are already speculating that Broder might be senile. The quality of his column has been gradually declining for at least a decade. Whether the problem is senile dementia, burnout, or just a general malaise at not having his beloved George W. Bush illegally occupying the White House, Broder should give it up. He's just self parody at this point.

Photo: SanFranAnnie

 

By now, you know that the loony religious extremist, Bart Stupak, got his misogynistic amendment through the House to discriminate against women by not allowing abortion coverage in private insurance eligible under the fairly weak healthcare plan that was passed by the House.

Once again, we have been betrayed by a far right Phonycrat who acts like a Bush/Cheney/Limbaugh/Palin/Duke Republican. You'd think that people would learn from what is happening in Iran that religious extremism brings nothing but misery. Yet, the Bart Stupaks of the world think that's just fine. There is so little real difference between someone like him and Ahmadinejad, it's not even funny.

Please Join the Primary Stupak Facebook Group!

How much more of this hateful religious extremism are we going to have to put up with in America?

Photo: Leo Reynolds

 

Updated: I had intended to use this fancy widget on the costs of the war, but it doesn't work on my computer. You will have to check the right menu of It's My Right to be Left of Center to check it out.

In any case, we have spent well over $600 billion on the Iraq War.



I'm amazed that unemployed Americans are willing to tolerate this colossal waste of money on a senseless foreign war based on lies.

Hat tip: Ten Percent

 

These emblems of the upper crust, Billionaires for Wealthcare, just keep the hits coming. The SF group performed "We Shall Overcharge" at a protest against Blue Cross, a formerly nonprofit group that was transformed in a sleazy deal to a for profit corporation a while back, causing rates to skyrocket. I share the protesters' goal of single payer healthcare.

This hit is so smokin' hot that it already has been covered by somebody else on YouTube. But, only the original version is good enough here on Godless Liberal Homo.


The Billionaires also serenaded the teabaggers in DC. I love the CIGNA Palin 2012 sign.


Another chart climber: Save the Status Quo

One of the biggest signs of the intellectual and moral decay of the Democratic Party is that no one in Nevada has stepped forward to challenge Harry Reid in the primary. Reid is a racist, misogynistic, heterosexist Mormon extremist who has failed to govern as a Democrat in any meaningful way.

Let's look at healthcare. Reid continues to lie and say that he needs 60 votes to pass healthcare as an excuse to try to block a strong public option. He hopes that Democrats won't know that he can easily pass it through budget reconciliation. Yes, the Goppers will whine, but they will attack, attack, attack everything the Democrats do anyway. It would be smarter politics to help boost 2010 turnout among understandably disillusioned Democrats and Democratic leaning independents by actually getting something done than worrying about the tantrums of Republicans. But, Reid is bought and paid for by the HMOs, so he doesn't care.

More on Budget Reconciliation from Think Progress:

...Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), who said any use of budget reconciliation by President Obama would be “regarded as an act of violence” against Republicans, and likened it to “running over the minority, putting them in cement and throwing them in the Chicago River.” Other GOP senators have chimed in against reconciliation, with Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) calling it a “purely partisan exercise” and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) saying it “would be a mess.”

Despite their howls against Obama, Republicans employed the same procedure to pass major Bush agenda items (which were supported by all four aforementioned Senators):

– The 2001 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 1836, 3/26/01]
– The 2003 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 2, 3/23/03]
– Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 [HR 4297, 5/11/06]
– The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 [H. Con Res. 95, 12/21/05]

As ThinkProgress has noted, Gregg defended using the reconciliation procedure to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for domestic drilling in 2005, arguing, “The president asked for it, and we’re trying to do what the president asked for.” Evidently, Gregg has lost the same sense of patriotic duty.

Reid has been acting like a Bush Republican for some time now. In the last Congress, Reid blocked efforts to defund the Iraq War, and he still won't support cutting funds off now. Reid even supported the efforts of Hillary Clinton, Joseph Lieberbush,and Dick Cheney to get us into a war with Iran. While Bush was in office, Reid offered only token opposition to any of Bush's initiatives.

Returning to this Congress, Reid, an anti choice misogynist, has refused to push for any legislation to curb the terrorist activities of his fellow abortion opponents. He's done nothing to crack down on the banksters. The antitrust division of the Justice Department is still horribly understaffed, which is just how Reid would like to keep it. ENDA and legislation to lift the military ban are going nowhere. Reid has done nothing to block the Hate Based initiatives that were started under Bush and have been expanded under Obama.

The least the Democrats could do would be to remove this de facto Republican as Senate Majority leader. His sniveling and dishonest behavior puts a terrible public face on the Democratic Party in the Senate. Yet, no public calls have been made by Democratic Senators to remove him from this position.

The fact that Reid is Senate Majority Leader and the fact that he has yet to face a primary challenger show how weak, corrupt, and spineless the Democratic Party has become.

Photo: talkradionews