- Commenting Rules. Read these before you comment. Really. I'm not kidding.
- Sharing material from Stonekettle Station. Read this if you're thinking about reposting, linking, quoting, or just plain stealing material from Stonekettle Station. Seriously, read this before sharing, otherwise I will unleash the badgers.

- Stonekettle Station's Greatest Hits: The good stuff, it's in here!
- Reader Links: Sites recommended by readers, pimp your site today!

Monday, November 5, 2012

Glory Days and The Ghost of Tom Joad

Glory days, well they’ll pass you by
Glory days in the wink of a young girl’s eye
Glory days, glory days

Nothing like waiting until the last minute, eh?

We’ve got, what? Less than twenty-four hours, right?

It’s near 10PM as I write this, by this time tomorrow, we ought to have a pretty good idea of who the next president is going to be.

Naturally, it’s now that Sarah Palin decides to weigh in.

It’s only fair, I guess.

After all Bruce Springsteen waited until the last minute to throw his considerable weight behind President Obama, and Palin is at least as big a rock star as is Springsteen these days – or as big of has-been anyway. Both of them are far past their sell-by date but still rolling along on inertia and the glory of fading stardom.

What?

Oh stop it, you know it’s true. Look, I love the man, but Springsteen hasn’t been the gritty, Jersey working man’s troubadour since the 90’s. He’s as long in the tooth as Madonna even if he is better preserved. His voice these days sounds like a gravel truck in sexual congress with a cement mixer after an all nighter gargling kerosene and razor blades. Which is not to say that he doesn’t put on a hell of a show, or that back in the day he wasn’t The Boss, because he most certainly was, or that I wouldn’t drop everything and go see him should he be in town.  The guy rocks.

But I couldn’t help but think how ironic it was that Springsteen decided to jump into Obama’s campaign right about the same time Palin decided to endorse Romney – apparently, here in the harsh cold light of November 5th, she’s finally come to the realization that Newt Gingrich isn’t going to be either President or the first Governor of Moonbase Reagan.  Both Springsteen and Palin are celebrities, for different reasons certainly and only time will tell which one leaves a greater impact on history (personally, I don’t think it’s much of a contest, but hey, what do I know?), however you’ve really got to wonder what it says about the state of our republic when a) there are still significant numbers of undecided voters less than twenty-four hours before the election, and b) it is implied in any serious fashion that they can be swayed one way or the other by either a sort of has-been rocker or a sure as hell has-been politician.

You know, on second thought, maybe ironic isn’t the right word, maybe a better word is appropriate. Yes, that’s it. Appropriate. It’s appropriate that The Boss and The Pit Bull should be on opposite sides of this contest.

Since Springsteen has ventured into politics, I suppose it’s completely appropriate for Palin to cut a Greatest Hits album.

Now I think I'm going down to the well tonight
and I'm going to drink till I get my fill
And I hope when I get old I don't sit around thinking about it
but I probably will
Yeah, just sitting back trying to recapture
a little of the glory of, well time slips away
and leaves you with nothing mister but
boring stories of glory days

And did I say endorse?  No, that’s wrong too. Endorse is the wrong word. This morning on Facebook, Palin didn’t actually endorse Mitt Romney, she just implied that in her opinion Romney doesn’t suck nearly as bad as Obama.  You’d think on the eve of the election, she’d come up with something new, instead in her Facebook screed, Palin – like the protagonist of Springsteen’s Glory Days – rehashes all the tired and debunked Fox News talking points:

This Tuesday our country’s future is in our hands.

I’m going to take the high road here and not start out with a joke about Palin jerking us off.

What’s past is prologue. We know what we will get from a second Obama term because we’ve all endured his first term. We know how well he kept his 2008 campaign promises. Do we really believe he’ll keep his 2012 promises?

We’ve all endured Obama’s first term? Endured. Like it was some arduous journey fraught with great peril and hardship and full of giant rats and hungry cannibals. This from a woman who quit her job during the height of the economic crisis, became a multimillionaire while doing pretty much nothing, and is now getting paid for basically being famous.  Great work if you can get it, I guess.

Somebody remind me again what exactly this women has had to “endure?” Seriously, what’s Sarah Palin got to bitch about? Because from where I sit, Barack Obama is the best damned thing that ever happened to Sarah Palin. She should be campaigning for him.

Do we believe the word of a man who promised he wouldn’t raise taxes on the middle class, but then slammed the middle class with a massive tax hike in the form of Obamacare (and don’t forget that his own lawyers argued before the Supreme Court that the individual mandate is a tax)?

Um. No. Actually, administration lawyers argued that the ACA wasn’t a tax. In fact, what they said was that the ACA, specifically the Individual Mandate, was authorized under the Interstate Commerce Clause.  It was the Supreme Court who decided that it was, in fact, a tax and thereby perfectly legal. The deciding vote, if you recall, was the bench’s bestest conservative.

As to the “raising taxes on the Middle Class,” I guess Palin missed the whole debate over the expiring Bush Era Tax Cuts and who was on each side. But I digress.

Do we really believe he won’t raise taxes even more on every American in order to pay for his wasteful spending and his crony capitalism?

Palin and her goofy followers believe a lot of things, many of which bear only a vague semblance of reality.  I don’t suppose this is any different.

Also, word of advice, when an Alaskan politician bemoans cronyism, well, you know it’s time to put your boots on.

Do we believe that the same president who increased the debt in his first term by more than all the first 41 presidents combined will suddenly decide to cut the deficit in his second term?

More than the first forty-one presidents combined? Now there’s some creative, and misleading, math.  Using the same logic and disregard for things like, oh, inflation over two hundred years, you could say that Mitt Romney has more money in the bank than the Gross Domestic Product of the entire United States under George Washington.  It’s true, but what relevance it has to the current situation is beyond me.

Do we believe that the president whose reckless spending led us to the first credit rating downgrade in our nation’s history will suddenly become a responsible fiscal manager if we reelect him?

Except, of course, that Standard & Poor’s cited partisan extremism in Congress as the primary reason for the downgrade, and specifically Congress’ use of the debt ceiling limit as a means of political blackmail.  As to “the president whose reckless spending” led us to the downgrade, Palin deftly manages to avoid mentioning who it was helming the House Budget committee at the time and why she thinks that guy will suddenly become a “responsible fiscal manager” if we make him Vice President.

Do we really believe that a president who promised us that job creation was his number one priority despite month after month of dismal job numbers now has a credible “plan” for the job growth that eluded him for the past four years?

I’m sorry, who was it again who torpedoed every jobs bill that’s come up for discussion over the last four years. Who was that again? 

Now, in spite of congressional obstructionism, the jobless rate has fallen steadily for the last four years. Imagine what Obama could have accomplished if Congress actually cooperated and did their jobs. But, again, I digress.

Do we believe that the same president who shut down the Keystone Pipeline and blocks domestic oil and natural gas development at every turn is somehow going to reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil and lead us to energy independence?

Reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.

Foreign oil.

Heh heh.

Say, here’s a funny question for you: If we build the Keystone Pipeline, where does the oil come from to fill it?

Last time I checked, Canada was a foreign country even if Palin can see it from her house. 

Also, here’s an annoying little fact: domestic oil and natural gas development is at an all time high.  So high in fact that Alaska’s vast supply of natural gas is virtually worthless at the moment.

Do we really believe that our country’s national security is safe in the hands of a president whose administration denied security and assistance to our consulate under attack on the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on America, and then blamed that consulate attack and the death of our ambassador on a “spontaneous” protest over an obscure YouTube video despite all the real time evidence to the contrary?

Yes, I do believe that our country’s national security is safe in Obama’s hands.

After all, he’s the guy that has authorized the killing of more terrorists and pirates than the first forty-one presidents combined – including the mastermind of the worst terrorist attack on America in US history. You know, the one that happened on the last conservative’s watch.

Do we believe that a president who was caught on a hot mic telling the Russian president that he would have “more flexibility” after his reelection is being honest about his plans for a second term?

I don’t think you really want to bring up the subject of hot mics.

Palin goes on for a few more paragraphs and surprisingly avoids mention of either birth certificates or Islam, eventually she fetches up here:

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have offered a credible alternative to Barack Obama’s failed policies. Governor Romney understands how the free market works. His pro-growth economic policies will benefit all Americans. He has promised to move us toward energy independence, deficit reduction, and responsible entitlement reform that honors our commitment to our seniors and keeps faith with future generations. Governor Romney deserves a chance to lead. President Obama had his chance. He’s failed, and we can’t afford to go backwards.

We can’t afford to go backwards?  Unless, of course, you support a candidate who promises a return to the very policies that got us into this mess in the first place. Romney certainly understands how the free market works, he’s spent his entire life using it to his benefit at the expense of many others – and that’s one promise I’d fully expect him to keep. 

The really enlightening part of Palin’s entire post was this: Governor Romney deserves a chance to lead.

Deserves.

Not Romney has earned a chance, no, see, Mitt deserves a chance.

Deserves.

That’s how people like Palin see the world, as their divine right. That’s why when the media and the polls don’t report what they want, well Sir, then it’s the media who must be lying.  When the weather makes the current incumbent look good, the super-storm must be sent by Satan.

That’s why they talk about talking back their country come tomorrow. Not our country, all of us together, no, theirs.

They don’t mind if the game is rigged, just so long as it’s rigged in their favor.

Palin’s recapping of her glory days is the perfect summation of everything that’s wrong with the GOP. 

Palin is right about one thing though, tomorrow the country’s future is in your hands.

Use the power wisely.

 

 

 

Now Tom said "Mom, wherever there's a cop beatin' a guy
Wherever a hungry newborn baby cries
Where there's a fight 'gainst the blood and hatred in the air
Look for me Mom I'll be there
Wherever there's somebody fightin' for a place to stand
Or decent job or a helpin' hand
Wherever somebody's strugglin' to be free
Look in their eyes Mom you'll see me."

44 comments:

  1. Good luck, America and Jim! Myself, many Norwegians and many Canadians, are hoping for four more years of Mr. Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well put, as always. Thanks also for the classic
    Rage.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wow... I enjoy your blog Jim, and we agree on most things political but a little harsh on old Bruce there, don't ya think? You got him as old, gravely, washed up, seen better days and long in the tooth. But he ain't none of that and you kinda come off like a "former" fan who ain't kept up. Glory Days? Puh-leaze! Not only is GD 30 years old, it's also hated by as many serious Bruce fans as love it. Why? 'Cause in the Bruce canon it's a lightweight and far from one of his best (even if it does come off one of his best selling). Yeah, it made the point about Sarah Palin, but so could a dozen other, better songs. But hey, Bruce don't need me sticking up for him, that's for sure. Still, I am inclined to ask how many post Born In The USA releases you own? 'Cause there are about a dozen and that's not counting the outstanding 4cd set of previously unreleased B-sides called "Tracks." My point? Bruce is old but far from done. He continues to amaze...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I own every Springsteen album ever made. And likely will continue to buy them in the future.

      Delete
    2. Also, I enjoy the hell out of Glory Days. Just saying.

      Delete
    3. Ah hah! So you're a true-blue Brucer who was mainly having himself some fun at the man's expense? OK... I can get behind that! Anyone who's all in can tease 'Ol Bruce all he wants!

      Delete
  4. Thank you Jim; eloquent and succinct. I look forward to watching the ritual on DownUnder TV tomorrow, in the balmy spring weather at the civilized time of 10am to whenever.
    Mr Monocle sends best wishes to the lonely shop cat.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Check out "Ghost of Tom Joad" by Rage Against the Machine. It is political and powerful, and the perfect song for Rage to cover from Woody Guthrie. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhSXFvi86j8&feature=related Hey, Bruce Springsteen endorsed Barack Obama in 2008. Lets see - Bruce went with Pres Obama to OH, IA, and WI that started October 18th and Jay-Z played in OH. So, even though Palin has just endorsed Romney (Ok, finally endorsing the Republican candidate), maybe a better timing comparison could be Republican General Colin Powell who just gave a really superb endorsement to Pres Obama on Oct 25th. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZG9Q0sdzfw But Sarah Palin wins the Google Fight against Colin Powell. Bruce Springsteen wins the Google Fight against Sarah Palin. http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Sarah+Palin&word2=Bruce+Springsteen Ha. Like it?

    ReplyDelete
  6. RATM's version of The Ghost of Tom Joad is a Bruce Springsteen song. It is NOT a Woodie Guthrie song. Woody wrote a song called, simply, Tom Joad; but that is not the song that RATM covers. The Rage song was written by Bruce.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I sure wish facts and common sense actually worked on the majority of the GOP voters...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Palin: "Do we really believe he won’t raise taxes even more on every American in order to pay for his wasteful spending and his crony capitalism?"

    OK, the takeaway from this one: Sarah Palin hates capitalism. You read it here first, folks.

    (Actually, while I'm almost entirely joking about this, I've seen this several times the past couple of weeks, where conservatives are bemoaning the wrong kind of capitalism. Which is perfectly valid in and of itself; it's just quite contradictory with their usual capitalism-can-do-no-wrong approach.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is, of course, a perfectly good remedy for crony capitalism. It's enforceable regulation.

      Delete
  9. Just getting ready to head to the polls; this is a great, invigorating essay to contemplate as I stand in line to exercise my greatest right.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It’s always so infuriatin’ when you commie pinko, closet muslim, queer-lovin’, Bible-hatin’, Constitution-bendin’, immigrant-defendin’, gun-stealin’, anti-American, leftist liberals resort to takin’ down our best arguments point-by-point using facts! Ha! FACTS? We don’ need no stinkin’ facts! It’s just more of yer high falutin left-wing media propaganda spun to sound like truth—you liberals would say anything to elected!

    Thanks for the last-minute shot of mojo, Jim. Mercifully, this race won’t be nearly as close as we’ve been led to believe. And it’s a damned good thing, ’cause in Mitt’s Wonderful World o’ Bizness, a coin toss means “heads I win, tails you lose.”

    Have an outstanding day, folks!

    ReplyDelete
  11. If the Repubs take the election it's a given what they will do to the economy. That will be the end of any free and fair election in the US. And Obama will be the last Democrat as POTUS (at least until afer the next depression and probably armed insurrection). The GOP will load up the courts and Supremes, and the progressive social experiments of the last century will be shut down. The US will invade countries to take their resources, cause 'Who gives a shit about democracy?'.

    And following their tactic of shutting down bad news, they will attempt to restrict and eventually censor the internet to eliminate subversve voices. It was nice visiting your site Jim. Thanks for all the insight and socially corrosive reader contributions. But under the new GOP, Stonekettle and its brethen blogs will face censorship and elimination. You'll be able to keep your guns (for awhile) but they will come and take your books first. At least they will try, until the guns come back into play. You better hope Obama wins and wins big.

    On a brighter note, at least this goddamn election will be over! Tommy D

    ReplyDelete
  12. Sarah Palin, the gift that keeps on giving.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Perhaps with this election we can finally be done with those losers, the Palins. ALL of them! They are nothing but the far north branch of the Kardashian family.

    Excellent posting, as always, Jim!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Image what Obama could have accomplished
    ^^

    ReplyDelete
  15. To quote an old anarchist slogan, "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal"
    Sorry Jim just feeling a bit cynical today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that was Mark Twain. Anybody know?

      Delete
    2. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/e/emmagoldma107325.html

      Emma Goldman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Goldman

      Delete
    3. Sounds like Ms Goldman is channeling Twain, my favorite curmudgeonly "old anarchist"!

      Delete
  16. In the end, Mitt Romney is nothing more than twice-baked G.W. Bush with topped with melted morals and sour greed.

    My prediction: If Romney is elected today, the U.S. military will be asshole-deep in Iran and Syria by February. There's nothing like a needless war to stimulate the economy and the juices of the GOP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roger that! Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!!!

      Delete
  17. I saw Bruce Springsteen last week. I can only hope to be that energetic and vital at 63.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have no doubt. As I said, I love the man and his music and I'd drop everything and go see him should he decided to play Palmer, Alaska. But I miss The Boss of Born in the USA. That's all.

      Delete
    2. Don't we all miss the selves of 20 years ago, at least physically?

      Mostly it was that I'd rather talk about music than politics right now, except for bitching about the Pennsylvania voter ID nonsense.

      Delete
    3. The older I get, the better I was.

      Delete
    4. Hey!, I resemble that remark! ;-)

      & yeah, I'd jump to see the Boss.. tho my legs would scream at the torture!

      enjoy
      bobby

      Delete
    5. I kind of don't miss The Boss of Born In The USA. It isn't my favorite of his by a long shot. And while I do sort of miss the intensity he burned with in the years between Asbury Park and Nebraska, I really dig the artist he's matured into. The guy who's willing to lead off an album with a weird folk-rock epic like "Outlaw Pete" or do a whole album of Pete Seeger tunes. He doesn't quite have the lyrical chops he did on Born To Run, but he's stealing guitar sounds from Tom Morello. You get the feeling he's finally comfortable in his own skin and kinda likes being Bruce Springsteen--that he doesn't feel the pressure anymore to be the Second Coming of Bob Dylan and Elvis combined. He records and releases whatever the hell he wants (and mostly it's good!) and goes on these sprawling tours with his families--the little tours with his wife and kids along, the big tours with the expanded E Street Band (and, good grief, some of the current members of the E Street Band include Max Weinberg's son--Max having heart trouble these days--and Clarence Clemons' nephew, the Big Man having joined the band in the sky; there's something so sweet and cool about the fact the E Street Band has become a multigenerational family enterprise).

      I can't really choose the kid he used to be over the man he's grown up into. The man is really fucking cool. We should all be so lucky as to have second or third acts like that in our lives.

      Delete
  18. Side note: Maybe we can tell Newt that he IS the first Governor of Moonbase Reagan & send him there to pave the way.
    Here, Newt, here's a shovel, a pickaxe, a spacesuit and, what the hell, two bottles of air. Start diggin' Gov, we'll be along shortly!

    Could we convince Sarah to go with him? She could see Russia, China, Sierra Leone (if she knew where to look)...

    Well, we are into the mid-morning slump here in VA, so time to go vote!

    Bruce

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Send Sarah and her trailer trash family with them and you got a deal. Here ya go Newtie, now you CAN build it yerself. better hurry!

      Delete
  19. Springsteen has been working for Obama for some time now, perhaps not an endorsement, but there hasn't been much question where he is, and I don't follow pop music at all and haven't since college.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/us/politics/springsteen-helps-obama-lure-blue-collar-votes-in-ohio.html?_r=0

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Was going to weigh in, but Warner beat me to it. The Boss has been stumping for Obama for almost a month now (that I remember hearing about it). Palin's just chipping in to say she "did her part." You know, so Fox won't fire her.

      Delete
  20. Good luck! I know where my vote would go, if I had one. Whichever way it goes, I'm not looking forward to the results. If Romney wins, I don't want to know the America he champions. If Obama wins, I don't want to see the bitching, whining, complaining, and jaw-aching that is likely to result - the birther and Obama is a fascist/coummunist/Muslim/Satan nonsense of the last term will likely pale into insignificance.

    ReplyDelete
  21. You kind of lost me with the Springsteen lead-in/comparison, Jim.

    I follow Springsteen enough to say: I was surprised he endorsed Obama last month, given that he had publicly said in quite a few interviews that he was staying out of the election this year. But I also have to note that he changed his mind and jumped in with both feet at approximately the same time as a lot of liberals who were disappointed with the President but likely to vote for him anyway: two days after the second Presidential debate, when Romney was still surging in the polls after Obama's lousy, somnambulant performance at the first debate and only-slightly-better showing at the second, when it looked like Romney had a pretty good chance of snatching a win out of his ass.

    In that context, I'd add that I don't know if Springsteen's endorsement was meant to sway fence-sitters as much as it was meant to rally the troops. I mean, I put myself in his shoes, and I imagine going out and playing some campaign events would be a good way for me to feel like I was doing something positive and more than writing a check. I wasn't stirred to do anything more than vote and write a few rants, myself, but after the first debate some progressives who were considering casting a protest vote for a third party were suddenly going door-to-door and putting signs in their yards; I guess some took their guitars out on stage and sang "Land Of Hope And Dreams".

    I was going to contrast this unfavorably with Palin, but then it occurs to me that maybe she isn't being any different and I shouldn't judge her differently just because I find her execrable. Nate Silver's bumping Obama's odds up to 90%, and even if good doctrinaire Republicans don't like "maff", I think it's pretty obvious from the way the Romney campaign was still pushing even up through yesterday (while the President takes the day off, rightly acknowledging that, win-or-lose, he's done everything he can and one more event wouldn't make or break a damn thing) that the campaign is in full-on panic mode. Assuming some political competence on Palin's part, she can surely see that Romney's facing slim odds right now. Not saying he still can't pull it out--the Electoral College is a funny thing--but nobody even halfway serious thinks the numbers look good, regardless of what they're saying to Fox News.

    So maybe Palin is pulling a Springsteen, and doing what she thinks she can do to rally the troops.

    Or even if she's being opportunistic, maybe it's less an attention-whore thing and more a kissing-up-to-Ryan thing. Still, it's possible, I'll give her this, that she really is thinking of her values and worrying about what she's seeing written up on the wall, and putting in a last-ditch effort.

    Before I had to edit for length, I had a bit on the "has-been" thing. I don't think it matters much. The short version would be that no, Springsteen's not hitting the crazy sales levels he hit in 1984, but no one really could for all sorts of reasons, Born In The USA was a bit of a fluke, and his last album just tied him with Elvis for third-most US number one albums (first-place, The Beatles; second-place, Jay-Z). So I think there are both objective and subjective reasons you're wrong, but, you know, whatever; I doubt it matters.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Caught Sean Hannity on his nightly whine a few evenings ago complaining how President Obama must rely on 'celebrities' to ensure a high turnout for his rallies, celebrities like BILL CLINTON!! Now if I remember rightly, the previously elected party president usually does throw in his towel with the party's current candidate. At first I thought that perhaps the GOP was trying desperately to distance itself from their past duly elected president, kind of taking lets leave sleeping dogs lie approach, but with watching all of the past shenanigans and BS being thrown around, I'm starting to suspect it is GW who is distancing himself from his party!! Oh, rumor has it that old Prescott was pretty tight with the old Nazi's, just sayin . . . .
    MTC

    ReplyDelete
  23. Right on.

    BTW, I'm posting as anonymous, just for convenience's sake, but my name is Meredith. So if someone wants to comment on this post, you'll know who you're talking to!

    I don't think that this guy's blog post is actually relevant to your post here, but I thought you might enjoy the snarkiness of it:

    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/09/02/republican-jesus/

    ReplyDelete
  24. I cast my vote this morning in a very small town in southern Maryland. There was remarkably little drama, efficient voting judges, and lots of kids (including mine) there to "help" their parents vote. It gave me a sense of relief that the insanity, at least in terms of the campaign rhetoric, was ending.

    In other news:
    Mitt Romney has just announced that he has found the wisdom of the Eight-fold Path in hopes of appealing to the Buddhist/Taoist vote.

    Indian votes are also a priority for the Romney campaign, and he was last seen riding an elephant into the sunset, holding pictures of Gandhi and Krisha, and singing "Jai Ho" . The ghost of Gandhi, when queried on his opinion of Mr. Romney, said, "Well we both wear magic underwear..."

    ReplyDelete
  25. I cast my vote in the small Virginia village in which I lived (until very recently)--didn't want to put in a change of addy so close to the election and risk some sort of cock-up.

    Anyway, the polls were located in one of the three pretty little country churches that you could hit with a well-tossed rock from my old front porch. There were several voting machines and five cheerful volunteers who were eager to help in any way possible. It was 3 in the afternoon and I was the sole voter at that time. Reminded me of what is so great about the village lifestyle. But I digress...

    I dutifully voted my conscience and then stuck around to swap lies with the locals a bit before heading up the road. On my way out, I noticed there were several stalwarts manning an Obama table in the parking lot. None of the locals had a problem with this; these were their neighbors exercising their rights. Some country folks respect that. Just a gentle reminder that not all Southrons--not even Virginians--are narrow-minded rednecks (though many *are*, I'll grant you). Hell, the state might even contribute its electoral votes to Obama. Again.

    ReplyDelete
  26. In hindsight "neocelt" was prescient and called it right. It was fun to read what ya'll had to say in the vespers of the main event. I would have said the same things, but I didn't, I was calling and giving rides, of all places in the Cowboy Capital of the Country, Texas original Tea Party place of birth... anyway, I won't digress, looking at the results, I wrote in Mother Jones this comment:
    What is worrisome is that both definitions, Liberalism and Conservatism, don't belong to our times anymore and we still argue as if we would be still stuck in the 19th century. We aren't the kind of society that defined those terms and haven't been for over a century. We moved on, starting in the times of FDR, but the persistence of these old ideas is precluding any meaningful discussion in the National marketplace. Obama's phenomena is consequence of having come along at the right time, when the follies of the behind the scenes teams brought us at the brink of a revival of the Great Depression's drama.  The critics of the media might have liked such revival, looking up to cash on our morbid fascination with mayhem and gory destruction. But the New American People didn't like it.

    They rather embrace a boring path to building their home and raise their children. They like better a term like egalitarian (society), where each is allowed to be different but where, at the same time, their individual worth isn't predicated on wealth, profession, association, preferences, religion, race, or gender.

    The New American People understand the meaning of "Out of Many, One Nation", and abhor inequality, unfair playing fields, and economic dictatorship. They are ready to embrace compassion and are suspicious about self-satisfaction. They are ready to support fair rules but won't see kindly any brute exercise of power to preserve privileges. They are motivated to try getting to be better but not ready to condone grabbing better things, just because you can. 
    And the most important thing about the New American People is that they are for allowing others to chose their way of life, no matter how different those choices might be, as long as their own choice is respected and protected. 

    So, what I see in these election, it is the undeniable evidence of the passing of Liberalism "and" Conservatism. We should take our time and think in what terms our society is defining itself. But stop using irrelevant definitions, only meaningful to the social paleontologists. At the same time, rejecting to play the game of the dictatorial extremism of either end.

    I think Jim said it better in the "Hemlock With A Small Side Of Schadenfreude" piece that followed the morning after the election...  

    ReplyDelete

Be sure to read the commenting rules before you start typing. Really.