After the election defeat this year, I'm reading tons of articles giving progressives advice on what to do to make a comeback. Organize, start a movement, sign lots of online petitions, send this or that group money, teach, educate, etc. etc. All doomed to failure if we can't get the word out beyond our own and right now, we can't.
Let's face facts here - all the left-leaning magazine articles and books in print and online aren't doing the job. Sure, we read them, nodding our heads in agreement but the fact remains that the people who need this information aren't getting it -- in fact, they are avoiding it. We moan and groan about Fox Noise, how the cowed-by-cons mainstream media has become not much more than a piece of the rightwing echo machine and how news channels on cable have become a parade of right-leaning radio talk shows with pictures peppered with a few actual news headlines crawling along the bottom of the TV screen.
It's a bummer but, as Walter Cronkite used to say, that's the way it is.
What we need to combat this is to join the fray. As radio talk show host Randi Rhodes says, nothing happens unless it happens on TV. So let's get our asses on TV then. My suggestion is to start a cable news channel that doesn't play at leaning left by tossing a few hours out of the broadcast day to the liberal viewpoint, get one going that actually is.
Think of the benefits - we'd finally have a place to present our actual ideas instead of reacting to the conservative media's distortions of it. Democrats and progressives would have a safe place where they can present their agendas without fear of being ridiculed after they go off the air. All those news stories that we pass among ourselves could actually be seen by someone who has never heard of them and never would given our current media situation. Less bubble boy and more about economic bubbles that are destroying our poor and middle class.
Make it splashy and entertaining too - there's no reason for any of this to be presented like a sleep-inducing lecture. Shout about it if need be, you'd probably catch the people scanning the channels and give them some real information for once.
We like petitions - let's start some urging people like George Soros to finance this and get it going. George, the right is going to demonize you no matter what - you may as well give them a reason to do it. As a foundation, I suggest naming it something that already has a sound reputation as a progressive stalwart - The Nation magazine or NationTV. It wouldn't have to exist on donations to keep it on either: as progressive radio stations have shown to advertisers, we liberals buy stuff too and are a market worth pursuing. Then market the hell out of it so people will watch - no more word of mouth only.
Pass the word and let's get this going. Our alternative is what just happened on election day - people who are voting based on unanswered myths and lies about Obama and the Democrats' agenda from the RNC and their paid or otherwise spokespeople. The truth doesn't set anybody free if they don't know about it.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Monday, November 8, 2010
What To Do About That Man In The White House
I have been a fierce supporter and defender of President Obama in the past. I want to still do that but after the midterms it's becoming more and more difficult. If the next two years are going to be a repeat of the last two, it'll be impossible.
What I mean by that is if Mr. Obama continues to try and reach out to Republicans (read: appease) then I'm done with him. I defended the President to the left as a pragmatist but it appears I was wrong on that. The President is an idealist - one who really thought he could unite the country all by himself. Nothing wrong with that on its face but idealism has to be seasoned with reality for it to work.
The reality is that turning one's cheek only works twice. The Republicans have shown time and time again that they are only interested in regaining power and they'll obstruct any and everything to get it. To them, it's party over country and they don't care who they hurt as long as they can stop the Democrats then blame them for not doing anything. Repeatedly saying that no matter what you'll "strive to work with" them only encourages them. The days of bipartisanship are over - now it's time to fire up the machine and steam roll over them.
That this should have happened well before we lost the House and a ton of state legislatures should be self-evident. The opportunities and advances we could have made beyond the impressive number of things the Democratic Congress accomplished is breathtaking but instead we wasted time trying to make conservatives, outside of our party and within, happy and willing to work for the good of the country.
So much for that idea.
What actions Obama and the Democrats can do now has been limited but still do-able. There's still executive orders to make more advances and the veto pen to protect what progress we have been able to make. Given the limits, it's time to jump on the bully pulpit and cable TV and start going on the offensive. Call the Republican claims what they are - lies. Point out the very real differences between the nutcases on the right and the fact that all the Democrats did was what they were elected to do in 2008.
This is going to have to start at the top with real leadership from the White House. Professor Obama is going to have to become President finally and fight.
If he is unwilling or unable to do that, then I say it's time to look for someone else to lead the party and the nation in 2012. Primary challenges don't always have to be divisive and split the party - in order for that not to happen Democrats are going to have to be willing to say that if a primary challenger gets Obama turned into a fighter and going the right direction but loses the challenge then its mission accomplished. That's what happened last election in the governor's race in Oregon. Then-Governor Kulongoski seemed to be turning right and was challenged by two primary candidates. Gov. Ted won the primary but got the message. He emerged a better governor and candidate and his party primary opponents unified behind him to win him a second term.
President Obama was elected on a platform of hope and change. The change is underway, the hope is that he finds the steel in his spine to get us through the next two years with minimal damage from the Tea Party crazies the Republicans have become. This time President Obama really does only have two years to get this done. If he does, he'll bring back the enthusiastic base who elected him in '08 but stayed home this year to win another term.
If he doesn't, and there is no challenge in the primaries, then pay close attention to the Republican presidential primaries. It'll show us who our next President will be.
What I mean by that is if Mr. Obama continues to try and reach out to Republicans (read: appease) then I'm done with him. I defended the President to the left as a pragmatist but it appears I was wrong on that. The President is an idealist - one who really thought he could unite the country all by himself. Nothing wrong with that on its face but idealism has to be seasoned with reality for it to work.
The reality is that turning one's cheek only works twice. The Republicans have shown time and time again that they are only interested in regaining power and they'll obstruct any and everything to get it. To them, it's party over country and they don't care who they hurt as long as they can stop the Democrats then blame them for not doing anything. Repeatedly saying that no matter what you'll "strive to work with" them only encourages them. The days of bipartisanship are over - now it's time to fire up the machine and steam roll over them.
That this should have happened well before we lost the House and a ton of state legislatures should be self-evident. The opportunities and advances we could have made beyond the impressive number of things the Democratic Congress accomplished is breathtaking but instead we wasted time trying to make conservatives, outside of our party and within, happy and willing to work for the good of the country.
So much for that idea.
What actions Obama and the Democrats can do now has been limited but still do-able. There's still executive orders to make more advances and the veto pen to protect what progress we have been able to make. Given the limits, it's time to jump on the bully pulpit and cable TV and start going on the offensive. Call the Republican claims what they are - lies. Point out the very real differences between the nutcases on the right and the fact that all the Democrats did was what they were elected to do in 2008.
This is going to have to start at the top with real leadership from the White House. Professor Obama is going to have to become President finally and fight.
If he is unwilling or unable to do that, then I say it's time to look for someone else to lead the party and the nation in 2012. Primary challenges don't always have to be divisive and split the party - in order for that not to happen Democrats are going to have to be willing to say that if a primary challenger gets Obama turned into a fighter and going the right direction but loses the challenge then its mission accomplished. That's what happened last election in the governor's race in Oregon. Then-Governor Kulongoski seemed to be turning right and was challenged by two primary candidates. Gov. Ted won the primary but got the message. He emerged a better governor and candidate and his party primary opponents unified behind him to win him a second term.
President Obama was elected on a platform of hope and change. The change is underway, the hope is that he finds the steel in his spine to get us through the next two years with minimal damage from the Tea Party crazies the Republicans have become. This time President Obama really does only have two years to get this done. If he does, he'll bring back the enthusiastic base who elected him in '08 but stayed home this year to win another term.
If he doesn't, and there is no challenge in the primaries, then pay close attention to the Republican presidential primaries. It'll show us who our next President will be.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Election Day 2010 Post Mortem - The Democrats Go Spineless Again
We sure blew that one. According to the polls showing us where voters actually stood when it came to issues (they still don't like Republicans and their ideas), this should have been another Democratic win. Well, if you define "win" as keeping both houses of Congress that is. I think we Dem types understood that we'd lose some seats but we apparently were hoping against hope that we'd pull it out at the end. Then reality hit on Tuesday.
Reason #1:
Too many of us stayed home and gave away the election by default. 29 million people who voted for Obama in 2008 couldn't be bothered to go to the polls this year. The majority of people who did manage to schedule in a few minutes at a polling booth were the Fox Noise demographic - angry old white people. They won. Surprise!
I put this down as yet another failure to know how our government works and not being taught Civics in school. I know that it's sexy to get out to vote for someone charismatic and intelligent on a national level and it's hard to convey that passion onto Representative Huff N. Puff and Senator Speaks Alot locally. It's also just as obvious that the vote avoiders don't get that in order for that national leader they were so hot for two years ago to get things done he or she needs a Congress that will pass the bills to do it. From the opinion pages of major national newspapers to news channel chat to bloggers, Obama has been blamed for things that are the fault of Congress. And here we are.
Reason #2:
This is a major one - the communication failure of the Democrats. That's the nice way of putting it. I'm calling it more the failure of the Democrats to call out the myriad of Republican lies they campaigned on. There was an article that came out shortly before the election - Eight False Things the Public "Knows" Prior to Election Day - that summed up the myths and outright falsehoods being pushed by the Republicans before election day. What did the Democrats do to dispell them? Not much if anything.
You'd think that after Gore and Kerry we'd have learned by now. Both presidential campaigns were slandered and smeared as expected by the GOP and both seemingly took the positions that such charges were ridiculous on their faces. They both decided that voters would see through such nonsense on their own and so there was no need to dignify those claims against them with a response. That might have worked back in the days of three TV networks and ranters such as Limbaugh, Beck etc. were considered cranky crackpots howling at the moon. Now the right has bought up enough airtime and cowed what used to be the reliable mainsteam news media from even hinting that what they say may not exactly be on the up-and-up so that those charges are repeated enough that voters got the idea that the Democrats couldn't respond because the charges were true.
I think you know who won that argument and who lost. It just happened again this year.
Reason #3:
The economy, stupid. This has and will be discussed ad nauseum so no need to repeat it here.
You may have noticed a theme here in this posting. I'm disappointed at how the election went but if there's anyone to be angry at, it's the Democrats. What the Republicans did in this campaign is what they always do so there's no news flash there. What I'm angry about is that the Democrats let them get away with it. Again.
Of course, there was a small silver lining to all of this. What the Republicans won this year was just one House of Congress. We still hold control of the Senate and the White House so the crazier planks of the GOP Tea Party platform won't go anywhere. Healthcare insurance reform won't be repealed, there will be no privatization/destruction of Social Security and Medicare, the Department of Education will continue to exist, public education will not be eradicated, etc. etc. What's most likely to happen over the next two years will be gridlock and not much of anything else, legislation-wise.
Cold comfort, but comfort nonetheless. Will the Democrats get it together to make a comeback in 2012? That remains to be seen.
Reason #1:
Too many of us stayed home and gave away the election by default. 29 million people who voted for Obama in 2008 couldn't be bothered to go to the polls this year. The majority of people who did manage to schedule in a few minutes at a polling booth were the Fox Noise demographic - angry old white people. They won. Surprise!
I put this down as yet another failure to know how our government works and not being taught Civics in school. I know that it's sexy to get out to vote for someone charismatic and intelligent on a national level and it's hard to convey that passion onto Representative Huff N. Puff and Senator Speaks Alot locally. It's also just as obvious that the vote avoiders don't get that in order for that national leader they were so hot for two years ago to get things done he or she needs a Congress that will pass the bills to do it. From the opinion pages of major national newspapers to news channel chat to bloggers, Obama has been blamed for things that are the fault of Congress. And here we are.
Reason #2:
This is a major one - the communication failure of the Democrats. That's the nice way of putting it. I'm calling it more the failure of the Democrats to call out the myriad of Republican lies they campaigned on. There was an article that came out shortly before the election - Eight False Things the Public "Knows" Prior to Election Day - that summed up the myths and outright falsehoods being pushed by the Republicans before election day. What did the Democrats do to dispell them? Not much if anything.
You'd think that after Gore and Kerry we'd have learned by now. Both presidential campaigns were slandered and smeared as expected by the GOP and both seemingly took the positions that such charges were ridiculous on their faces. They both decided that voters would see through such nonsense on their own and so there was no need to dignify those claims against them with a response. That might have worked back in the days of three TV networks and ranters such as Limbaugh, Beck etc. were considered cranky crackpots howling at the moon. Now the right has bought up enough airtime and cowed what used to be the reliable mainsteam news media from even hinting that what they say may not exactly be on the up-and-up so that those charges are repeated enough that voters got the idea that the Democrats couldn't respond because the charges were true.
I think you know who won that argument and who lost. It just happened again this year.
Reason #3:
The economy, stupid. This has and will be discussed ad nauseum so no need to repeat it here.
You may have noticed a theme here in this posting. I'm disappointed at how the election went but if there's anyone to be angry at, it's the Democrats. What the Republicans did in this campaign is what they always do so there's no news flash there. What I'm angry about is that the Democrats let them get away with it. Again.
Of course, there was a small silver lining to all of this. What the Republicans won this year was just one House of Congress. We still hold control of the Senate and the White House so the crazier planks of the GOP Tea Party platform won't go anywhere. Healthcare insurance reform won't be repealed, there will be no privatization/destruction of Social Security and Medicare, the Department of Education will continue to exist, public education will not be eradicated, etc. etc. What's most likely to happen over the next two years will be gridlock and not much of anything else, legislation-wise.
Cold comfort, but comfort nonetheless. Will the Democrats get it together to make a comeback in 2012? That remains to be seen.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Teabag President - A Nightmare Scenario
Imagine, if you will, that things really do go South for the Democrats and the President. The Republicans take over the House and Senate in November, ensuring that nothing meaningful is done about the Great Recession. The economy stays in the tank, unemployment goes up and it's all blamed on Obama. With no real ability to answer the charges thanks to conservative media and their water carriers in the mainstream media, we reach the 2012 election.
The Tea Party, empowered by their primary victories in 2010 and successful take-over of Congress, start turning their attention to the Republican primaries. Traditional and even mildly moderate Republican candidates are attacked as RINOs as the TPers demand that the GOP nominee be one of them. They win again.
Thanks to the bad shape of the economy, President Obama fails to win a second term.
The new Tea Party President starts acting on their agenda. Social Security is partially privatized, aid to the poor and the unemployed is scaled back. All the while, the new President issues denials that any of that actually happened and it is duly reported, unchallenged.
The Tea Party supporters start talking about the nuclear threat from "communist" Russia (which, to them, is still the USSR). They defeat efforts to dial back the American nuclear arsenal, which keeps Russia from doing the same. All efforts to convince them that Russia is now a democracy with no designs on the United States falls on deaf ears as they denounce it as "liberal propaganda." Tensions rise between the two nations. Cries for a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Russians grow from the neo-conservatives in and out of the administration.
US-Russia tensions grow even more.
Then it happens - an accident between US and Russian submarines destroys the American sub. All hands are lost. The TPers and neocons scream that it is an act of war and it's repeated 24/7 on their cable "news" channels and websites. War fever spreads, The President reaches for the "football"....
Too much? Not possible? Guess again.
We have seen time and time again how information-resistant the far right Teabaggers are but we've kept our criticisms to domestic issues and their crazy positions on them. There's no reason to think that the craziness would stop at our borders if they were ever to actually gain real power. I don't think it'll ever get that far but then again, George W. Bush was President for eight years too.
It's not entirely impossible though. Keep in mind that the current polling is showing that of the probable 2012 candidates for the GOP nomination, coming in second right now is....Sarah Palin.
Imagine that hand on the nuclear button then tell me that you're going to stay home this year and not vote.
The Tea Party, empowered by their primary victories in 2010 and successful take-over of Congress, start turning their attention to the Republican primaries. Traditional and even mildly moderate Republican candidates are attacked as RINOs as the TPers demand that the GOP nominee be one of them. They win again.
Thanks to the bad shape of the economy, President Obama fails to win a second term.
The new Tea Party President starts acting on their agenda. Social Security is partially privatized, aid to the poor and the unemployed is scaled back. All the while, the new President issues denials that any of that actually happened and it is duly reported, unchallenged.
The Tea Party supporters start talking about the nuclear threat from "communist" Russia (which, to them, is still the USSR). They defeat efforts to dial back the American nuclear arsenal, which keeps Russia from doing the same. All efforts to convince them that Russia is now a democracy with no designs on the United States falls on deaf ears as they denounce it as "liberal propaganda." Tensions rise between the two nations. Cries for a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Russians grow from the neo-conservatives in and out of the administration.
US-Russia tensions grow even more.
Then it happens - an accident between US and Russian submarines destroys the American sub. All hands are lost. The TPers and neocons scream that it is an act of war and it's repeated 24/7 on their cable "news" channels and websites. War fever spreads, The President reaches for the "football"....
Too much? Not possible? Guess again.
We have seen time and time again how information-resistant the far right Teabaggers are but we've kept our criticisms to domestic issues and their crazy positions on them. There's no reason to think that the craziness would stop at our borders if they were ever to actually gain real power. I don't think it'll ever get that far but then again, George W. Bush was President for eight years too.
It's not entirely impossible though. Keep in mind that the current polling is showing that of the probable 2012 candidates for the GOP nomination, coming in second right now is....Sarah Palin.
Imagine that hand on the nuclear button then tell me that you're going to stay home this year and not vote.
Monday, September 20, 2010
You Can't Debate The Far Right
I've said this before and I repeat it here: You can't debate the far right because you have to spend all of your time correcting the falsehoods they've been fed.
I'm old enough to remember when political discourse was based on policy and actual facts. Liberals and conservatives used to argue actual ideas based on real information that both agreed on. It was good for the country too - no one has a lock on the truth or good ideas and debating those ideas helped us move forward. To paraphrase what former Senator and Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern said once: We need both conservatives and liberals in America. We need conservatives to slow down the exuberance of liberals and liberals to speed up needed change when conservatives slow things down too much.
Those days are gone. Conservatism has been replaced by knee-jerk reaction from the right against any and everything the liberals propose. Absolutely nonsensical claims from the right are now the norm, bolstered and fed by rightwing hate radio and TV. I don't need to rehash them here - you all see and hear them everyday. The fact that most if not all of what the far right claim as truth is easily debunked matters nothing to them - tell them the truth and you get back the lie, over and over.
The right is looking more and more cult-like as the days go on as well. There was a book named Holy Terror written in 1984 just before the Religious Right took over the Republican Party. The authors made the point back then that some Christianity was very cult-like in that its adherents could listen and see nothing but Christian materials (news, music, television, etc.) all day, every day if they chose to. Thanks to the explosion of cable and the internet the rightwingers can now spend their day listening to rightwing talk, visiting rightwing "news" sites and finish their day watching Fox News if they choose. All with not a single time having to deal with real news reporting or information.
And that's exactly what they do too.
If this described just the more fervent members of the "conservative movement" there would be not as much reason for concern. Both sides have their extremes - I've heard a version of Glenn Beck's "FEMA camps" going back as far as the days of LBJ and Nixon coming from the left who breathlessly assured me that both Presidents were secretly building concentration camps for anti-war demonstrators. My response then as now to such madness was to nod, smile and back away slowly.
The dangerous part is that the nuttiness that used to confined to fringe groups that were dismissed and derided is now coming from Republican candidates and elected officials. When people on the internet and out in the streets talk about Obama being a socialist and talk about secession and revolution just because an election didn't go their way needs to be watched but is mainly harmless. The prospect that people who are or can be elected to propose and vote on actual laws acting to put that crackpot-ery into effect should scare the hell out of anyone with a lick of sense.
What to do? Those of us with "a lick of sense" and more need to realize that we're not going to reach everyone, but everyone needs to know how the modern far right thinks. Arguing with the idiot right is fruitless and a waste of time (although, admittedly, driving them even crazier is big fun): they are absolutely convinced that they, and they alone, have the truth and everything to the contrary is "liberal propaganda." Realize as well that the truth doesn't set anybody free - repeating it over and over and over until it sinks in does.
Don't count on the Democrats to do this for us either - the Dems are and always have been timid when it comes to confronting the ridiculous right. Don't count on the corporate media for help either - when they aren't pushing fluff, they continue to carry the GOP's water for a very good reason (for them): the GOP is more likely to give them more goodies, tax and legislation-wise, than the Democrats. What we need to do is blog, post, talk to our neighbors and get the facts out there. Be our own media, as it were.
The most important thing to do this year? GET OUT, VOTE, AND BRING YOUR FRIENDS. I know some of us are disappointed that voting Democrats back into power in '06 and '08 hasn't brought everything we hoped it would, but it has done a lot of it. Swallow hard if you must, but sitting home and letting rightwing nuts come to power by default is not an option. Arguing may not work with the right but defeating them sure as hell does. Then we can say to them what Dubya once said to one of his detractors: "Who cares what you think?"
Saturday, September 11, 2010
WHY IT IS GOOD TO BE A CONSERVATIVE
(this came from my email and is too good not to share...)
- being a conservative means I can be selfish and not feel bad about it.
- being a conservative means all the problems of the world can be attributed to liberals.
- being a conservative means I never have to acknowledge flaws in my philosophy.
- being a conservative means anything a Democrat does is bad.
- being a conservative means I can pretend we only have a liberal media.
- being a conservative means I'm more concerned about protecting a definition than I am about protecting the rights of Americans.
- being a conservative means that I'm sorry if I offended you, but I'm not really sorry for what I actually said.
- being a conservative means I never have to try to solve any problems in the government because I insist government is the problem anyway.
- being a conservative means I can lay off workers to boost profits then complain about lazy unemployed people.
- being a conservative means I am staunchly pro-life and will put a bullet through the eyes of any liberal who challenges that.
- being a conservative means you folks are going to hell because you don't live your life the way *I* think you are supposed to live your life.
- being a conservative means you can blame problems on poor people instead of the rich ones (who actually run things).
- being a conservative means believing in spite and fear instead of hope and change.
- being a conservative means knowing for certain that gays and lesbians are worthless and weak, yet letting them marry would destroy civilization as we know it.
- being a conservative means you get to yell your talking points and write in all caps, especially the word "LIBRUL!"
- being a conservative means sometimes people have to starve if it proves my point.
- being a conservative means pretending the Republican party was born the night Ronald Reagan was elected.
- being a conservative means knowing that everything that was bad up to 2006 was Bill Clinton's fault; everything bad that happened from 2007 to 2009 was Nancy Pelosi's fault, and everything after that is Barack Obama's fault.
- being a conservative means even when I'm wrong, I'm right.
- being a conservative means getting my pension through the teachers union, even though I HATE unions.
- being a conservative means I can view all things I don't understand with contempt and not have to make the effort to change.
- being a conservative means I can accuse President Obama of being divisive because I didn't vote for him and he won anyway.
- being a conservative means being more concerned about the flag than the people and the country it stands for.
- being a conservative means I am not a racist -- black people are the real racists.
- being a conservative means the news I don't like hearing is just liberal propaganda.
- being a conservative means being against Social Security, Medicare and Civil Rights, because justice is "socialist".
- being a conservative means that if I just scream "JESUS!" the loudest, I don't have to actually live by any of his teachings.
- being a conservative means I don't have to think; somebody's taking care of that for me.
- and best of all, no matter how badly I screw up, I can always get a job at Fox News or a conservative "think" tank.
- being a conservative means I can be selfish and not feel bad about it.
- being a conservative means all the problems of the world can be attributed to liberals.
- being a conservative means I never have to acknowledge flaws in my philosophy.
- being a conservative means anything a Democrat does is bad.
- being a conservative means I can pretend we only have a liberal media.
- being a conservative means I'm more concerned about protecting a definition than I am about protecting the rights of Americans.
- being a conservative means that I'm sorry if I offended you, but I'm not really sorry for what I actually said.
- being a conservative means I never have to try to solve any problems in the government because I insist government is the problem anyway.
- being a conservative means I can lay off workers to boost profits then complain about lazy unemployed people.
- being a conservative means I am staunchly pro-life and will put a bullet through the eyes of any liberal who challenges that.
- being a conservative means you folks are going to hell because you don't live your life the way *I* think you are supposed to live your life.
- being a conservative means you can blame problems on poor people instead of the rich ones (who actually run things).
- being a conservative means believing in spite and fear instead of hope and change.
- being a conservative means knowing for certain that gays and lesbians are worthless and weak, yet letting them marry would destroy civilization as we know it.
- being a conservative means you get to yell your talking points and write in all caps, especially the word "LIBRUL!"
- being a conservative means sometimes people have to starve if it proves my point.
- being a conservative means pretending the Republican party was born the night Ronald Reagan was elected.
- being a conservative means knowing that everything that was bad up to 2006 was Bill Clinton's fault; everything bad that happened from 2007 to 2009 was Nancy Pelosi's fault, and everything after that is Barack Obama's fault.
- being a conservative means even when I'm wrong, I'm right.
- being a conservative means getting my pension through the teachers union, even though I HATE unions.
- being a conservative means I can view all things I don't understand with contempt and not have to make the effort to change.
- being a conservative means I can accuse President Obama of being divisive because I didn't vote for him and he won anyway.
- being a conservative means being more concerned about the flag than the people and the country it stands for.
- being a conservative means I am not a racist -- black people are the real racists.
- being a conservative means the news I don't like hearing is just liberal propaganda.
- being a conservative means being against Social Security, Medicare and Civil Rights, because justice is "socialist".
- being a conservative means that if I just scream "JESUS!" the loudest, I don't have to actually live by any of his teachings.
- being a conservative means I don't have to think; somebody's taking care of that for me.
- and best of all, no matter how badly I screw up, I can always get a job at Fox News or a conservative "think" tank.
9/11, Nine Years Later - Haven't We Had Enough?
Today is the anniversary of 9/11. The ninth anniversary. I'm not turning on my TV to watch any of the ceremonies. I'm not going to watch any TV specials about that horrific day - I've already seen them. Don't I remember 9/11? Of course I do. How can any American forget? None of us, I imagine.
I remember being woken up early for work by my late wife to the news. I remember seeing the pictures on my TV of the damage from the first plane hitting one of the World Trade Center Towers and thinking it wasn't that bad (What was on my TV was a close-up of the damage with no sense of perspective as to how large that fiery hole in the building actually was). I remember the horror of watching the second plane hit the other tower and realizing that this was no accident, this was a deliberate attack. I remember the story of the passengers on another plane paying the ultimate sacrifice over Pennsylvania to prevent their jet from becoming another missile to be used to attack the White House or the Capitol building in DC.
I remember something else as well - watching all of this from Oregon and not feeling much fear over it. I remember going to work, delivering mail as a letter carrier, and the look of shock on the faces of people when I pulled my mail truck into a particular apartment complex to deliver their mail. I remember this conversation with one of my customers too:
I've never been to New York but from TV and other sources I understand that going to "Ground Zero" now means visiting a construction site, not the barren tangle of twisted iron it once was. There will be a new skyscraper there to replace the two that collapsed, plus an underground mall and a memorial museum in remembrance of the worst terrorist attack on American soil to date. This is a good thing - it means that city is rebounding from the tragedy and mass murder it suffered.
The ceremonies to remember the people who's lives were cut short on that day by hate will continue, as they should. I have been to another, actual Ground Zero site: Peace Park in Hiroshima, Japan - the site of the first atomic bombing. The building that stood directly under the air burst nuclear bomb in World War II still stands there and there's a museum there as well. They still hold ceremonies - religious and civic - to remember the people who died on that day too.
Let's not forget another anniversary date in American history: April 19th, 1995. That was when two American extreme right terrorists attacked this country at Oklahoma City in what is still the largest act of domestic terrorism committed on American soil as well. There's a memorial there as well as annual ceremonies to remember the people who died that day.
What's different between Hiroshima, Oklahoma City and the 9/11 attacks on New York City and the Pentagon? Only one of them still essentially shuts down a country to remember it. This is not a good thing.
There's a difference between remembering and obsessing and we're getting very close to doing the latter when it comes to 9/11...if we haven't already reached that point. Of course, there's benefits to some to do this: political gain, for one - financial gain for others and sometimes the two overlap. It's disturbing and ghoulish to use the deaths of over 2,000 people to try to get votes and sell seminars and DVDs on hating Muslims everywhere.
It's not just some Americans who are seeing the political gain here. The constant selling of fear is just what the terrorists who attacked us wanted when they did their deed. The people who flew airplanes into buildings in New York and into the Pentagon didn't do what they did in hopes of taking over America, they did it in hopes that we'd become so fearful that we'd bankrupt ourselves fighting them and step into traps they set (like, say, Iraq) so we'd be otherwise engaged and they'd be able to pursue other goals. Look at the root word of "terrorist" - it means to invoke terror in others by attacking their victims to gain political goals. They aren't called conquestists.
How do we really fight terrorism? Be vigilant, do what we need to stop them if we can but stop being so afraid. In it's entire, murderous history terrorism has never achieved the goals it set out to accomplish. Not ever. Personally, you and I have the same chance of being involved/hurt/killed in a terrorist attack now as we did prior to 9/11: under 1%. Those are very good odds in our favor. Live your lives fearlessly.
And finally, let us never forget the events of this date and those who were killed in it but don't make it the central point of our lives or our national policy. It's time to let 9/11 go.
I remember being woken up early for work by my late wife to the news. I remember seeing the pictures on my TV of the damage from the first plane hitting one of the World Trade Center Towers and thinking it wasn't that bad (What was on my TV was a close-up of the damage with no sense of perspective as to how large that fiery hole in the building actually was). I remember the horror of watching the second plane hit the other tower and realizing that this was no accident, this was a deliberate attack. I remember the story of the passengers on another plane paying the ultimate sacrifice over Pennsylvania to prevent their jet from becoming another missile to be used to attack the White House or the Capitol building in DC.
I remember something else as well - watching all of this from Oregon and not feeling much fear over it. I remember going to work, delivering mail as a letter carrier, and the look of shock on the faces of people when I pulled my mail truck into a particular apartment complex to deliver their mail. I remember this conversation with one of my customers too:
Customer: "You're working today?"That was all nine years ago. NINE. YEARS. AGO. Some people would like us to act like it just happened today.
Me: "Of course, why wouldn't I be?"
Customer: "Aren't you afraid because of where we're at?"
Me: "You mean the state capitol?"
Customer: "Yes."
Me: "There's 50 of those across the country. I think we'll be OK."
I've never been to New York but from TV and other sources I understand that going to "Ground Zero" now means visiting a construction site, not the barren tangle of twisted iron it once was. There will be a new skyscraper there to replace the two that collapsed, plus an underground mall and a memorial museum in remembrance of the worst terrorist attack on American soil to date. This is a good thing - it means that city is rebounding from the tragedy and mass murder it suffered.
The ceremonies to remember the people who's lives were cut short on that day by hate will continue, as they should. I have been to another, actual Ground Zero site: Peace Park in Hiroshima, Japan - the site of the first atomic bombing. The building that stood directly under the air burst nuclear bomb in World War II still stands there and there's a museum there as well. They still hold ceremonies - religious and civic - to remember the people who died on that day too.
Let's not forget another anniversary date in American history: April 19th, 1995. That was when two American extreme right terrorists attacked this country at Oklahoma City in what is still the largest act of domestic terrorism committed on American soil as well. There's a memorial there as well as annual ceremonies to remember the people who died that day.
What's different between Hiroshima, Oklahoma City and the 9/11 attacks on New York City and the Pentagon? Only one of them still essentially shuts down a country to remember it. This is not a good thing.
There's a difference between remembering and obsessing and we're getting very close to doing the latter when it comes to 9/11...if we haven't already reached that point. Of course, there's benefits to some to do this: political gain, for one - financial gain for others and sometimes the two overlap. It's disturbing and ghoulish to use the deaths of over 2,000 people to try to get votes and sell seminars and DVDs on hating Muslims everywhere.
It's not just some Americans who are seeing the political gain here. The constant selling of fear is just what the terrorists who attacked us wanted when they did their deed. The people who flew airplanes into buildings in New York and into the Pentagon didn't do what they did in hopes of taking over America, they did it in hopes that we'd become so fearful that we'd bankrupt ourselves fighting them and step into traps they set (like, say, Iraq) so we'd be otherwise engaged and they'd be able to pursue other goals. Look at the root word of "terrorist" - it means to invoke terror in others by attacking their victims to gain political goals. They aren't called conquestists.
How do we really fight terrorism? Be vigilant, do what we need to stop them if we can but stop being so afraid. In it's entire, murderous history terrorism has never achieved the goals it set out to accomplish. Not ever. Personally, you and I have the same chance of being involved/hurt/killed in a terrorist attack now as we did prior to 9/11: under 1%. Those are very good odds in our favor. Live your lives fearlessly.
And finally, let us never forget the events of this date and those who were killed in it but don't make it the central point of our lives or our national policy. It's time to let 9/11 go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
