|
|
|---|
|
American Politics Journal Atrios Barry Crimmins Betty Bowers Buzzflash Consortium News Daily Howler Daily Kos Democatic Underground Disinfotainment Today Evil GOP Bastards Faux News Channel Greg Palast The Hollywood Liberal Internet Weekly Jesus General Joe Conason Josh Marshall Liberal Oasis Make Them Accountable Mark Morford Mike Malloy Political Humor - About.com Political Wire Randi Rhodes Rude Pundit Smirking Chimp Take Back the Media Whitehouse.org More Links |
Subject: House on fire
Hi Bart,
You asked,
> "Why do YOU think Obama fails to see this
house on fire?"
He can see. My own thoughts on the subject
suggest that there's no real intent among Dems to actually implement ANY
policy or program which might somehow infringe
on corporate profit. There's a ROLE to be played, rhetoric to be
repeated.
The masses need to be placated.
I KNOW - without question - that politicians
understand what most "Joe Six-pack" Americans want because they know
what to promise on the campaign trail.
I believe I understand enough about the technical workings of Congress
to know that
the party in power can pretty much do what it
wants to do - most especially when the party in power also controls the
White House.
To me, that means we COULD have had reform for
Wall Street. We COULD have ended evil george's wars. We COULD
have
restored this to a nation of laws. We COULD
have repealed evil george's tax cuts for the rich and made Social Security
solvent.
We COULD simply open Medicare to all Americans.
Many of those things COULD have been done by now. No, not all of
them,
at least not completely. But by now, it
SHOULD look as though we're heading in the right direction.
So if I can easily win a fight but I don't, what
does that mean? I think it means I chose not to. It's like
when I wrestle with my
four-year-old grandson. I put on a good
show - play the role. I tell him I'm going to win this time - repeat
the rhetoric.
It LOOKS (to him) like I'm trying to pin him.
HE thinks he "won" - hey, he's four. But the truth is, if for some
reason I felt it
was in my own best interest to pin him, I could
do so without effort. I think this quote from Douglas Adams sums
it up nicely,
even though Adams is ostensibly writing about
the President of the Galaxy:
"The President in particular
is very much a figurehead—he wields no real power whatsoever. He
is apparently chosen by the
government, but the qualities he is required
to display are not those of leadership but those of finely judged outrage.
For this reason
the President is always a controversial choice,
always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to
wield power but to
draw attention away from it."
- Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Universe
His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it.
I think the actual answer lies in reasserting
the Fairness Doctrine. My favorite part of that idea is that we,
the people,
don't need to convince a bought-and-paid-for
Congress to do anything. The Fairness Doctrine is policy of the FCC,
not law.
That means we need only focus our pressure on
the White House to reinstate and enforce the policy. Of course, the
risk of
such action on the part of the people is in proving
without question that Adams was right: the President represents - and protects
- interests other than (and often contrary to)
those of the masses...
I hope all is well with you, Bart.
Mark in Santa Rosa
Mark, the "house on fire" I'm talking about is
his presidency.
Obama is choosing to ignore the 24/7, wall-to-wall
coverage of the loons who, trust me, want him dead.
Maybe that's a winning strategy, maybe it's not.
But saying the racist pigs aren't racist is a
confounding strategy.
Send e-mail
to Bart | Discuss
it on The BartCop Forum | Comment
on it at the BartBlog