The problem is too much money in congress. They are too intimidated to say anything for fear of loosing election cash.

C

The thugs are irrelevant. The party is intimidated by Blue Dogs. (Ooops forgot to remind myself to shut up, sorry Rahm).

MJ, I think the moral of all this is that short of an invasion from a dangerous foreign empire, or a plane-bomb from a mass-murdering foreign terror army, you can't really expect Americans to "come together" over domestic political agendas. The competing agendas are too different and the political stakes are too high. We're going to get into our respective bunkers with our chosen camps and fight it out.

It's in the right's DNA to clobber and bring down any Democratic president, and monkey-wrench his agenda, just as it is in the left's DNA to do the same to Republicans. The sooner we just accept that fact and join the battle, recognizing our own past contributions to intense partisan warfare, instead of conveniently forgetting our own zeal and moping about why we can't all get along, the better it will be for all of us. If a Republican is elected in 2012, a lot of us will be out to screw him and his plans, just like the tea-baggers are trying to do to Obama. And we shouldn't be ashamed of it.

The target audience is the middle of the roaders. Now surely a group of people that succeeded in mobilizing the country to elect its first African-American president by a very healthy margin can manage to organize a campaign to truth-bomb a zealous contingent of raving lunatics and obliterate their ill-informed idiocies with fact, reason and an elevated sense of economic urgency. Let's just do that.

One problem, however, is that by deferring the policy details of the health care issue to Congressional wrangling and negotiating, Obama has left his side of the debate in a state of disorganization and confusion, wondering exactly what it is they are supposed to be fighting for, where the forces are being mustered, and around what flag the battle is to be waged. Obama should have recognized that passing major health reform in the face of an opposition army of economically powerful stake-holders who are willing to enlist and exploit a crazed right-wing militia of ignorant fanatics would be an uphill battle, and that he needs to match zeal with zeal, purpose with purpose, noble cause with noble cause. He needs to introduce some simplicity and moral clarity into the debate with one or two central, easily understood and emotionally overpowering policy causes worth fighting for.

i think it will be found that there is a brain chemistry imbalance in those who are rigidly dogmatic and zealots. it stimulates the pleasure center in the brain knowing that you are 100% right and the "other" is 100% wrong. having this dynamic play out in a group stimulates the pleasure center even more.

most people would rather be right than happy.

I think the real question MJ is "are we going to be outsmarted by thugs?" Far too often it appears the answer is yes.

"Are We Now Two Nations That Loathe Each Other?"

Well MJ, here is the deal...

We will give them all of the original confederacy plus Oklahoma... they have to take the idiot Inhofe with them...

We have no need for bald, toupee wearing fat white reactionary boys from Alabama... Sessions and Shelby you listening?... of course Trent "Ole Miss" Lott was the toupee-in' wearingest... The court marshaled Mitch McConnell goes too. You ever explain that discharge as an officer after 3 months commission during the Vietnam war there Mitch?

Any way that's the deal.

Racists, survivalists, anti abortionists, birthers, xenophobes, pro nukes, pro war, C Street Family freaks, Jerry Fallwellians, Pat "Dumber than a box of rocks" Robertson lovers and dogmatic Christian fundamentalists jihadists... ALL report to south of the Mason-Dixon line immediately!

We are fencing you William Crystal that Krauthammer moron and the Bushes in. Have your United States of Wing Nuts... oh you get Palin we get Alaska...

Because they will have no school, no science, no colleges, no sense and one book in their library...

No passports or travel visas allowed into the Normal States of America by you Wing Nut Staters.

Now shove off..,

MJ, the crazies have always been out there. My memories are mainly from Texas, but Texas hasn't been that unusual. Perhaps extreme, but not that unusual. The difference is really in what the mass media is willing to report and the distribution of the reports.

I still have memories of members of the American Nazi Party from 1961. Texas John Birchers from those same days would fit right in with the birthers and deathers of today. When Goldwater was running, the crazies came out the woodwork, but the media gave them no credence. The crazies abounded during the battles over Civil Rights.

The media did not generally report on the crazies locally. The city newspapers still dominated news, and the editors wanted mass markets rather than niche markets, so they buried the news of the crazies. Even when TV began to compete effectively, they had little air time for news. And politics were still competition between two relatively similar parties which lived on a single culture that grew out of the Depression, WW II and the Korean War. This was the dominant source of media stories.

It was the changes in the media that caused the emphasis on the extremists. Talk radio was just the beginning. What has happened, especially since about 1990, is that Editorial judgment regarding what was a story that would boost ad revenue has changed as mass markets have broken down into niche markets. There has ceased to be a single or small group of key editors in each city that operated on a single culture and sold to a mass market. Journalism has become a free-for-all in when everyone is trying to stand out against their competitors and possibly attract a reliable audience that they can sell to advertisers. There is no more set of journalistic standards.

Either along with or after that, the politicians began to capture their own propaganda media. This has been a key element in the growth of the conservative movement. It has always been a movement of outsiders attempting to take over the older mass culture. They have taken advantage of the fragmenting of the older media culture.

It's my impression that the national TV media has been the last to break up, with the rise of FOX and the takeover of the TV media by the big corporations while the Newspaper chains have been collectively dying.

We are down now to a case where the thugs make news instead of being buried in the back of the media. The right-wing politicians are taking advantage of this.

The two cultures are not new in America. They have always been here. But we have had two generations in which the rational, less traditional and largely urban culture was dominant in large part because the dominant culture of the media matched that of the nation. The new fractionated media no longer supports that model, while the rural culture of the conservatives is fighting a rear-guard battle against the big-city urban culture represented by the Democrats. The difference is that the media now is reporting a great deal more than ever before - often less reliably but certainly in much greater quantity.

This man is not intimidated:

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/05/05/we-will-not-submit/

Neither is this man:

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/truth-and-friends/

The poor fed up lot in between who are not heeded in any way and are sick of the divisiveness, hatefulness and narrowmindedness of the two groups above, reinforced by the MSM.

How often do you speak with "the poor"? Do you have a phone I can call to confirm your insight that "the poor" want more unity and bi-partisanship. Who should I ask? Larry King?

Not much to add this thread, MJ, but reading Franks' The Wrecking Crew about the rise of the modern Republican right is interesting.

One of the things he says, somewhat in passing, is that Young Republicans like Abramoff took their inspiration from the "actions" conducted by the New Left and SDS in the late 60s/early 70s.

Recall the bombing in Wisconsin, the bomb in Greenwich Village, and other disruptive actions.

The difference, to my mind, was that these actions were, at least initially, meant to stop an immoral and illegal war. A big difference. But the thinking soon enough spread to the need to remake the entire society along revolutionary terms.

True enough, these folks weren't the Democratic Party, but they did get all the attention, and the Republican right is, in part, reacting to those ideas which, they feel, still animate the DP, or segments of the DP.

So bottom line, Conscience has a point. Though he's not entirely correct in that animus against Bush was created mostly by the outrageously immoral things HE did. Thus far, what has Obama done that is even close to the equivalent? Nothing.

As to "what to do," I think Dan K has it mostly right. Lots and lots of people firmly, but non-violently and without incitement, stating what the facts are and making the unassailable moral argument for health care reform.

Republicans are panic-stricken. Think about it: We have just emerged from 8 years of near-total Republican control, which was the culmination of a 40-year anti-progressive movement. And what did the Republicans deliver? Disaster in nearly every arena of government. So we now have a Democratic president -- not incidentally, a black man -- and a Democratic Congress who are about to change our national health care system. As big as that reform is, this is a much greater moment than is readily apparent. Once universal health care is instituted and supported by a vibrant public option, the nation will inexorably regain its progressive trajectory. That is because we will then collectively have an economic interest in the health and well-being of our fellow citizens. And we will have direct motivation for controlling costs in health care, which is a huge umbrella encompassing health providers, the pharmaceutical industry, medical device makers, etc. Once the incentive is in place to manage costs -- i.e., private profits -- things will never be the same.

So, in a way, the present Republican reaction is not irrational: Republicans may well be correct that an historic pivot point has been reached. They find themselves on the wrong side of history and that is never pleasant, especially for people who cling desperately to outmoded, largely fictional, views of the nation and the world. For these Republicans, the world truly is turning upside down. So be it.

Oh MJ! Thank you so very much for this garbage. The problem in America isn't that we are "Two countries who loathe eachother". No, The problem is writers like you, who honestly think wholeheartedly that whatever you believe is absolutely correct and that anybody who DARES question your authority, is either a "Fascist" as you said in one of the comments above, or someone who "Buys guns" (as if there is anything wrong with that.)
I almost forgot my favorite part! I absolutely loved the paragraph where you condemned the "Teabaggers" and "Glenn Beckites"! You are so right! Who do these crazy people think they are? Exercising there freedom, and being politically active. (I'm being sarcastic if you can't tell). Well thank God (that's right I'm religious too [gasp!]) that you democrats don't do anything like that. Well I guess you guys are busy "writing books" as you said in an earlier comment.
In conclusion, I just wanted to say that both you and your blog are pathetic.

Thanks!

TPC,

You would have an argument if there had not been 8 years of over-the-top attacks on Bill Clinton. We're seeing the same stuff against Obama today.

Was there over the top rhetoric from fringe lefties under Bush? You bet. The difference is, that when an obscure professor in Colorado suggests that America is responsible for 9/11, the entire right wing apparatus goes on attack, he is bandied about on Fox News, excoriated on the floors of Congress and Democrats are called on to denounce this person by mainstream media outlets.

Our "nuts" are ridiculed and pushed further to the sidelines. Ours are condemned by our elected officials. Yours are slapped in front of a TV camera and further encouraged.

The GOP in the Clinton era was just as vile and despicable as today, there just was not an internet to enable rapid response to the lies.

The way the GOP acted against President Clinton led my mother to leave the party. And she voted for Nixon for President three times, Reagan twice.

I disagree that Red and Blue State people "came together" after 9/11.

Blue Staters took the whole thing rationally. Red Staters went crazy.

Standing in line to give blood on 9/11, the guy in front of me in line raised hi voice and said fore everyone to hear, "It is a good thing that this happened while George Bush was President!"

I was ready to argue that the whole thing wouldn't have even happened if Bush hadn't been President, because he was in incompetent. Before I got my mouth open, though, a couple of other crazies started loudly agreeing with him.

It all raised the hair on the back of my neck, and I thought it prudent to just STFU. In five seconds, I realized the world had gone insane and that it was not healthy to argue.

Later that same day, I was in a bar listening to a friend's band playing. There was a video game machine to my right, a hunting game, and goober-looking guys were taking turns doing terrible against the machine. They were all saying things like, "Man, I wish that was Osama bin Laden, and it was a real rifle!"

To myself, I could only say, "Osama bin Laden fought the Soviets, you idiots, and he would have killed you before you got a bullet close to him, especially as bad as you shoot."

The Red State world went insane that day, while the Blue Staters saw what was happening and just decided to not say anything to get them any crazier.

My experiences that day make me compare it to "The Night of the Broken Glass" (Kristallnacht), November 9-10, 1938, when the German S.A. was instructed by Hitler and Goebbels to have "spontaneous demonstrations" and destroy Jewish shops and homes and to kill if they wanted. It was the last and greatest craziness that convinced everyone that they had better keep quiet.

Red Staters on 9/11 = crazy, violent Brown Shirts coming out of the closet. Use this as a means of intimidation and abusing freedom of speech.

Blue Staters on 9/11 = intimidated. Honest concern for the families of the WTC attacks.

When Bill Maher and a NM professor lost their jobs, the message was out: SHUT THE FUCK UP.

There was no "coming together." One side went crazy and threatened violence, and the other side realized it and backed WA-A-A-AY off.

That is my take on it, and I ain't shutting up about it.

Not until 2005 did Blue Staters start to come out of the closet again. And then very slowly. We never sided with the Red Staters. The neocons had taken over the country, backed by the S.A. Red Staters. It took four years for Red Staters to start to feel empowered enough to stand up for themselves and the country. And it was a slow process.
.

I agree with the piece, but can I just make one reservation?

"in hatred for the monsters who attacked us. "

I never hated anyone nor do I think they are monsters.

Other than that - I'm close to thinking some of my fellow citizens are. It's serious - when we talk to each other, we are not communicating because words mean different things to people depending on whether they are on the right or the left. We aren't going to be able to heal this divide as long as we are speaking different languages. And we really are right now.

They do this because lefties never fight back. They always just wait for the investigation or police etc. You say ignore bullies, but sometimes you can't, sometimes you have to bloody their nose so they know if they tangle with you they are not going to have it their own way.

I've been radicalized. I am not going to go looking for righties to beat up and I don't lie awake at night wishing them harm. But if they ever rise, you better believe I am going to be volunteering to put their rebellion down, and I am not going to be one bit sad if lethal force is necessary.

Thank you for sharing. This information is very useful.
Best regards, Katya, CEO of facebook, iscsi initiator server 2003