Joe Lieberman's time has come.

If Lieberman joins Senate Republicans in opposing health care reform, he should be immediately stripped of his seniority, his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee, and his other committee memberships. If he threatens to leave the Democratic Caucus and join the GOP, call his bluff, and if he chooses to leave, let him go. It means nothing to have Lieberman's name on a list as Senate Democrat #60 if he is only going to oppose his fellow Democrats and defy his own constituents on every important issue. Health care advocates should contact their Democratic senators now and demand action against Lieberman, and advocacy groups should begin running ads against him in his home state of Connecticut, highlighting the millions of dollars in campaign contributions he has received from the for-profit health and insurance industries while residents of his state have suffered due to lack of health insurance.

While he is not up for re-election until 2012, recent polls in Connecticut have consistently shown low approval and high disapproval ratings for Lieberman, and indicate that if the election were held today he would likely lose. Polls on health care reform meanwhile show that a majority in Connecticut and across America want robust reform including a public option now. A recent Research 2000 poll commissioned by Daily Kos found that 68 percent of likely voters in Connecticut support a public option, while only 21 percent oppose. National polls likewise show that a clear majority support the public option (Boston Globe, Reuters, Washington Post).

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow discussed Lieberman's reasons for defying his constituents and fellow Democrats this week on her show, including not only Lieberman's millions in contributions from the health and insurance industries but also his wife's work for a health care lobbying firm whose clients benefitted from Lieberman's legislation (see also Salon).

Time and time again we have heard from Democrats in Washington: "Joe is with us on everything but the war.... Joe's a good guy.... Good old Joe...." Clearly, good old Joe is with no one but himself and his friends in the health and insurance industries. The fact that Lieberman was willing to tell outright lies about the public option to explain his actions shows the depths of self-serving opportunism to which he has sunk.

Democrats must stop rewarding Lieberman for his treachery, must stop making excuses for him, and must make it clear to him that there will be a high price to pay for standing in the way of health care reform.

Mark C. Eades
Shanghai, China
http://www.mceades.com

Watching the 2010 US midterm election season open from my vantage-point far across the Pacific in China, I can barely contain my glee at the latest news from New York's 23rd congressional district as its Nov. 3 special election approaches. Due to the growing rift between the GOP establishment and its frothing-at-the-mouth conservative base, Democrat Bill Owens (pictured here, see campaign website) appears increasingly likely to capture what until now has been considered a safe Republican seat. With strong support from the right-wingnut faction of the Republican Party - including endorsements from leading wingnuts such as Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Michele Bachmann - Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman has drawn enough conservative support away from moderate Republican Dede Scozzafava to give the Democrat a clear lead in both poll numbers and fundraising.

Despite endorsements and support from establishment Republicans like Newt Gingrich, Scozzafava has fallen to second place in two recent polls, the most recent showing her carrying 30% of likely voters to Owens' 35% and Hoffman's 23% (see CQ Politics, Daily Kos). Meanwhile, campaign fundraising figures released Oct. 22 show that Owens raised more than his two rivals combined between July 1 and Oct. 14: Fundraising totals for the three are $502,197 for Owens, $233,583 for Scozzafava, and $205,139 for Hoffman (see Swing State Project, NY Daily News). This is not not good news for the GOP, but of course it is wonderful news for Democrats. A conservative-leaning Democrat and therefore not an especially exciting candidate for progressives in and of himself, Owens' surge nonetheless represents an opportunity for Democrats across the United States and abroad to take one more seat in Congress away from the Republicans and grab some early momentum as we head into 2010.

It would also be a lot of fun meanwhile to watch the GOP slide into even deeper disarray. I for one relish the prospect of the NY-23 special election signalling all-out war nationwide between a pragmatic but impotent GOP establishment led by Gingrich and a tea-party faction led by the likes of Limbaugh, Palin, Beck, and Bachmann. Boy howdy, what a show! Should wingnuts turn against the Republican establishment and split the conservative vote nationwide, what looked like a less-than-promising midterm election year for Democrats could turn into a far better year than any expected. 

In addition to Owens' campaign website, support may be directed his way via Act Blue and/or via the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Mark C. Eades
Shanghai, China
http://www.mceades.com

Photo: US Consulate General, Shanghai
(See also Shanghai Daily, Expo 2010)

SHANGHAI, CHINA-US Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman visited the USA Pavilion under construction at the 2010 World Expo site in Shanghai this week, and said that President Barack Obama is "very excited" about his upcoming trip to China. Huntsman's visit Oct. 14, his first to Shanghai since his ambassadorial appointment by Obama in August, comes just one month away from the president's first Asian tour, which will include stops in Shanghai and Beijing. The president's excitement at his visit will be more than evenly matched by that both of the Chinese people and of Americans living and working in China.

Huntsman visited the World Expo site for a "topping-off" ceremony marking completion of major structural work on the USA Pavilion following an aggressive 89-day building effort. At the ceremony Huntsman and Shanghai Expo Bureau director general Hong Hao signed their names in Chinese characters on the final steel beam to be put into place on the pavilion structure. Long delayed due to funding difficulties, the USA Pavilion is now among the first dozen national pavilions to have finished major structural work. When completed, the 5600-square-meter pavilion will be among the largest at the expo site. With an estimated budget of $61 million - more than $40 million of which has already been raised from private sponsors - it is certain also to be among the most expensive.

The US ambassador told reporters that the rapid progress on the construction of the USA pavilion was due to the "outstanding and patient" collaboration among the Shanghai government, the expo bureau, and the non-profit USA Pavilion team as well as support from the US government and sponsor companies, according to Shanghai Daily. "Our national pavilion will showcase American business and technology, as well as culture and values, to foster stronger friendship between the American and Chinese peoples as it also demonstrates America's commitment to a forward-looking, positive relationship with China," Huntsman quoted aptly from US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Like other national pavilions at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai, the USA Pavilion will provide jobs not only for local Chinese staff but also for US citizens residing in Shanghai (the number of which has grown of late owing to unemployment in the US). Together with President Obama's visit next month and the World Expo beginning in May, the coming months look to be exciting and promising ones for Americans in China. Despite recent trade disagreements between the US and China, Obama remains popular here, and is certain to receive a welcome from the Chinese people that will put smiles on the faces of expats. In Shanghai already, Chinese young people can be seen sporting Obama t-shirts, street vendors sell pirate DVD editions of Obama's speeches and pirate print editions of his books, and universities are planning special lectures coinciding with Obama's visit.

Obama will visit Shanghai and Beijing Nov. 15-18 during a four-nation tour that will also take him to Japan and South Korea in addition to his appearance at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Singapore. While in China he will meet with Chinese President Hu Jintao on issues including trade, energy, climate change, and security. There is no word as yet whether the president's Shanghai stop will include a look at the USA Pavilion site.

Mark C. Eades
Visiting Professor of English Language and Literature,
Shanghai International Studies University
http://www.mceades.com

As an American living and working abroad I watched President Obama's speech at the United Nations General Assembly with great pride and more than a little relief:

Pride, following the shame of our previous administration's arrogant unilateralism; and relief, that our previous administration wasn't followed by another just like it or worse. All too well as an American abroad I recall the embarrassment of being represented on the world stage by a tactless, insensitive president who seemed to possess little more than a child's understanding of the world.

President Obama's speech at the UN General Assembly, on the other hand, was that of a true statesman and a world leader of the highest caliber, with no apologies and no excuses. I think it was among the best speeches of his career thus far.

Any criticism of it by his political opponents in the United States amounts to nothing but sour grapes and a sad attempt to deny their own disastrous failure of the past eight years.

Mark C. Eades
Visiting Professor of English Language and Literature,
Shanghai International Studies University
http://www.mceades.com

SHANGHAI, CHINA-While strolling through the shopping arcades surrounding Shanghai's sixteenth-century Yu Garden this afternoon, I happened upon a t-shirt shop prominently displaying one shirt (pictured below) featuring the smiling image of US president Barack Obama beside other shirts including images of Che Guevara and Chairman Mao. Were such a juxtaposition of Obama, Guevara, and Mao to appear at a t-shirt shop in the United States, it would only serve to confirm for Obama's detractors that he is indeed some sort of Communist. Were it to appear at a t-shirt shop, say, in some left-wing mecca like my own San Francisco or Berkeley, I suppose it would surprise no one. Its appearance at a t-shirt shop in Mao's own People's Republic of China, however, struck me as something a little special.

When the president visits China in mid-November as planned, he may face an audience as tough as any he has faced at home. Obama's recent decision on behalf of the United Auto Workers union to impose a 35% tariff on tire imports from China has angered many Chinese and prompted calls for in-kind retaliatory measures against the United States. Unlike the president's fans in Europe, Africa, and even the Middle East, many pragmatic Chinese view US affairs strictly through the prism of how America's actions affect China's material interests, and will not be swayed by the kind of grand statements on world peace and brotherhood among men that so electrified his audiences in Berlin and Cairo. Nonetheless, admiration for Obama remains strong among the more idealistic youth of China, and here in front of me today was my president's image on a Chinese t-shirt.

I have been visiting China since 1991, and have spent altogether about a year and a half living in Shanghai; and this is the first time in China I have ever seen a US president's image on a t-shirt. I have also seen pirate DVD editions of Obama's speeches for sale on the street, and at my university have seen Chinese professors showing Obama's speeches to classrooms full of attentive students. My own students also seem to hold Obama, not merely in admiration, but even in a kind of awe. More than any other recent US president, Obama seems to be seen - at least among many young people in China - not merely as the president of one powerful overseas nation, but as a world leader perhaps of unprecedented importance, and from whom much is expected.

Of course, even older and less idealistic Chinese will tell you that Obama is "better than Bush." To his good fortune, Obama's immediate predecessor was one against whom it would be rather easy to win a popularity contest anywhere in the world except perhaps in Israel. Being "better than Bush" still serves Obama well, and probably will for some time to come. Despite the tendency here (at least for the average Zhou Six-Pack or Zhou the Plumber) to view US actions more-or-less exclusively on the basis of how they affect China, both Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq and his arrogant behavior with the world at-large made him immensely unpopular here. Just as Obama is the first US president whose image I've ever seen on a Chinese t-shirt, Bush was the first I've ever heard people in China tell me they just couldn't stand the sight of.

Despite his current troubles at home and abroad, however, Obama has far more going for him than the mere fact that he isn't George W. Bush. Appealing to the youth of China may be the key to his success here, and come November, I would hope to see many of China's youth wearing t-shirts like the one I saw today.

Perhaps I'll even see Zhou the Plumber wearing one.

Mark C. Eades
Visiting Professor of English Language and Literature,
Shanghai International Studies University
http://www.mceades.com

SHANGHAI, CHINA-Having arrived in China from the United States just over a week ago, I find it strange watching political news from my own country far back across the Pacific. My apartment for visiting overseas faculty at Shanghai International Studies University is equipped with international cable TV including Al-Jazeera in English, whose world news coverage includes US news stories of interest to international viewers; and via high-speed internet I can watch US domestic news on my laptop as pictured here. Al-Jazeera is clearly the superior product for world news, and I long ago gave up on getting anything of value on US politics from CNN, but I have enjoyed watching MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow from Shanghai on my laptop in addition to my usual daily readings from the Huffington Post and TPM, all via standard local broadband service despite all reports that overseas news sites are inaccessible in China. Domestic Chinese media also cover US politics in detail; and in stark contrast to his immediate predecessor, President Barack Obama appears to be quite popular in China, particularly with young people as elsewhere in the world. Obama's anticipated visit to China in November promises to be quite an event.

Among US domestic stories covered in detail by Al-Jazeera and other international media, most prominent is the fight for (and against) health care reform, Al-Jazeera observing like some in our own media the embarrassing fact that the US is the only nation in the industrialized world which does not provide universal health care to its citizens. As I write this, in fact, Al-Jazeera is comparing the US health care system to those in other developed countries around the world, and showing brief clips of shouting Obamaphobes at town hall meetings bent on maintaining our sad status quo. Nothing, however, can compare to Olbermann and Maddow for detailed coverage of the continuing town hall fiasco across the United States. Yesterday I watched video on Olbermann of right-wingers at a town hall in some dark corner of America rudely shouting down a disabled woman in a wheelchair, and I felt ashamed to be from the same country as these ignorant pigs. Lots can be blamed on the health care industry for the opposition to reform, but the ugly behavior of ordinary right-wing Americans at town halls can only be blamed on themselves and their own willful ignorance. These people are a disgrace to civilized human beings everywhere.

I would say the same about those I've also watched on my laptop making stupid Obamaphobic statements about the President's upcoming speech to American schoolchildren. US presidents regularly visit schools and address America's children, yet when this president follows suit these morons naturally assume some dark purpose at work. Professional liars like Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter say such things because they are paid to say them. Ordinary Americans who say such things, on the other hand, do so simply out of ignorance and hate. Ignorant people in remote areas of rural China or other developing countries at least have an excuse for their ignorance. In America there is no excuse. If you're ignorant in America it's because you have chosen to be ignorant. I repeat: These fellow citizens of mine are a disgrace, and their absence from my immediate surroundings makes my heart not the least bit fonder of them. Their persistent irrational disregard of the facts makes me feel quite certain that simple racism is at the heart of the matter for many Obamaphobes, whether they admit it or not, and for this in America in 2009 there can be no excuse.

Meanwhile, new US ambassador Jon Huntsman has announced that Obama will visit China in mid-November. Obama's visit is certain to generate excitement among young Chinese as well as among expat Americans like myself, and I would fully expect to see cheering crowds of youthful admirers, souvenir Obama t-shirts, and other trappings of Obamamania here just as we have seen around the world. This will be a great time to be an American in China. With a $61 million US pavilion currently under construction for the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai, I am hoping that the president will visit here as well as Beijing, but if not I am very tempted to buy an air ticket to the capital so as not to miss the event. My last visit to China was shortly after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, and I can tell you that George W. Bush was and remains as unpopular in China as anywhere else in the world. Despite Obama's troubles at home, his stellar popularity around the world makes being an American abroad a much more pleasant proposition than it was only a year ago.

Noticeable particularly on Al-Jazeera is the change in America's tone on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since Obama took office, and the resulting change in how America's role in the conflict is portrayed. The new US administration's sharp criticism of continued Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank has, at least on Al-Jazeera, resulted in the US no longer being portrayed merely as a lackey of Israel. Israel now stands alone as the responsible party for its continued violation of international law and Palestinian human rights, and - if only in a spirit of cautious optimism - Obama's America is coming to be regarded as a far more balanced broker for peace. This is nothing but good news for Americans at home and abroad.

Mark C. Eades
Visiting Professor of English Language and Literature,
Shanghai International Studies University
http://www.mceades.com

Is it because she is fleeing prosecution for knowingly submitting a forged document to a federal court? Is it because she is secretly an Israeli agent working to undermine Barack Obama? Is it because she fears that black men in suits and sunglasses are coming from Washington to kill her?

I don't know the answer, but "birther queen" Orly Taitz was indeed interviewed by MSNBC from Tel Aviv on Aug. 3 - only two days after submitting, to a federal district court in California for "authentication," a document alleged to be Obama's Kenyan birth certificate now pretty conclusively proven to be a forgery. Following her gleeful release of the document on Aug. 1, Taitz must be a little surprised by the speed at which it has been picked apart on the internet and shown to be an almost certain forgery. I don't know what the penalty might be if it is determined that Taitz knowingly submitted a forged document to a federal court for the sole purpose of doing political harm to the President of the United States, but it is the one good reason I can think of why she would so suddenly leave the country at what only two days ago seemed (at least to her and her demented followers) to be her moment of triumph. While she may indeed fear that black Men in Black are coming to kill her, I would seriously question the theory some have suggested that she might be an Israeli agent working to undermine Obama, if only because I assume the Israelis would be smarter than to entrust such a task to such an obvious nutjob as Orly Taitz.

Taitz appears haggard and even more disturbed than usual in her MSNBC interview with David Schuster, who charged in a question at the end of the interview that Taitz refused a ride to MSNBC's affiliate in Tel Aviv the same day because the driver appeared to be a Muslim. A Soviet-born holder of dual US/Israeli citizenship, Taitz is on record with the Orange County Register stating that Israel should not merely defeat but "exterminate" its Arab enemies, whatever "collateral damage" may occur among innocent Arab civilians (see also Tablet). Having wondered previously why an immigrant from the former Soviet Union would be as obsessed with Obama's birth certificate as any down-home American redneck, I'm beginning to to think it might just be a case of Transatlantic Islamophobia.

Orly Taitz claims that she is merely a "lawyer," with a purely "legal" interest in the details of Obama's birth, but I obviously suspect there's more to her Obama birth obsession than this or mere insanity. Taitz hails from a milieu of Soviet-born Israelis among whom far-right, anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiment runs much stronger by most accounts than among the general Israeli population, as numerous Israeli and international sources have observed. Witness the rise of Avigdor Lieberman, Soviet-born leader of the far-right Yisrael Beiteinu party, made up mostly of other Soviet-born Israelis with strongly anti-Arab views, many of whom live not in Israel itself but in West Bank settlements; and many of whom really, really don't like Barack Hussein Obama.

Taitz has a documented association with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful pro-Israel lobby group with close ties to Binyamin Netanyahu's right-wing Likud party, as Allison Hoffman notes in Tablet. I'd be very interested in hearing what sympathies Taitz may have not just for Likud but for Yisrael Beiteinu, and what connections she may have with Soviet-born settlers in the West Bank. As observed above, she is on record saying that Israel's Arab enemies should be "exterminated" rather than merely defeated, and appears to have refused a ride to MSNBC's affiliate in Tel Aviv because she believed the driver to be a Muslim. Like right-wing settlers (see video), Taitz is also fond of calling her critics "nazis" or "brownshirts," as she did with David Schuster in her interview from Tel Aviv. Taitz spoke about her birther activities in a March 1 interview with Israeli National Radio.

Could this be why she has found so much in common with Islamophobic American rednecks who think that Obama is a secret Muslim born in Kenya? Could it also be that America's best interests are not those she has most at heart in her dogged efforts to undermine our president?

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

Disruption is emerging as the Right's method of choice for fighting health care reform as the August recess and the ground war for reform begin. Weekend town hall meetings in Philadelphia and Austin were both disrupted by shouting bands of the same basic wingnut type we saw at McCain-Palin rallies in 2008 and at the teabagging events of earlier this year. As previously, video from these events clearly demonstrates just how crazy the grassroots Right has become.

At the Austin event Aug. 1 with Democratic Congressman Lloyd Doggett (pictured here, see video), the usual suspects showed up shouting "Just Say No" and waving signs that included the usual symbols of communism and fascism worked into statements against "socialized" health care, in addition to an image of Doggett as Satan. The protestors' continued shouting throughout the event was clearly an effort to disrupt it and to prevent any other voices being heard. The same was the case at an Aug. 2 event in Philadelphia with Republican-turned-Democratic Senator Arlen Specter and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius (see video). Here, wingnuts with bumber stickers on their heads shouted down speakers to the clear annoyance of others around them trying to listen. One woman held up a copy of the New American Bible and said, "This is the only truth," as though that were somehow an argument against health care reform.

These disruptive actions by Righties are not just an attack on health care reform but also an attack on democracy and open debate, since their express aim is to silence those with whom they disagree. The "me-first" mentality of anti-health care protestors was exemplified by one Carol O'Brien at the Philadelphia event, who told the Philadelphia Inquirer that extending health care coverage to 47 million uninsured Americans might mean that she would no longer be first in line at the doctor. "I don't want to have to wait for care," O'Brien said, clearly unconcerned about the amount of waiting others might have to endure without health care reform. Too bad Carol O'Brien is an unwitting stooge for an insurance industry that would deny care to her just as happily as she would deny it to others.

On the one hand I would hope that, in a public forum such as this, some rules of order might be enforced to prevent disruption and allow all voices to be heard; and that those who insist on disrupting could simply be removed just as they would be be removed from any other public forum. On the other hand I can't help seeing behavior such as this as an opportunity for progressives to demonstrate the depths of irrationality to which the Right has sunk. Good use was made of video from McCain-Palin events demonstrating all sorts of ugly behavior, and good use has been made of video showing similar behavior at teabagging events. As the long, hot month of August progresses I would only expect the wingnuts to get uglier and more brazen, and if they are going to insist on behaving this way we might as well make sure everyone sees the videos.

(See also: Huffington Post, Think Progress, TPM)

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

One simple fact unites the "birther" phenomenon, the Sonia Sotomayor and Henry Louis Gates controversies, and the right-wing crusade against health care reform in America: The one hope Republicans have of derailing the Obama presidency and stopping the progressive agenda is by tapping into the ignorance and fear of under-educated and ill-informed white Americans (aka "low-information voters"). Despite America's great wealth and advanced material development as a nation, abject ignorance remains a way of life for many Americans even today, and the rise of Obama has many of our most ignorant fellow citizens scared out of what few wits they possess. Lest I be accused of racism or elitism for my comments, I will mention that I hail from the very same white, working-class, small-town culture that I criticize here.

Consider the "birthers": From where I sit, it seems apparent that only a fool could buy into the theory that Obama is some sort of "Manchurian candidate" spirited into America from darkest Africa by evil leftists bent on turning the good ole USA into some kind of Islamic socialist republic. Obama has provided his Hawaiian birth certificate (the same "certificate of live birth" anyone gets when ordering a copy of one's birth certificate from one's home state), we have seen Obama's original birth announcements from two Hawaiian newspapers, and the Republican governor of Hawaii has stated unreservedly that Obama was indeed born in her state. None of this satisfies the birthers, however, who insist that no such proof has been produced. There is no rational basis whatsoever for birther claims against Obama, yet birther numbers are growing particularly among southern whites, many if not most of whom now believe or suspect that Obama was not born in the United States. If this isn't ignorance, then I'd like to know what is.

The birther controversy is but the latest incarnation of the racial and cultural prejudices that have followed Obama since he began his presidential campaign. No one demanded birth certificates from George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, or any previous American president, and no one will demand a birth certificate from our next white president. This is happening to our current president, not because of any missing birth certificate, but because he is black and because his name is Barack Hussein Obama. Anyone who says otherwise is either a liar or a fool.

The controversies surrounding Obama's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court and his comments on the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates likewise reveal a deep pit of ignorance in the white American populace. Both have been used by a few clever conservatives to convince a lot of not-so-clever conservatives that they are in danger of losing "their" country to militant blacks and Latinos led by Obama. In Sotomayor's case, an obviously moderate judge respectful of the law has been caricatured as a militant racialist out to harm white people. Pandering to a shrinking GOP base composed increasingly of under-educated whites in rural areas of the South, the Midwest, and the mountain states, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee spent far more time in Sotomayor's recent confirmation hearing grilling her on her "wise Latina" remark than studying her judicial record. In the case of Henry Louis Gates, arrested in his own home on charges that have since been dropped, Obama's comments on the matter have likewise been twisted to suggest that he is an "uppity" black man with a chip on his shoulder. As we know, few people are less popular among ignorant white people than "uppity" black people from places like Harvard: a testament not only to the bigotry but also to the gross anti-intellectualism, anti-urbanism, and anti-cosmopolitanism rampant in right-wing circles. You know there's something wrong in America when having a good education is counted against you.

The Republican crusade against Democratic health care reform is likewise based on ignorance and fear. Most blatant recently in these regards is the story currently circulating that health care reform includes a plan to euthanize senior citizens as a form of health care "rationing." This story is a complete falsehood, but has that stopped the less well-informed members of our senior population from believing it? Of course not. Unfortunately, Democrats will have to dedicate considerable resources to battling this fiction; and faced with the truth many of the willfully ignorant will still choose to believe a lie. Even before this particular tale began circulating, Republican propaganda against health care reform was based largely on xenophobic lies about the "socialized" health systems of Canada and Western European countries, eagerly consumed by Americans who really, really want to believe that anything Canadians or Europeans do is inherently evil: Of course they euthanize their grandparents, just as they eat their children, have sex with their pets, and go around socializing things that ought to be privately owned. I fully expect that at some point an obviously racial element will appear in the health care debate just as in others, if indeed it has not done so already (I can see it now: "...Obama wants to give free health care to 'welfare queens' and 'illegal Mexicans'! Obama plans to euthanize white people and send their organs to Kenya...!").

Uniting all right-wing claims against Obama is their dependence on the ignorance and on the racial and cultural fears of under-educated and ill-informed white Americans (aka "Joe Six-Pack"). There is not a single conservative line of attack against Obama that any rational person schooled in critical thinking could possibly take seriously. These are Joe Six-Pack's charges: Obama is not a "real American." He is a secret Muslim. His middle name is Hussein, and the other parts of his name aren't very American, either. He is an angry, uppity black man who hates white people and who got into Columbia and Harvard only because of Affirmative Action. He is a socialist who wants to kill your grandma and grandpa. He is an elitist city-slicker who is coming to take away your guns and your Bibles and replace them with copies of the Holy Quran and The Communist Manifesto. He eats arugula instead of good ole American iceberg lettuce, spicy brown mustard instead of down-home yellow, faggoty French crepes instead of apple pie. He pals around with terrorists and gets secret messages from ACORN through his teleprompter.

If educational levels were equally high across America, the Republican Party would have no base outside the ranks of the very rich and a few twisted souls serving as research fellows in right-wing think tanks. If ignorance were eliminated in America, the GOP as it exists today might not exist at all, and would certainly have little if any hope of ever winning a national election. GOP leaders in Washington are a disgrace for their racist and xenophobic hate-mongering, their crude anti-intellectualism, their wanton disregard of the facts, and their eagerness to exploit the irrational fears of people lacking in the critical thinking skills to recognize lies as lies. Equally at fault are news outlets like Fox News and CNN which, since the 2008 Democratic primaries, have treated the "cultural concerns" (i.e. prejudices) of certain working-class whites as legitimate cause to oppose Obama, and as "concerns" that not they but Obama should feel obligated to address. When the Jeremiah Wright controversy exploded during the primaries, these news outlets behaved as though Obama somehow owed Joe Six-Pack a comforting explanation for Wright's remarks, for Obama's presence at their utterance, and for why after 400 years of slavery and second-class citizenship a black man such as Wright might be a little angry. As African Americans and Americans of all races enjoyed their first-ever opportunity to nominate and elect an African American president, these news outlets fixated instead on poor Joe Six-Pack and his cultural anxieties (i.e. his threatened sense of white entitlement). Today, these same news outlets treat the birther controversy and charges of racism against Obama, not as the gross stupidity that they clearly are, but as legitimate topics of "debate."

Personally, I've grown sick and tired of Joe Six-Pack and his cultural anxieties. Joe Six-Pack's petty prejudices, his willful ignorance, and his paranoid fantasies do not deserve to be treated as legitimate "concerns" or as serious topics of "debate." Given the internet, cable television, free public libraries, and an increasingly diverse America offering many opportunities to learn about different cultures, Joe Six-Pack has run out of excuses for being a low-information voter. Joe Six-Pack needs to grow up, get an education, and come live in the 21st century with the rest of us.

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

Seyed Mohammad Marandi, a professor of English literature and North American Studies at the University of Tehran known for his pro-government views, was subjected to a bruising interview July 26 by Fareed Zakaria on CNN's GPS. Professor Marandi did an admirable job of maintaining his composure as Zakaria hammered him with questions and counterpoints on the respective roles of the regime, the opposition, and the international community in the current Iranian crisis, warmly smiling throughout the interview as pictured here and addressing Zakaria amicably by his first name. At the conclusion of the interview, Zakaria asked Marandi how he felt about the possibility that history might one day regard him as the smooth-talking "mouthpiece" of a doomed dictatorship. In his response, Marandi said he believed this would not be the case despite efforts by Americans including Zakaria to portray him as "the mouth of Sauron."

With this statement J.R.R. Tolkien's tales of Middle-Earth entered the contemporary debate on U.S.-Iranian relations, suggesting that to American eyes Iran appears as something like the land of Mordor ("where the shadows lie"), that Iranian rulers such as Khamenei or Ahmadinejad appear to us as something like the dark lord Sauron, and that we appear to ourselves as some cross between the Coalition of the Willing and the Fellowship of the Ring. Our president would thus be cast as Frodobama, attempting to destroy the Ring of [Iranian nuclear and theocratic] Power in the very fires of Mordor from which it was forged. Wow!

From an Iranian professor of English literature who studied in England and wrote his PhD dissertation on Lord Byron - poet of the Romantic era by which Tolkien's own work was influenced - such is at least a mildly thought-provoking suggestion, especially for those of us with similar interests in English literature. While I disagree with his support for the recent actions of the Iranian regime, I obviously found his cultural reference to Tolkien as a metaphor for the American view on contemporary U.S-Iranian relations compelling enough to spend half an hour blogging on it. I must confess I'm especially intrigued by the thought of a hobbit-hero named Frodobama Hussein Baggins. Perhaps I just don't have enough to do.

(As for characters in addition to Frodobama, I'm thinking Ted Kennedy as Gandalf the Grey; Joe Biden as Frodobama's loyal but gaffe-prone companion Samwise Gamgee; Hillary Clinton as a female version of the nimble elf Legolas; and the unwillingly self-cast Professor Marandi as Saruman, "the mouth of Sauron." American neocon Daniel Pipes, who rooted for Ahmadinejad in the recent Iranian election for the sake of further conflict, would in my opinion be very well cast as the creature Gollum. Any further or different suggestions are most welcome. Little if any attempt at serious political analysis here - just a bit of silly fun on a lazy Sunday afternoon.)

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

Will he follow through?

When you are House-training your blue dog, it is important to be firm, consistent, and willing to apply a rolled-up newspaper when necessary. This is why House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Henry Waxman must follow through on his threat to bypass his committee with health care reform legislation if recalcitrant "blue dog" Democrats don't stop playing the politics of delay. As The Hill reports, Waxman said that the seven blue dogs on his committee threaten to join with committee Republicans to "eviscerate" health care reform, and insisted: "I won't allow them to hand over control of our committee to Republicans."

Bad blue dog! Bad, bad blue dog! 

I sincerely hope that Waxman will follow through on his threat to bypass the committee if blue dogs continue stalling on health care reform. If he does not follow through by applying the rolled-up newspaper as threatened, then his blue dogs will not be properly House-trained, and may even think that they are the masters of the House. This simply will not do! If their disobedience continues with such actions as pooping or peeing on the floor of the House, then the rolled-up newspaper should be applied again and followed by rubbing their little noses in it and putting them out in the yard until they learn how to behave themselves. Not to worry, though: once the rolled-up newspaper has been robustly applied a few times, merely showing it to them should be enough to make them obey. Then they can be trained to roll over, to play dead, and to sit up and beg for doggie-treats.

Good blue dog...!

-------------------------------------------

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

Republicans are attacking the Obama health care plan, but with a sizeable Democratic majority in both houses of Congress the major obstacle to progress on health care reform is not the minority party but conservative members of the majority who appear to have chosen the interests of the for-profit health care industry over those of the American people. The worst of the worst among these is Montana senator and health industry lackey Max Baucus, one of the Senate's biggest recipients of campaign contributions from the health industry and a true profile in cowardice.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Baucus received more than $3.9 million in campaign contributions from the health industry between 2003 and 2008, including more than $850,000 each from pharmaceutical companies and health professionals, more than $780,000 from the insurance industry, and more than $465,000 from HMOs/health services, the vast majority of which came from outside Montana. As chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Baucus wields considerable influence over any health care legislation that comes out of Congress, and acts in his position neither as a loyal Democrat nor as a public servant of the people of Montana, but as a self-serving "unilateral," dragging his feet and gravitating more toward Republicans who want to kill health care reform than toward members of his own party who support it. Baucus' behavior has frustrated fellow Democrats and sparked charges against him of a conflict of interests between his role on the Senate Finance Committee and his financial ties to the health industry (Democracy Now!, National Public Radio, Roll Call, Talking Points Memo, Washington Post).

Baucus has now been targeted in a TV ad from Democracy for America and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, currently running in Montana, pointing to the vast sums of campaign cash he has received from the health industry, and attracting a great deal of in-state attention. Meanwhile, rallies in support of health care reform are planned for July 24 outside Baucus' offices in Missoula and five other Montana cities. It appears that the good people of Montana want meaningful health care reform as much as anyone, and their efforts deserve the support of progressives everywhere (Great Falls Tribune, KULR, Missoulian).

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

Republican senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina says he wants to "create pain" for his colleagues in the Senate and "break" President Obama by defeating health care reform. In doing so, DeMint would of course also be creating pain for many of his own constituents and people across America who lack health care; breaking the lives and the financial as well as physical health of millions of uninsured. As a supporter of President Obama and his health care plan, I've got a better idea: Let's create pain for Senator DeMint instead. Let's see if we can break him.

In a recent interview with the evangelical World Magazing, DeMint said on his desire to defeat the Democratic agenda in Congress, "I am not going to be able to persuade my colleagues to do the right things, so I am just going to have to create pain" (HuffPost). Then, during a conference call with conservatives on the specific issue of health care reform, DeMint said: "If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him" (Politico).

Obama shot back at DeMint July 20 in a speech at Children's National Medical Center, quoting DeMint's stated aim of using health care to "break" the president as evidence that Republicans are putting politics ahead of people (TPM, ABC):

DeMint will be up for re-election in 2010, having won his first term in the Senate in 2004 by a margin of 54-44 over his Democratic opponent, state superintendent of education Inez Tenenbaum, following the retirement of Democratic senator Ernest "Fritz" Hollings. The fact that DeMint's immediate predecessor was a Democrat, and the competitive nature of Tenenbaum's 2004 campaign against DeMint, suggest that he is far from invincible; and that his seat could again be held by a Democrat.

From Obama's comments above it appears, as ABC has suggested, that the Democrats plan to use DeMint's words against him and other Republican opponents of health care reform. If DeMint ultimately fails in his efforts to derail health care reform it could further cost him politically. South Carolina was Obama's big "comeback" state after losing the New Hampshire primary to Hillary Clinton in 2008, and Obama's supporters in South Carolina should be none too happy about DeMint's stated desire to "break" the president for whom they so enthusiastically voted. They should also be none to happy that DeMint is putting politics above the well-being of his constituents.

The use of Demint's own words against him and (hopefully) his failure to derail health care reform could result in creating pain for him at the ballot box in 2010. If Democrats and progressive bloggers can create enough pain for DeMint, perhaps we can break him.

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

A bipartisan group of six "moderate" US senators, dubbed the "Gang of Six" by news agencies, issued a demand July 17 for a slowdown on Democratic health care reform. These senators - including three conservative Democrats, one conservative Independent who caucuses with Democrats, and two moderate Republicans - asked for a slowdown on health care reform not because their constituents wished it so: recent polls show that a clear majority of Americans want health care reform now including a public health care option such as that proposed by President Obama and progressives in Congress. No, these senators asked for a slowdown on health care reform because the for-profit health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries have bid them to do so in the hope that reform can be stopped, and because these same industries have generously provided them with career campaign contributions totalling more than $11 million.

These six senators - whom I'll call the "Gang of Sickos" in honor of Michael Moore's film on America's health care crisis similarly titled - are Democrats Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, and Ron Wyden of Oregon; Independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut; and Republicans Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine (Paul Krugman calls them "the six deadly hypocrites"). Their career total and average daily contributions from the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries are summarized by Paul Blumenthal at the Huffington Post based on figures from the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP).

Sicko #1: Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska, the ringleader of the group, has raised more than $2.2 million in campaign contributions from the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries over the course of his career according to Blumenthal, averaging more than $700 per day since taking office in January 2001. Public Campaign Action Fund (PCAF) gives a slightly lower career total of just over $2.0 million for Nelson, and provides extensive detail on his ties to the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries. Before entering politics, as PCAF notes, Nelson spent his career as an insurance executive, as an insurance company lawyer and, early in his career, as Nebraska's state insurance regulator. As PCAF also notes, a number of Nelson's former Senate staffers have moved on into lucrative careers as health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industry lobbyists. Comments may be addressed to Senator Nelson via his Senate contact page (Nebraska residents only) or by direct e-mail at: senator@bennelson.senate.gov (CRP: Ben Nelson).

Sicko #2: Democrat Mary Landrieu of Louisiana has raised more than $1.6 million in campaign contributions from the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries over the course of her career, averaging more than $300 per day since taking office in January 1997. PCAF provides extensive detail on Landrieu's ties to the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries. Like Nelson's former staffers, several of Landrieu's have also gone on to work as health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industry lobbyists. Landrieu's opposition to the public option was attacked in a TV ad from MoveOn aired in her home state. Landrieu is also listed as one of the twenty most corrupt members of Congress by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Comments may be addressed to Senator Landrieu via her Senate contact page (Louisiana residents only) or by direct e-mail at: senator@landrieu.senate.gov (CRP: Mary Landrieu).

Sicko #3: Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon has raised more than $1.4 million in campaign contributions from the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries over the course of his career, averaging almost $300 per day since taking office in February 1996. Comments may be addressed to Senator Wyden via his Senate contact page (Oregon residents only) or by direct e-mail at: senator@wyden.senate.gov (CRP: Ron Wyden).

Sicko #4: Independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut has raised almost $3.6 million in campaign contributions from the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries over the course of his career, averaging more than $500 per day since taking office in January 1989. This former Democrat has been the bane of progressives since his signing onto the Bush war program and his opposition to Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election. Comments may be addressed to Senator Lieberman via his Senate contact page (Connecticut residents only) or by direct e-mail at: senator@lieberman.senate.gov (CRP: Joe Lieberman).

Sicko #5: Republican Olympia Snowe of Maine has raised more than $1.1 million in campaign contributions from the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries over the course of her career, averaging more than $200 per day since taking office in January 1995. Unlike the "Democrats" listed above, Senator Snowe and her junior Republican colleague from Maine, Susan Collins, can perhaps be partially excused for their actions based on the fact that they are Republicans, and are only doing what all Republicans do: Deny the needs of the poor, working, and middle classes in favor of the wealthy, while pretending in Bush-Palin fashion to be the champions of "Real Americans." Nonetheless, comments may be addressed to Senator Snowe via her Senate contact page (Maine residents only) or by direct e-mail at: olympia@snowe.senate.gov (CRP: Olympia Snowe).

Sicko #6: Republican Susan Collins of Maine has raised almost $1.6 million in campaign contributions from the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries over the course of her career, averaging more than $300 per day since taking office in January 1997. Comments may be addressed to Senator Collins via her Senate contact page (Maine residents only) or by direct e-mail at: senator@collins.senate.gov (CRP: Susan Collins).

Based on the average daily contributions given here, Paul Blumenthal estimates that in a 70-day delay in health care reform such as that proposed by the "Gang of Six," these six senators stand to gain a further total of more than $170,000 in contributions from the health, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries, or an average of more than $28,000 ($400 per day) for each senator. While they and their families remain fully insured throughout this period, many of their less-fortunate constituents including children will remain uninsured and at risk, some will grow ill and be unable to receive care, and some will die unnecessarily. But that's not your problem, is it, Senator Sicko?

Throughout this period of bipartisan "moderate" foot-dragging on health care reform, Americans should be encourged to watch or to re-watch Michael Moore's film, Sicko, by which the title of this blogpost was inspired; and which lays bare the reasons why the United States still ranks far below the rest of the developed world in health care for its citizens. With all due respect to Mr. Moore and his intellectual property rights, I think that the urgency of the moment merits mentioning that Sicko may at present be viewed in its entirety for free at Google Video, a link to which should be sent to anyone who has not yet seen it or who may need to see it again.

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

The following are acute observations on Sarah Palin as professional victim and martyred conservative saint by author and Wall Street Journal columnist Thomas Frank from the Huffington Post, well worth reading in their entirety:

"...The ['liberal-elite'] culture's fantastically unfair treatment of middle Americans is the main lesson that many will no doubt take away from Ms. Palin's time in the national spotlight. In fact, it may be the only lesson. We don't really know where the former vice presidential candidate stands on most issues. We know only that she is constantly being maligned, that when we turn on the TV and see her fair face beaming, we are about to hear that some liberal someone has slurred this noble lady yet again.

"Indeed, if political figures stand for ideas, victimization is what Ms. Palin is all about. It is her brand, her myth. Ronald Reagan stood tall. John McCain was about service. Barack Obama has hope. Sarah Palin is a collector of grievances. She runs for high office by griping.

"This is no small thing, mind you. The piling-up of petty complaints is an important aspect of conservative movement culture. For those who believe that American life consists of the trampling of Middle America by the "elites" -- that our culture is one big insult to the pious and the patriotic and the traditional -- Sarah Palin's long list of unfair and disrespectful treatment is one of her most attractive features. Like Oliver North, Robert Bork, and Clarence Thomas, she is known not for her ideas but as a martyr, a symbol of the culture-war crimes of the left.

"To become a symbol of this stature Ms. Palin has had to do the opposite of most public figures. Where others learn to take hostility in stride, she and her fans have developed the thinnest of skins. They find offense in the most harmless remarks and diabolical calculation in the inflections of the anchorman's voice. They take insults out of context to make them seem even more insulting. They pay close attention to voices that are ordinarily ignored, relishing every blogger's sneer, every celebrity's slight, every crazy Internet rumor.

"This has been Ms. Palin's assigned role ever since she stepped on the national stage last summer. Indeed, she has stuck to it so unswervingly that one suspects it was settled on even before she was picked for the VP slot, that it was imposed on her by a roomful of GOP image consultants: Ms. Palin was to be the candidate on a cross...."

Call for art: Were I the painterly kind, I should like to produce something in a Medieval or Renaissance image of the martyred Saint Sarah of Wasilla, perhaps on a cross, or undergoing cruel scourging by wicked liberals, or pierced by arrows like Saint Sebastian. Oh, would that some talented soul be the conveyor from Heaven's heights of such a work...!

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com