This summer of the big, phony, insane health care reform "debate," we've heard the complaints by the old "conservatives" -- many of whom, by the way, are not the Greatest Generation; they're the ones who were too young for WWII and Korea, and too old for Vietnam and are dominated by the generation of Eugene McCarthy and the Red Scare-- and the young racists who hate themselves so much, and, of course, the great-grandchildren of TR's "malefactors of great wealth". They're pissed off. They lost, to a black man, and they're pissed off.

All of these same issues were debated fully in the campaign and they lost the argument. The voters decided they were wrong, by a large margin.

But they pretend none of that happened and wear stupid-looking tea bags on their ball caps and pack heat to presidential rally and bleat "this is a democracy" and they "want their country back.

I guess it depends on your definition of democracy.

If you believe that only the elections you win matter; if you believe that elections are not final; if you believe that your opponents are evil incarnate, and illegitimate, no matter what the majority of the voters say across the land, then you'd fit right in with the logic of the GOP and the Rush Limbaugh's of the world. Armed insurrection, threats of violence, bullets not ballots, are the natural language of that bizarro world view. People that think this way have walked the earth before, and they have wrought death and destruction across Europe and Asia throughout the 20th Century.

  "This is a democracy" are four words that are really important, though, and ought to be on the mind of every lawmaker and public official.
 
    As blogger Steve Benen at the Washington Monthly points out, "Americans voted in November, electing a large Democratic majority in the House, a large Democratic majority in the Senate, and handing a Democratic president a large mandate. With that in mind, if a majority of the House wants health care reform, a majority of the Senate wants reform, and the president wants to sign a reform bill, reform should pass. After all, "at the end of the day, this is a democracy." The "voice of the people" was heard loud and clear on Election Day. If majority rule should carry the day, then health care reform advocates are in good shape."
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_08/019648.php

    But one right-wing talk-show instigator after another, one far-right representative from various parts of the old Confederacy-- and their ideological running buddies like Glenn Thompson from places like Pennsylvania's 5th District--apparently don't believe in the same kind of democracy that equals the "voice of the majority" in a free and fair and open election.

The True Believer always knows what's best for me, no matter what I tell him.

But the Lost Cause is still lost, Caleb. 
   
So what is your definition of democracy? Is it based in the vote of a free people, with the responsibility to govern given to the majority, or is democracy supposed to be given to the overweight, overaged kid that throws the biggest temper tantrum?

I'm really getting sick of the crap.

Passing along a clever post by  Stroszek on the Daily Kos.

(More at the link)

Dear Republicans,

Over the past week, we have seen your passionate protests and heard your concerns about Democratic proposals for health care reform. We have considered your insightful and well reasoned arguments, and on behalf of progressives everywhere, I am here to say: OK! We give up! We are willing to compromise on the proposals that concern you. You've won! Yay!

In accordance with your cogent and potent criticisms, these are the terms of our concession:

1. We will not euthanize your grandmother. This is the big one, and I really hope you guys appreciate how much of a concession this is on behalf of the progressive movement. Since the days of the Bull Moose Party, progressives have wanted nothing more than to slaughter old people by the millions. That much is obvious. After all, if we wanted senior citizens to have long and healthy lives, why would we have created Social Security and Medicare? Think about it. Death to grannies has long been the core of progressive policy, so it's not without some consternation that we give it up. So there: no euthanizing old people. You've got it.

1. Rahm Emanuel's brother will not kill Sarah Palin's baby. While this will require us to gut HR 3200 "America's Health Choices and Murder Sarah Palin's Baby Act of 2009," we're currently working with Henry Waxman to remove the extensive Sarah Palin's baby-killing provisions from the final bill. While this will probably cost us Andrew Sullivan's support, we recognize that this is a necessary sacrifice for securing broad bipartisan support of health care reform.

The government will not nationalize hospitals and other health service providers. ... More-->

OK, I realize this sort of gloating isn't real classy, but when my son sent this to me I instantly thought of three relatives and two co-workers who needed to see it. Really needed to see it.

http://www.236.com/video/2008/get_your_war_on_new_world_orde_10121.php

You may, too.

Heh.

Christopher Hitchens, writing in Slate,  argues that the GOP and the McCain campaign should have to pay a price for their decision to prevent the governor with the nice ta ta's from facing some tough questioning. Instead, they've got her in a bubble of adoring (and ignorant) fans, motorcades and softball interviews. All the while, she and her handlers are snarling at the press, at libruls in general, and the 70% of the nation who are un-American because they think she's a dangerous joke.

Why does the press continue to cover her? Why are they complicit in this partisan tactic? I realize it's a lot of fun to be abused at every rally, if not from the podium then from the said adoring fans.  And,  I realize she's a story, but that doesn't mean they have to completely roll over, does it?

Back in 2000, I gave some money to John McCain. I'm backing Obama now.

But despite repeated efforts, the McCain campaign has refused to take me off its mailing lists. Incompetent? Afraid that a lot of us taken off will make their numbers look worse? Who know.

So, I've just decided to go with the flow and pass along their tactical moves to the gang here. FWIW.

"Friends,
The polls are tightening across the nation, and one thing is clear: this year's presidential election will be one of the closest in history. We know that John McCain and Sarah Palin will change Washington, but before they reform our nation's capital, you have to send them there first.

Now more than ever, your vote is critical. And there's no better way to vote than by voting early, or with an absentee ballot. Voting early, or with an absentee ballot, is the best way to avoid the long line on Election Day and get your vote counted. Many states allow you to vote early by requesting an absentee ballot through the mail. Please visit www.JohnMcCain.com/AB for more details on early voting and absentee ballot requests in your state.

Your support is extremely important to electing John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin in November, and your vote will matter. I'm encouraging you to visit our website and either register to vote or sign up for early voting or an absentee ballot. Your vote will make all the difference in November.

Thanks for your support and for your vote!

Rick Davis
Campaign Manager

P.S. Please forward this email to your friends, family, neighbors and colleagues and encourage them to either register to vote or sign up for early voting or absentee voting. Remember, this will be a close election and the work we do now will make all the difference in electing John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin. Thank you

I've got to start reading Coates more over at the Atlantic. The man makes sense:

Here's an interesting video that shows how objectivity becomes a cover for weakness. I think David Gergen just disagrees, and I'll give him a pass. But two things stick out to me from this: 1.) It's OK that Palin was clueless about the Bush Doctrine because most Americans and journalists are clueless about it. By that logic, most Americans are qualified to be president. 2.) Palin's ignorance only matters if it affects the "game." In other words, unless McCain loses votes on this, it's actually irrelevant. This is the sort of analysis that arises when your more interested in process than in actual results. It's also, interestingly enough, pretty judgmental. The more I watch, the more I think it's not that you have to be objective, you just have to be careful what you're objective about.

Video Link to talking heads segment

This is an interesting essay on FiveThirtyEight.com, on how the Palin phenomenon is working well on the emotional level.


http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/dems-must-give-voters-explicit.html

When facts are used to discredit Sarah Palin, emotion trumps facts. The instinct is to defend against the facts. Consider: you meet someone and like him or her on a gut level. A stranger – someone who doesn’t have built-up personal credibility with you – gives you a list of reasons not to like that person. How do you react?
...

...“Sarah Palin is very likable. There’s nothing wrong with liking her. But this isn’t a zany sitcom where a friendly, plucky Everywoman with dangerous ignorance on foreign policy gets to be vice president. Americans don't deserve someone too scared to do a press conference. Fun for a TV show, but running the country doesn't permit second and third takes when you mess up the scene."

And then the argument on how to handle this weirdness:

a man at Palin's rally in Carson City heatedly told an Obama volunteer in response to his anti-Palin argument, "I don't trust the facts!" Some people hear that and think: "I cannot relate to someone who would say that." I hear it and think: "Defended around emotion and feels under attack." People under attack can't be persuaded. And persuasion is the goal, remember? You can’t reason someone out of his or her feelings. But you can validate those feelings, buy their willingness to listen, and then calmly make your logical case.

OK. I apologize for the double post, but the first one came up blank with a link back to the home page. Whaaaaa?


I must admit that I was amazed that TIME.COM is running this video, but there it is.

http://www.time.com/time/video/?bcpid=1485842900&bctid=1770059182

I'm as partisan as anyone, and have been in the tank for Obama for a long time. And this video is funny. But the raunchy flavor seems... I dunno, odd. It's not what I'm used to. But mockery is a devastating tool, and I'm guessing that the fact that the editors posted this indicates the level of anger in the press against the McCain campaign.

What say you?

I must admit that I was amazed that TIME.COM is running this video, but there it is.

http://www.time.com/time/video/?bcpid=1485842900&bctid=1770059182

I'm as partisan as anyone, and have been in the tank for Obama for a long time. And this video is funny. But the raunchy flavor seems... I dunno, odd. It's not what I'm used to. But mockery is a devastating tool, and I'm guessing that the fact that the editors posted this indicates the level of anger in the press against the McCain campaign.

What say you?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13314.html

John McCain is performing near the bottom of the class again. Low class, no class.

He's shaming the honor of all those, like my father, who served honorably and proudly for the U.S. Navy.

What a disgrace.

This phony "honor" is his strength. It must be stripped away, because it is a fraud on the American people.

As the rabid dogs directed by Rove and Schmidt on behalf of the totally dishonored McCain and his pit bull, continue the savaging and virtual lynching of Barack Obama, I wondered:

Where are the defenders? Where, in particular, are Bill and Hillary? Why aren't they calling out the slimers and calling them names?

schadefraude? Or just keeping your powder dry? I hope it's the latter.

Inquiring minds would like to know.

Interesting report from Polster.com: Sorry if this has been posted already, but I hadn't seen anything and wanted to get it on the record:
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/omero_the_palin_effect_more_ba.php

Palin runs up the score among Republicans and evangelicals (+37, +32 more minus less likely to vote for McCain, respectively).  But moderates say Obama's pick of Biden makes them more likely to vote for Obama (+12 more minus less), with Palin having neither a positive or negative net affect for McCain.

 

These findings build upon earlier results I wrote about this week.  It seems increasingly unlikely that former Hillary Clinton supporters will move to McCain because of Sarah Palin.  But during the heat of the Republican convention, the Republican base is indeed energized. 

I love it when Joe Biden gets fired up.

So did this crowd here in Pennsylvania today, too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=955Y3NJTRIE

Here's a collection of quotes that might come in handy in the coming 2 months here and elsewhere in the blogosphere. As Billy Glad says, we are in danger.

Recommend to keep it where people can find it for a couple of days, please.

He might like the quote from Sinclair Lewis in 1935 about Fascism.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -- James Madison

'When the government fears the people it is a democracy....when the people fear their government it is tyranny...' --- Thomas Jefferson

Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin


The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive.– Thomas Jefferson

The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home. – James Madison

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders...tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. – Herman Goering


I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually. – James Baldwin


Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. – Voltaire


The cry has been that when war is declared, all opposition should be hushed. A sentiment more unworthy of a free country could hardly be propagated. – William Ellery Channing


"if there be one principle more deeply written than any other in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest." -- Thomas Jefferson


Criticism in a time of war is essential to the maintenance of any kind of democratic government. – Sen. Robert Taft, (R) Ohio


Fascism will come wrapped in a flag and carrying a Bible. ~ Sinclair Lewis 1935


"patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels." - Samuel Johnson


"If the American people ever allow the banks to control issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers occupied." -Thomas Jefferson


"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists." -J. Edgar Hoover, former head of the FBI



BEWARE THE LEADER WHO BANGS THE DRUMS of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know ? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar."

-- Anonymous

Andrew Sullivan's got the report on the latest Rasmussen poll since McCain picked the least qualified candidate for a major ticket in modern times. Turns out those who haven't made their minds up don't like this very much, and think it reflects poorly on McCain's presidential judgement.

Imagine that.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/08/undecideds-dont.html

"

The headlines are about the broad polling reaction to Palin. But the most fascinating part of the first Rasmussen poll on the matter is how those who are currently undecided in the election feel. They, after all, are the votes both campaigns are trying to win over with their veep picks. The key data is in the cross-tabs, which have been missed in some of the coverage so far.

On the critical question, "With Palin As Vice-Presidential Nominee, Are You More Or Less Likely To Vote For McCain," there's a striking result. Among those already for McCain, 68 percent say it makes them more likely to vote for him; only 6 percent say less; and 23 percent said no impact. Among those already for Obama, Palin made only 9 percent of them more likely to switch to McCain, 59 percent less likely, and 30 percent said it would make no difference.

But among the critical undecideds, the Palin pick made only 6 percent more likely to vote for McCain; and it made 31 percent less likely to vote for him. 49 percent said it would have no impact, and 15 percent remained unsure. More to the point: among undecideds, 59 percent said Palin was unready to be president. Only 6 percent said she was.If the first criterion for any job is whether you're ready for it, this is a pretty major indictment of the first act of McCain's presidential leadership.

One other striking finding. If McCain thought he could present Palin as a moderate, he was wrong. A whopping 69 percent view her as conservative (37 percent as very conservative), and only 13 percent see her as moderate.

From this first snap-shot (and unsettled) impression, Palin has helped McCain among Republicans, left Democrats unfazed, but moved the undecideds against him quite sharply. I totally understand why."