There are few politicians in the nation that can play the role as a national leader as
well, Obama has talent even if he has no substance. The best thing about him is
that he accomplishes nothing, and that is good. Change can be dangerous and we
are better off with the status quo.

After being sucker punched twice in a row by the Democratic Party, and flogged and threatened mercilessly by our propagandist press about the coming Boehner Gang take over, voters just want to get the ass whipping over with. Most are so beaten up they don’t even want to vote. Now, after ten years of fascist destruction and looting of the American economy, as invisible International Black Market/Corporate cash flows directly into facist coffers and every Rovian/Koch looney tune zombie possible is dancing on the American political stage Mr. E. Robinson tells us not to worry. Mr. Obama has the veto.

    It’s a set up. And this time they’re looking to put you down for good.

Hollywood directors and holy men believe that God is a baritone, it would be
blasphemy to think that the voice of God was squeaky or shrilly. When Obama
bellows in his high testerone baritone voice, women faint in ecstasy while blue
collar workers shake and shiver.
McCain, Hillary,or Palin have voices that are squeaky or shrilly, it is no wonder they
were defeated. The next Republican contender for president must be a baritone,
and he can be a liar.

Robinson is probably correct about the extent to which waves will sweep back and forth, as each party proves unable to manage a deficit that ultimately derives from the de-industrialization policies endorsed by those same two parties for decades. And yes, Obama could benefit in 2012 if the Tea Party- loving Republicans do gain control of Congress and end up being discredited by a failure to keep their impossible promises.

As to the Democratic “enthusiasm gap,” I suspect that the Obama administration has little interest in stirring up the enthusiasm that brought him to power in 2008. One sign of this is the moribund nature of the “Organizing for America” website that was so effective in coordinating grass-roots campaign work. I used it to connect with local Obama activists, donate funds and to participate in well-targeted phone campaigns. And guess what? My account is de-activated, as are those of many others who were part of the Obama 08 effort.

“It’s easy to imagine how Democrats, facing near-unanimous predictions of a wipeout, could bestir themselves to narrow the enthusiasm gap . . . “

Frankly, me dear, I don’t give a damn.

A JUST SOCIETY

ER: Two years from now, we might well be looking at yet another wave — flowing in the opposite direction. Our politics have become tidal.

I would have used the word “faddish” - as in, “fads come and go” - but I still agree with the comment as made.

It would be better for Americans to stop thinking about politics as if it were MPEG-players or some other “Must Have” gadget. I submit that politics, like it or not (and most of us don’t like it in its present form), is key to the future well-being of this nation and its citizens.

More so, Americans must decide what sort of society that they want – one made up of megabuck super-heroes or one of a Just Society for all its members.

I should hope, by now, that we’ve understood z simple fact: Wealth does not trickle down. It stays right up there doing not much of anything for social justice.

One final thought:

Robinson has at least one thing right. Obama can be expected to lie/posture even more after the election. He’ll let the R’s do the heavy lifting for Wall Street (which he has championed thus far) and re-frame the narrative into one wherein the D’s (incompetent and passive-aggressive to the end) reach out to Main Street. It will get pretty nauseating.

It’ll be interesting to see what Berlin does, but there is reason to suspect that Vichy won’t get that much traction here.

Obama may be “popular” but his “approval” poll numbers are falling very rapidly. He will probably run in 2012, but the chances of his getting re-elected cannot be high.

A political vacuum will be created and I think that many people sense this, albeit subconsciously. What will happen after the Democratic Party’s November rout, therefore, will be of great interest.

Well, the cat’s finally out of the bag. The Dems will be creamed and—wow—even Eugene has said that the sky isn’t going to fall. Oh, wow.

There’s that little thing called veto power. Does that mean that we don’t have to lie to ourselves and vote the “lesser of two evils” again? Yes, that’s exactly what it means.

Now, Eugene Robinson and other cheerleaders for Vichy International still want us to know that the Dems are the good guys, the Republicans (Berlin) are the bad guys.

Tweedledee and Tweedledum regularly switch sides every few years, however, and both sides smell equally foul. The first is aggressive-aggressive, and in bed with the lobbyists. The second is passive-aggressive and in bed with the lobbyists. Choose your poison.

Given the fact that public anger and cynicism has never been this strong since the Great Depression, there may be another option this time around. At least that’s what Naomi Klein and Thomas Friedman are talking about, though in a somewhat different fashion.

Here’s hoping that Vichy’s rout is so great that people fall away from that party in ever-greater numbers even after the election—including progressive legislators that are currently still joined at the hip to the DNC.

Maybe in 2012, we’ll be given a real choice, not the faux Vichy/Berlin choice currently on our ballots.

Most of the discussions of the midterm elections insist on approaching the subject monarchically.  That is, the election can be nothing but a referendum on Mr. O and the national Democratic Party.  The monarchical approach is generally coupled with a good deal of ideological analysis, or at least sloganeering.

However, most Congressional and Senatorial races are not actually referendums on the presidency, and most people—the overwhelming majority—do not vote ideologically anyway.  Therefore, most of the analyses which begins with the presidency and its supposed ideology are beside the point.

The loss of seats which the president’s party traditionally suffers during midterm elections is largely a shadow or reflection of the president’s coattails of two years before; many people are swept into office by the coattail effect who cannot be elected without them to ride on.  This is not a matter of ideology or resentment; it is simply a resumption of the normal political habits of the voters.

In general, then, I think the supposedly upcoming Democratic catastrophe is greatly overrated, and that in any case the lists of presidential failings or accomplishments, however accurate, are irrelevant.

It does seem to me that people evaluate casting a piece of paper—and no a
single issue written on it to vote for or against—for a smiling a face but tutored
to guard the system, wld be affective of changing or even emending the basic
structure of US governance!

It seems to me that an overwhelming number of americans [99.99%?] think that
the governmental structure, which arises from the interpretation of US
constitution
[self being considered sacrosant; tho merely interpreted by fallible people] is ok,
but that some people are dishonest or are violating the sacrosancy of the
constitution.
Many believe that just taxing perfectly everything wld be allright. Alas they do
not espy, that there are thousands of economists and mns of people with
millions propositions how to tax people and spend their money.

Nor do they realize that the seeming confusion is part of the structure which
they hold so dear to their hearts.

And so, joe replaces in congress josephine. Next time it is then the other way
around; while others get preselected and only thus ‘elected’ for office, but with
same mind intact!

It does seem that goodcopbadcop still works quite well. So why wld uncle sam
and uncle tom change that?

And there are also uncles hans, pierre, slobodan, joshua, pedro, petar, magnus,
giovani there. Thanks for ur L, R Ear or the Finger!

The only real difference I see between the two parties is rhetoric. Yeah, yeah, so we (as a nation), will put the Republicans back in charge. Will it be any different than the last time Republicans were in charge? No. So, we’ll put Democrats back in charge. Will it be any different? No. The two-party system does nothing but maintain the power of the ruling elite. They are one party of two different flavors.

What would I do?

First, end the wars, and bring the troops home.

Eliminate tax subsidies to corporations and make them all passthrough corps. In fact, eliminate all income and payroll taxes and institute a flat national sales tax (not a VAT) at the retail level, and allow subsidies only for low income people, and exemptions on necessities.

End all subsidies and aid for foreign countries, and actually charge countries for our “security services”.

Cut our losses and establish a Resolution Trust Authority to unwind large, zombie banks.

Eliminate Social Security for the next generation, and establish a real “Safety Net”, if one actually can exist.

Substantially cut defense spending. We don’t need to be the World’s policeman. With 100 or so nukes, we don’t have to worry too much about being invaded. If American companies wish to do business in other parts of the World, they do so at their own risk. The only thing that needs to be protected are the trade routes.

Eliminate most or all social welfare programs, and place responsibility on individuals and communities to develop private, charitable organizations to provide for the poor and underprivileged.

The problem with my plan is, it requires that people be held accountable for their actions, and inaction. The problem in this country, is no one, from the poorest, all the way up to the richest, do not want to be held responsible. They would rather the government assume the responsibility, and sacrifice their freedom. The problem is, the US government was established to “create a more perfect union” between the states, not to alleviate people of their responsibilities.

“Pity the middle class; pity the Democratic Party - it was put to death by its own
elected officials.”
That’s absolutely true. Sometimes it’s hard to grasp how this fraud of a man could take office and breathe life into a dying Republican corpse and then embrace that corpse and its destructive ideology. From his torture to his drones to his spying to his adoration of the wealthy, Obama has done a macabre dance on the graves of the middle class. He has no redeeming traits.
I have no respect for the Democrats, either. Even the so-called “liberals with consciences” (Sanders and Kucinich) wouldn’t stand firm when pressured, and our hopes for at least one or two honest liberals were dashed. None of the Democrats wanted my input when they bailed out the banks or gave more money for wars, and so they aren’t getting my input on November second. The same goes for Obama in 2012.

A real transformation seems to be taking place in
our political system. The two parties are polarizing
further & further apart to the point of being
natural enemies, like lions and hyenas, (take your
pick who is who).
When, as Eugene points out here, the rep.‘s gain
their slimmer than expected majority (I expect in
both houses), it will not be the 2/3rds majority to
overide executive veto.
We’re going to see how a truly lame, self-absorbed,
ego-centric, arrogant, wasteful, and disrespectful
federal government can become even more so. We will
become even less informed of our governments doings
(like that could be possible) since the media will
be covering the congressional in-fighting for all
the dollars it will be worth.
A coworker once told me that spam & bullets were
the only things worth buying - I thought he was a
nut, but now I’m not so sure.

Dear Eugene,

It is difficult to get enthused about the following; Obama has:

1. Gutted real financial reform (no Glass-Steagle, no ‘too big too fail)
2. Rejected the only health care option that would simultaneously extend
coverage and cut costs (single payer)
3. Supported a stingy stimulus (one-third tax breaks)
4. Doubled-down & accelerated the Bush bailouts
5. Escalated a fruitless war in Afghanistan
6. Not helped people in bankruptcy & needing mortgage remediation
7. Not passed a jobs bill & had trouble extending unemployment compensation
8. Ignored previous Republican profligacy, crimes, misdemeanors
9. Used “Heck of a Job, Timmy” to promote low taxes for the wealthy on capital
gains, dividends and ‘carried interest’
10. Sandbagged the ‘Budget Commission’ with Max Baucus clones to cut cut
cut.

If you’re a Democrat, you cannot get enthused about supporting decisions such
as the ten listed above.

We are saddled with a politically inept President; these decisions demonstrate
Obama’s political ineptitude:

A. Kept Bush advisors in the two key areas where people wanted change - the
Economy and the “War on Terror”
B. Believed unrealistically (and kept believing) the Republicans would line up for
“bi-partisanship”
C. Opted to not lead or even act as the “Great Explainer” in the non-Reform of
Health Care
D. Opted to not lead or even act as the “Great Explainer” in the non-Reform of
the Financial System
E. Fled almost all leadership roles in favor of an ‘insider game’ he did not
understand and could not win

Again, it is difficult to get enthused about a politically inept leader.

The so-called enthusiasm gap is of the Democrats own making.

The Democrats have pursued Republican policies (see above list of 10); there is
very little to be enthusiastic about Democrats who pursue Republican policies.

The Democratic President is only a nominal Democrat.

In just a few weeks, Obama’s actions will have cost the country an entire
generation of Democratic leaders, and will be welcoming the opportunity to
practice his beloved ‘bi-partisanship’.

Pity the middle class; pity the Democratic Party - it was put to death by its own
elected officials.

“Posturing, not policy” is a rather excellent definition of our entire political process these stormy days.

If one looks for cuts it might behoove one to consider how much the war costs this nation each and every day. It might be worth a mention to our Tea Party friends that Ronald Wilson Reagan, that icon of the right and Boraxo salesman par excellance, raised taxes twice during his administration. Far from being a deficit hawk he actually set the record for the largest deficit in US history, broken only by Shrubya.

But the real and essential question, untouched by democratic loyalists like Mr. Robinson, remains the staunch loyalties displayed by both major parties towards the MIC, towards waste, unchecked extravagance and fealty to the corporations providing the funds that fuel our increasingly expensive campaigns.

The sad facts remain, despite the refusal of said loyalists to face reality, that the differences between a democratic regime and a republican one is usually slim to none. Look, as prime example, to the current administration and its heinous similarities to the previous one in far too many instances. I have repeatedly mentioned endless war, torture, a refusal to deal with the no longer affordable waste in our defense industry or the waste in general that would make unnecesary the repeated calls for cuts in “entitlements”. I touch upon the absence of re-regulation , so necessary to the health of the nation and the planet as well. Let us dwell for a moment upon that icon of democrats everywhere, Bill Clinton and his budget balanced upon the backs of those he tossed off welfare, a republican solution if ever there was one. I am certain that, if one gives a bit of thought to the subject, that small list could grow quite larger.

Our system is sick and in dire need of healing, as the recourse would seem to be a continued unchecked slide towards fascism. Regardless of which party reigns. It is long past time to put aside loyalties, especially as unfounded as is the outmoded belief in a Democratic Party that exists only inmyth and the minds of tyhose whod well in the past.

It’s understandable for Eugene to be very cautious about this.

After all, his pundit buds and the so-called liberal media are apparently the faintest echo of the conservative echo chamber and little more. They certainly aren’t reflective of the base.

An excellent example is visible to you today.

The media story line is that Jack Conway “went too far” in Kentucky. Even the Democrats are aghast. The very eminent “doctor” Rand Not-My-Whole-First-Name Paul is so livid he won’t even shake Conway’s hand! OMG, Chris Matthews is sputtering! Conway has clearly blown it. It’s over!

Except.

Read the comments from average people, you know, the non-pundit class.

They are overwhelmingly supportive of Conway, who has dared to fight Paul with the truth, and Paul and the conservatives don’t like it one little bit.

Here’s the question though: why is the liberal media continually echoing the conservative perspective? Why are we constantly fed stories about the conservative common wisdom? Where is the activism of our side? Where are the liberals questioning the religious creds of these so-called Christians and their abhorrently un-Christian philosophies and closet of sinful peccadilloes?

There’s one other possibility Eugene skipped in his pantheon of electoral outcomes. What if… crazy as it may seem… what if… we vote.

What if we deny Boehner his curtains? What if we knock Beck for a loop? What if WE turn back the conservative’s anti-American strategy?

We can. Just vote. You don’t even have to believe, man. You just have to act. Election Day is your chance.