Democracy In action

The big summit at Blair House has come and gone, and things remain as they were. Is anyone surprised by this? Predictably, the Republicans used it as a forum to speechify about how appalled they are by the proceedings thus far. Without asking any specific questions, or offering any detailed recommendations, they simply used the occasion to replay the past year in a series of speeches in which they continued to perfect their already superb rendition of fake outrage: “We can’t believe that you would put unrelated things in that bill! It’s pork, I tells ya, and we wouldn’t touch it with our dainty fingers! And just look at how big this thing is! Yuck!” Like they never put out a bill that wasn’t loaded with special favors, or massively larger than it neeed to be. Suddenly the age-old traditions of bill-processing catches them unawares, and it is just too much for their delicate sensibilities.

Eric Kantor predictably brought a copy of the bill (or else several reams of blank copy paper) as a prop. What’s next, a rubber chicken? Rep. Kyl actually lectured the President about the issue, which is like explaining the Theory of Relativity to Albert Einstein. After a full day of this kind of blather and posturing, Obama’s jaw was so tight from flexing that it began to resemble a bicep.

And the Democrats were scarcely better. Realizing that the entire event had turned into nothing more than another Republican campaign stop for the 2010 election, they became progressively less polite as the day wore on. Harry Reid looked (finally) as though he realized he should have crammed reconciliation down their throats months ago. Not too late, Harry. The GOPs continued to demonize the legislative tactic they were only too happy to use when it suited them, only to become belatedly fastidious when the opposition uses the same means.

We’re in a dangerous position here, and it extends beyond this one (albeit crucial) issue. Nourished by a repetitious media, the American public is increasingly despairing of the ability of Congress to function in any way, other than to protect special interests. This is nothing new of course. The lure of power and largess has turned many an honest man bad before. It was so bad during the Great Depression, that over 20% of the population turned towards Socialism or Communism as a preferred means of obtaining relief or redress.

What’s different now is that the drum beat of anger is being stirred up by so many more television and internet apostles of revolt. A population under severe economic stress, being told that Congress is irredeemably broken, that radical change is necessary and right, and with access to untold amounts of weaponry, is a dangerous thing indeed.

On a lighter note, Dick Cheney suffered his 67th heart attack recently. I’m not going to make the obvious joke that the doctor found nothing in there. In fact, I don’t even want Dick to die. Not yet. See, I’m still holding out hope that he will be called to account one day, that the hoped-for war crimes trial will be held, and that we will get to enjoy his perp walk to oblivion.Then, let nature take its course.

Keep smiling.

News From the Front

So Joe Stack III banked his Piper Cherokee into an IRS building in Austin Texas and took two lives along with his own. He had fought for many years against the government and its tax policies and finally, in a Quixote-like gesture, charged the symbolic source of his woe. Like Quixote, he was deluded and unbalanced. And like the fictional hero, he will have his admirers.

Having done a quick check of reactions on the interweb I would say that he is receiving a 60% favorable response to his crime, calling him a patriot and making recommendations for a statue to be erected in his honor. And here’s the thing: an angry, bitter man in his life, his words are being read by millions following his death. Is there a lesson in this for any other would-be martyrs?

I read his so-called manifesto. There is nothing particularly political about it: he hated all politicians, and the government generally, and the IRS specifically. He did not appear, at least in this writing, to adhere to any particular group. But watch the right latch on to him. He will become one of their secular heroes. And Glen Beck will shed a tear or two. That’s right: he’ll say that it was unfortunate that he did what he did, but that he can understand how he was driven to this act. Make no mistake Glen. This murderer is one of your children. You have helped create the atmosphere where something like this is not only possible, but seems like a reasonable response. Yes, Joe Stack will be owned by the right.

The media will have its usual say, telling us that there are extremists on both sides, that violence is not limited to right wingnuts, that both are responsible for the breakdown in civil discourse. But remember: It is the right which violently attacks and kills, at abortion clinics, at homes, at churches.

It is the right that happily shuts down the work of government, without regard to their stand on the issues, only to serve a political end.

It is the right which vilifies government aid to struggling states publicly, while accepting the checks quietly.

It is the right which forms a new political movement in the name of tax reform, while it turns a blind eye to the virulent racism with which it is imbued.

It is the right which has perfected “blame the victim”.

It is the right which has created paramilitary groups armed to the teeth, with the avowed aim of overthrowing the democracy.

It is the right which has been busy stockpiling weapons and ammo for years, but especially since the last election, creating a much more dangerous environment, all the while clinging to a bogus reading of the second amendment.

So don’t tell me that there are extremists on both sides. Don’t tell me that the violence and evil intent is comparable, because the facts will not support you.

Joe Stack killed and died because he believed that the government was engaged in a nefarious plot against him. To the right I say: you can have him. We don’t want him.

Can I Get a Hero?

What makes a hero?

It used to be a term reserved for unique individuals, those who sacrificed all on behalf of others. In ancient Greece, to be a hero was to be on a par with the gods. In Rome heroes excelled in war, often at the cost of their lives, and when the danger had passed, if they survived, they were expected to return to their regular lives. Or they might have sought high office, perhaps as Consul. As time went on, heroism was seen as a path to higher station, and not necessarily as an end in itself.

In later days we have heard countless tales of heroism, often in war time. The common assumption was that an individual did not seek glory, but did the hard thing. Maybe he was afraid, wishing he were somewhere else, but when bravery was called for, he stepped up. He didn’t brag about it. We usually heard about his courage from others. This was true throughout the Second World War, when “heroes” insisted that the truly brave ones were those who did not return.

Who are the heroes of today? Are they as rare, as special as they once were? Let’s see. I do know that you hear the word hero thrown around a lot more than ever.

For starters, every one who puts on a soldier’s uniform today is automatically called a hero. This is without regard to what they do, whether here in the U.S. or overseas. What would older generations of service men think, when they blushed at the thought of being referred to as heroic, knowing that they had done nothing to deserve it? You could sit on your ass in Ft. Dix for the duration, counting rations, but don’t worry, you’re a hero. Hey, that they sacrifice something for their country is not in question. It is notable, even special. But heroic?

This also goes for anyone who wears a uniform. Police or Fire, you’re a hero. Now, if you run into a burning tower believing that its collapse is imminent, knowing that you’re probably not going to survive, but running in anyway to possibly save a life, then not to worry brother, you are a hero, and you can have a statue erected in your honor. Hell, I’ll help to put it up.

So, to recap, anyone in uniform is a hero. Postal worker, boy scout, ticket taker, lunch lady. Heroes, one and all.

But just in case you think that the bar is still a little high, in this modern, no-effort life we have here in the U.S., think again. How many times have you heard children, when asked who their heroes are, cite their parents Yes, all you have to do is have a kid, and you too can be a hero. If you do the things a parent is supposed to do, you get patted on the back. What could be easier? None of that messy, dangerous stuff for you.

Maybe you don’t have kids. Maybe you’re a social disaster, or have problems with the ladies. That’s OK. There are millions of children who have been raised with an artificially lowered expectation of what should constitute a hero. Give them a candy bar, and they’ll probably think that you’re a hero! Yes, you don’t actually have to do anything!

And that’s not all. There is a new category of hero. One who not only doesn’t have to do anything, but has only to be alive. Yes, if you survive a terrible disease, you are considered a hero. For some reason, this only seems to work with cancer. If you have diabetes, or cholera, or rickets, you are just some schmuck who got sick, and then got lucky (on a count of you didn’t die). But, if you get cancer and come out of it, you are a survivor! You get a parade, and believe me, you are a hero. If you got cancer and died, it’s sad, but no matter how hard you fought, whatever spirit you showed, you’re not quite a hero.

Isn’t this a great country?

How Many Lumps?

The inaugural Tea Party convention is this weekend, and I find myself wishing that I was there.

I want to walk among them, take pictures and video and interview them. I want to hear from individuals, what they want changed, and what they get out of the loose organization that is Tea Partydom. I want to do it until my head literally explodes, and the media story becomes one about the strange, exploding head guy, and not about Sarah Palin and whether or not the Republicans are trying to highjack the incipient movement.

See, I’ve been lying low, blogwise, while I’ve been trying to assess what my feelings ought to be regarding the Partyites. I’ve even stopped referring to them as teabaggers, as much fun as that was. I know that they are pissed off at the disfunction of Congress, the way big banks are getting no-conditions bailouts, and how the government has driven this country into a ditch. Those things piss me off too. There are some legitimate grievances here. So I thought, I’ll try to hear them out, get past the worst rhetoric and see what they really have to say.

Then I remembered that they take their talking points and inspiration from Glen Beck.

Many of them say that they hate Republicans as much as I do.

Then I remembered that their pin up girl is Sarah Palin, late nominee for the Vice Presidency.

They favor bettering the condition of the common man, and are sincerely populist in their views.

Then I remembered that I have never seen a black Tea Partyer, nor a Hispanic one, or heard any of them speak responsibly or rationally about immigration policies.

Then I listened to Tom Tancredo give the keynote address today at the Tea Party convention kickoff at Opryland (seriously, the event is being held at an Opryland site). The microphone had a bad buzz going, but what he had to say came across clearly. Much of it was virulently anti-immigrant, with one-liners about how a lot of them can’t spell ‘vote”, or at least not in English. The crowd, as they say, went wild. He denigrated Barrack “Hussein” Obama (another huge ovation), and, knowing his audience, took a lot of time to bash John McCain.

Then he asked for a commitment from the crowd to pass on “our Judeo-Christian culture”, since it’s what made our country great, again to rousing cheers. Anyone not liking it, he suggested, could go back home. I guess the folks who actually DID build Nashville, back in the good old antebellum days, were not representative of the Tea Folk as far as complexion is concerned, and came from somewhere south of the Judeo-Christian source, and under duress. He wound up his talk with praise for the American flag, and managed to summon up some real fake tears in the process. At least he’s been paying attention to Fox.

And then I figured that it’s something like this: If I were in some group, and a lot (okay, most) of them espoused values that were so far from mine - like racism, homophobia, the end of a woman’s control over her own reproductive rights, the embrace of pseudoscience,and a willingness to believe and support all manner of hate speech, then I guess I would not let myself be a part of that organization. It would be like saying Hitler was okay because autobahns are cool, even though I don’t hold with the rest of his program.

And that’s just one of the reasons that we part ways.