Meditations on Yesterday's Entertainment (political)
pl
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Most of the punditocracy reads it as a repudiation of President Hopechange. Fortunately, that rejection is not being read as racism, at least not as yet.
We're all a bunch of racist, misogynist gay haters, mind you, but still.
"Politics, noun. A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." —Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
"Everything is changing. People are taking their comedians seriously and the politicians as a joke." —Will Rogers
At the risk of pissing in the wind on the thread, my apologies for the vulgarity, I think TR got it wrong and those who follow him in the concept of the country misread our history. I recall 48 states and various territories and protectorates or other entities. I believe I have posted in the past here on the concept of our "tale of the tribe" to use Ezra Pound's term for our foundational "myth." Pound was an interesting and accomplished poet plus an arch-traitor, but he pointed to what countries, would-be nations or entity-like nations or empires looked to in order to explain and justify their claims for both territory and sovereignty.
The Greeks look to Homer and Alexander; the Romans look to Virgil, and the Portuguese look to Camoens' _Lusiados_ to name just several "countries" or "Empires.". I will not belabor the point beyond our foundational documents, which I take to be the _Declaration of Independence_ and the _Constitution with the Bill of Rights_. All of our foundational documents are under attack from various vantage points and political perspectives and under interpretation and re-interpretation by parties and the courts, as they have been for years. Just consider our Civil War. They have been from our earliest days, for better or worse, but I would say for better, at least in principle and perhaps in practice.
I would be happy to engage with anyone who would like more than two lines of comment on TR and his views, legacy, and relevance today.
Just the cover Obama needs for his Regime Change Russia campaign. Oops. I mean Operation Ukrainian Freedom. (or whatever new, new neocon name they will call in in 2015).
Was it Petreaus & Boot' directive for NYPD to stop and arrest the 74-year-old veteran that served the US with distinction (whereas Petreaus & Boot seem to care about a certain foreign country?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_McGovern
I look forward to the "opposition party" holding hearings on Obama's failure to prosecute criminal banking activity, Obama's expansion of the surveillance state, Obama's transfer of trillions of dollars to the financial industry, and Obama's penchant for seemingly endless military involement overseas.
Yeah. The only thing that the election results "mean" is exponentially increasing gridlock for the indefinite future.
Bipartisanship is extinct, and has been so for many years. I wonder what Ike would think? I'm guessing it wouldn't be much of a surprise for him.
What ought to happen in our "nation?" Do we still have one? Maybe we should repair and maintain infrastructure, and perhaps make public investments in building new and more advanced "national" infrastructure? Nah. Let's just leave it up to the states.
Perhaps we should expand health insurance coverage beyond the millions of people who have been able to access health insurance under Obamacare -- after years of being denied health insurance. Nah. Let's go back to the way it wuz. Who needs authentic competition between private for-profit health insurance companies, and the subsequent pricing rigor imposed upon the medical profession?
Perhaps we should ensure that the financial sector doesn't sink us again *too soon*? A couple of decades, at least, before another "Lesser Depression?" That would be nice. Although maybe we should get out of the current one first?
The problem with the Republican strategy of opposing Obama no matter what the issue, or no matter what it means for the country as a whole, is that we all end up paying much more for the mindless obstruction than for policies that might result from informed debate and standard deal-making.
Obviously voters never have enough RELIABLE information, but when I have exercised my right to be ignorant, I believe my solemn duty is to abstain from exercising the right to vote.
TR, founder of the Progressive Party. Ironic that we are still having problems with medicine safety, food safety, conservationism, monopolies and oligarchs who think they are more important than statesmen.
I'm a 67 year old woman and my husband and I voted.All of our 5 children voted also. It didn't seem to help our party, but that is the great thing about a democracy, there is always the next time.
Much knashing of teeth from the usual suspects. It appears that in my state voters simply stayed home even with efforts to ease voting and a push for absentee voting.
Even though I have come to dislike both political parties I still vote. Since my polling place is only one block from my house it's very easy to do so. Having lived in many different places in my life, that has not always been the case. For many people a combination of their very full work & family schedule and inconvenient polling location contributes to people not voting. Then there are the apathetic voters.
A few years ago I bought a political science book that I found very helpful (yes, I am aware of the low opinion many people have of political science and I generally share that). It's a short introductory college level textbook I bought used at Amazon called "Culture and Politics: An Introduction to Mass and Elite Behavior" by Oliver Woshinsky. I did not notice a particular political bias, and I appreciated his "how it works" attitude (my engineer mindset likes that approach). While the book is US-centric he uses examples from many countries to highlight his points.
He has some interesting chapters on "Citizen Voting Behavior" especially one called "Who Participates in Politics and Who Doesn't". In one of those is his Pyramid of Political Involvement which goes like this:
"1-3% Influentials – Leaders & full time political activists
10-20% Participants – Regularly active in politics
40-70% Citizens – Voters, occasionally politically active
20-40% Apathetics – Wholly uninvolved in politics" ...
Note that the numbers above are broad, but it gives you some idea of the ratios. Also each level of involvement requires a greater output of time, energy and personal resources than the one below it.
In addition to the normally apathetic types, I think many people feel the system is rigged and that nothing worthwhile will come out of their voting. Can't say I blame them.
Most of the punditocracy reads it as a repudiation of President Hopechange. Fortunately, that rejection is not being read as racism, at least not as yet.
We're all a bunch of racist, misogynist gay haters, mind you, but still.
Posted by: jr786 | 05 November 2014 at 02:16 PM
The hawks are back. http://news.antiwar.com/2014/11/05/hawks-triumph-in-senate-will-push-more-aggressive-us-policy/
Posted by: D. Mathews | 05 November 2014 at 02:29 PM
TR. Hear Hear!! If it were so!!😎
Posted by: SteveG | 05 November 2014 at 03:22 PM
Once the current dodging and prancing ends (if ever) we shall see if there is any support for Mr. Roosevelt's position. Time to get real.
Posted by: curtis | 05 November 2014 at 04:29 PM
It will indeed be interesting to see how patriotic the new Congress turns out to be.
Posted by: shege | 05 November 2014 at 04:39 PM
Some voting cartoons http://www.grantland.net/voting.htm
"Politics, noun. A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." —Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
"Everything is changing. People are taking their comedians seriously and the politicians as a joke." —Will Rogers
Posted by: Valissa | 05 November 2014 at 05:35 PM
Now we'll see some real something or other!
Posted by: Edward Amame | 05 November 2014 at 05:40 PM
At the risk of pissing in the wind on the thread, my apologies for the vulgarity, I think TR got it wrong and those who follow him in the concept of the country misread our history. I recall 48 states and various territories and protectorates or other entities. I believe I have posted in the past here on the concept of our "tale of the tribe" to use Ezra Pound's term for our foundational "myth." Pound was an interesting and accomplished poet plus an arch-traitor, but he pointed to what countries, would-be nations or entity-like nations or empires looked to in order to explain and justify their claims for both territory and sovereignty.
The Greeks look to Homer and Alexander; the Romans look to Virgil, and the Portuguese look to Camoens' _Lusiados_ to name just several "countries" or "Empires.". I will not belabor the point beyond our foundational documents, which I take to be the _Declaration of Independence_ and the _Constitution with the Bill of Rights_. All of our foundational documents are under attack from various vantage points and political perspectives and under interpretation and re-interpretation by parties and the courts, as they have been for years. Just consider our Civil War. They have been from our earliest days, for better or worse, but I would say for better, at least in principle and perhaps in practice.
I would be happy to engage with anyone who would like more than two lines of comment on TR and his views, legacy, and relevance today.
Posted by: Haralambos | 05 November 2014 at 06:42 PM
Just the cover Obama needs for his Regime Change Russia campaign. Oops. I mean Operation Ukrainian Freedom. (or whatever new, new neocon name they will call in in 2015).
Posted by: Fred | 05 November 2014 at 07:13 PM
If you comment, and a U.S. citizen, could you say whether you voted?
It's interesting how little of the registered electorate voted.
(I'm not american.)
Posted by: crf | 05 November 2014 at 07:43 PM
Here is a story of Ray McGovern' arrest at 92Y, when he tried to attend an event featuring Petreaus and Boot:
http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2014/10/31/former-cia-analyst-ray-mcgovern-arrested-while-trying-to-attend-david-petraeus-event-in-new-york/
Was it Petreaus & Boot' directive for NYPD to stop and arrest the 74-year-old veteran that served the US with distinction (whereas Petreaus & Boot seem to care about a certain foreign country?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_McGovern
Posted by: Anna-Marina | 05 November 2014 at 09:52 PM
Colonel,
Sen. McCain power just became a whole lot stronger in the Senate Armed Services come January.
Posted by: J | 05 November 2014 at 10:36 PM
TR's wise words from outside the box. Truth in perspective.
Posted by: C Webb | 06 November 2014 at 01:08 AM
I look forward to the "opposition party" holding hearings on Obama's failure to prosecute criminal banking activity, Obama's expansion of the surveillance state, Obama's transfer of trillions of dollars to the financial industry, and Obama's penchant for seemingly endless military involement overseas.
Right?
Posted by: steve | 06 November 2014 at 01:50 AM
Yeah. The only thing that the election results "mean" is exponentially increasing gridlock for the indefinite future.
Bipartisanship is extinct, and has been so for many years. I wonder what Ike would think? I'm guessing it wouldn't be much of a surprise for him.
What ought to happen in our "nation?" Do we still have one? Maybe we should repair and maintain infrastructure, and perhaps make public investments in building new and more advanced "national" infrastructure? Nah. Let's just leave it up to the states.
Perhaps we should expand health insurance coverage beyond the millions of people who have been able to access health insurance under Obamacare -- after years of being denied health insurance. Nah. Let's go back to the way it wuz. Who needs authentic competition between private for-profit health insurance companies, and the subsequent pricing rigor imposed upon the medical profession?
Perhaps we should ensure that the financial sector doesn't sink us again *too soon*? A couple of decades, at least, before another "Lesser Depression?" That would be nice. Although maybe we should get out of the current one first?
The problem with the Republican strategy of opposing Obama no matter what the issue, or no matter what it means for the country as a whole, is that we all end up paying much more for the mindless obstruction than for policies that might result from informed debate and standard deal-making.
Posted by: JM | 06 November 2014 at 07:31 AM
crf
I voted. I always vote. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 06 November 2014 at 09:05 AM
Cee
Sometimes you eat the bear. Sometimes the bear eats you. It means that you do not always win. it is in the nature of life. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 06 November 2014 at 09:07 AM
Obviously voters never have enough RELIABLE information, but when I have exercised my right to be ignorant, I believe my solemn duty is to abstain from exercising the right to vote.
Posted by: rjj | 06 November 2014 at 09:57 AM
TR, founder of the Progressive Party. Ironic that we are still having problems with medicine safety, food safety, conservationism, monopolies and oligarchs who think they are more important than statesmen.
Posted by: SAC Brat | 06 November 2014 at 10:11 AM
I'm a 67 year old woman and my husband and I voted.All of our 5 children voted also. It didn't seem to help our party, but that is the great thing about a democracy, there is always the next time.
Posted by: Nancy K | 06 November 2014 at 10:22 AM
Col.,
Much knashing of teeth from the usual suspects. It appears that in my state voters simply stayed home even with efforts to ease voting and a push for absentee voting.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2014/11/06/michigan-democrats-absentee-voting/18568041/
Posted by: Fred | 06 November 2014 at 10:35 AM
crf,
Even though I have come to dislike both political parties I still vote. Since my polling place is only one block from my house it's very easy to do so. Having lived in many different places in my life, that has not always been the case. For many people a combination of their very full work & family schedule and inconvenient polling location contributes to people not voting. Then there are the apathetic voters.
A few years ago I bought a political science book that I found very helpful (yes, I am aware of the low opinion many people have of political science and I generally share that). It's a short introductory college level textbook I bought used at Amazon called "Culture and Politics: An Introduction to Mass and Elite Behavior" by Oliver Woshinsky. I did not notice a particular political bias, and I appreciated his "how it works" attitude (my engineer mindset likes that approach). While the book is US-centric he uses examples from many countries to highlight his points.
He has some interesting chapters on "Citizen Voting Behavior" especially one called "Who Participates in Politics and Who Doesn't". In one of those is his Pyramid of Political Involvement which goes like this:
"1-3% Influentials – Leaders & full time political activists
10-20% Participants – Regularly active in politics
40-70% Citizens – Voters, occasionally politically active
20-40% Apathetics – Wholly uninvolved in politics" ...
Note that the numbers above are broad, but it gives you some idea of the ratios. Also each level of involvement requires a greater output of time, energy and personal resources than the one below it.
In addition to the normally apathetic types, I think many people feel the system is rigged and that nothing worthwhile will come out of their voting. Can't say I blame them.
Posted by: Valissa | 06 November 2014 at 10:58 AM
Wonder where ISIS took to...
Posted by: makosog | 06 November 2014 at 11:47 AM
Voted here Pepub even though NJ is a Dem stronghold.
Posted by: makosog | 06 November 2014 at 11:48 AM
Nope. They should concentrate on the issues at hand and pass a lot of bills to smoke out Obama as the "veto prez...
Posted by: makosog | 06 November 2014 at 11:52 AM