It is a truly remarkable feat, in just one year's time, to turn the fear and anger voters felt in 2006 and 2008 at a Republican Party that had destroyed the economy, redistributed massive amounts of wealth from the middle class to the richest of the rich and the biggest of big businesses, and waged a trillion-dollar war in the wrong country, into populist rage at whatever Democrat voters can cast their ballot against.So writes Drew Westen on CommonDreams/HuffPost this week. He goes on to recount Obama's lapses, while I digress.
Because it is difficult to me to look at that record and not to think that THAT--absorbing all that rage and animus--was EXACTLY what he was selected to do.
Because, while it is truly miraculous for any regime to have accomplished so much so soon to deflect blame, responsibility and accountability AWAY from the departed Busheviki and absorb it, shamwow-like, unto and onto the Dims & "thePrez," it was not unanticipated. In my opinion, it was fore-ordained. It was a condition of the job. I'll bet there is a contract somewhere setting out Pres. Obama's "duties" to absolve the Busheviki, in exchange for becoming the first ("______") Prez.
In fact, as I have stated often, elsewhere, I believe that to have been the reason Obama (or Hillary) were DESIGNATED to be the eventual Dim nominees. Either would have served the Owners to illustrate the futility of entrusting the State to any but the usual suspects: rich WHITE men. Either would have made a perfectly adequate scapegoat.
What happens if you refuse to lay the blame for the destruction of our economy on anyone--particularly the party, leaders, and ideology that were in power for the last 8 years and were responsible for it? What happens if you fail to "brand" what has happened as the Bush Depression or the Republican Depression or the natural result of the ideology of unregulated greed, the way FDR branded the Great Depression as Hoover's Depression and created a Democratic majority for 50 years and a new vision of what effective government can do? What happens when you fail to offer and continually reinforce a narrative about what has happened, who caused it, and how you're going to fix it that Americans understand, that makes them angry, that makes them hopeful, and that makes them committed to you and your policies during the tough times that will inevitably lie ahead?When you know your job is NOT to blame the white establishment, but absorb the blame your own black self, what happens is: Mission Accomplished!
And that_will_be_that for the political aspirations of women and/or any other marginalized "minority." SCROTUS decision in CU v. FEC assured that outcome for all time. Freedom of speech, in politics, at least, is nothing more than a flaky, rhetorical device.
"Oh, no!" you say, "we can pass laws, a constitutional amendment, to save popular sovereignty!"
No, I am sorry, no, we can't. Weren't you paying attention?
As a result of the CU v. FEC decision, no Congresscritter who does not possess an unlimited personal fortune can or should be expected to buck the will of CorpoRat constituents who can either donate millions to ensure her or his election, or donate the same amount to her/his defeat by an opponent selected for compliance and moral pliability.
Not Congresscritters alone, of course, are now subject to the unabated lash of corpoRat/fat cat/special interest cash. It also affects ANY OTHER elected official, at any level--which is what makes this decision so desperately and egregiously and perniciously wrong. And the lowser down the ranks you move, the more venal and desperate become the cfandidates to whom advantages can and will be offered.
So, though you don't know it yet, apparently, you have just seen the curtain wrung silently down on your ability to contribute meaningfully to the political debate, unless you command millions of dollars with to buy your representatives' seat at the table in your name.
Hope you enjoyed the ride...Y'all come back, y'hear?