Posts
I’ve always been a fan of the underdog, in my sports teams, music I listen to and companies I support. The “David vs. Goliath” scenario has always intrigued me. While sometimes these match-ups end up being more media hype than a legitimate mismatch, this year’s run by George Mason University, rising like cream, from the bottom of the pile of 64 basketball teams, to the NCAA Men’s Final Four, is the real deal and has captivated both the hard-core fan and jaded sports enthusiasts, alike.
To give you an idea of how my favorite teams usually fared, I’ll share one from my boyhood, that being about the 1972 Texas Rangers. I fell in love with this team due to my enjoyment of watching the underdog Washington Senators and huge Frank Howard (6'6", 250 pounds), who appeared larger than life, even on the primitive black and white TV that I first watched Red Sox games on. I also developed a fixation for a young Senators' player, Jeff Burroughs, a powerful right-handed slugger, who as an 18-year-old bonus baby, received his hitting instruction from a manager named Ted Williams, a pretty good hitter in his own right. The ’72 Rangers were a woeful team, hence, my fascination with them. With a woeful 54-100 record, they finished dead last in the American League West Division that summer. Burroughs showed his appreciation for my adulation by never answering the 15 or more requests I sent him for an autograph. Fucking asshole!! (Apparently still a sore spot)
Williams had been voted AL manager-of-the-year in 1969, for leading the Senators to a respectable 3rd place finish. If you know the Senators’ sordid past, you’ll know that winning 86 games as their skipper made Williams worthy of that honor. Williams followed up his successful 1969 campaign with season totals of 72 wins in 1970 and 69 wins in 1971. In 1972, Williams and his Senators found themselves in the Texas no-man’s-land of Arlington, midway between Dallas and Fort Worth. While the Splendid Splinter was a wonderful hitter and reputable hitting coach, he was never much of a manager. At the end of ’72, the late Red Sox slugger found himself out of a job.
Back to George Mason. This unlikely crew of college basketball players have captivated college basketball fans nationwide. Despite finishing the regular season with a 23-7 mark, they were a surprise selection for the NCAA tournament, mostly because the Colonial Athletic Conference (CAA), isn’t considered one of the elite conferences and there were doubts about their strength of schedule. They did win a key “bracket buster” game against perennial national power, Wichita State, back in February (and also beat them in the NCAA tournament). Still, the CAA hasn’t receive an at-large invitation to the big dance since 1986, when Richmond (now a member of the Atlantic-10) received an at-large invitation.
Despite the incredulity expressed by ESPN host, Billy Packer, at GMU’s at-large bid to the tourney, all GMU has done is march through the NCAA field, with four upset victories and now will face Florida (a great story in their own right) tomorrow, at 6:05 PM. Can this Hollywood movie in the making script give us one more (or the unthinkable, two) victory?
What I’ve been impressed with about GMU, is that unlike many other traditional basketball powers, who year-after-year end up in the Final Four, this university is actually a school where the emphasis has always been on academics. It’s ironic that a school like Mason, has to rely on college athletics to receive any national attention. As their president, Alan Merten (in an interview with C-Span’s Brian Lamb, this AM) expressed, this is a great opportunity for the school and sometimes, particularly for a school like his—only in existence since 1972—sports success is what it takes to get noticed. Obviously he understands America’s obsession with “bread and circuses.”
One interesting note about George Mason, since immigration policy has dominated the news of late, is the diversity of this Fairfax, Virginia-based school. There are 140 different nationalities on campus, as well as 85 languages represented. Merten mentioned that 30 to 35 percent of the student body are either foreign-born or first-generation Americans.
Will the Patriots be able to finish strong with their improbable Cinderella story? Obviously, it would be a Hollywood scenario, ala Hoosiers, if they did in fact beat the higher-seed, Florida. One thing is for certain, much of the country will be rooting for them.
The Washington Post does a nice article on the team’s coach, Jim Larranaga.
Friday, March 31, 2006
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Liberals kill kids
I’m all for freedom of religion. While I no longer find much validity in practicing any organized form of spirituality, I don’t hold it against others who gain strength and solace from a belief in a higher being.
Then again, when I hear right-wing windbags like Rick Scarborough, blather his nonsense about how “liberals are killing kids,” I suddenly get defensive and think about reneging on my kindness and magnanimity towards religious folk.
What I have to tell myself is that right-leaning nut jobs like Rick Scarborough, are dyed-in-the-wool members of the American Taliban and that he doesn’t represent most religious practitioners in America, just a small, vocal minority. Oh, but an annoying minority they are.
This morning, one of my favorite progressive radio jocks, Rachel Maddow, of Air America, graciously extended an invitation to Scarborough, to talk about his book, Liberalism Kills Kids. With the book’s provocative title and more than enough experience with small-minded religious bigots, like Scarborough, I wasn’t feeling overly optimistic for Maddow’s chances of conducting an honest interview with Scarborough. My doubts had nothing to do with Maddow, who is a tough, but fair-minded interviewer. My concern was blowhards like Scarborough, who talk, talk, talk and never allow the host a word, edgewise.
Scarborough didn’t disappoint me. He rarely allowed Maddow any opportunity to conduct an interview. He ran his mouth, nonstop, during the entire segment. Maddow was only able to get an opportunity to talk by shaming Scarborough into giving up the mike for just a few seconds.
The best part of Scarborough’s playing the victim card, was his insistence that America persecutes Christians and prevents them from practicing their faith. What gives so-called followers of Jesus, like Scarborough, such a persecution complex? They continually assert that their rights are being violated, with little hard evidence to support that contention. In fact, I'd say that anti-intellectual bigots, like Scarborough, have had more than their fair share of face time given them, by the mainstream media. IMHO, I'd be more than happy to see them crawl back under the slippery rock they slithered from.
Then again, when I hear right-wing windbags like Rick Scarborough, blather his nonsense about how “liberals are killing kids,” I suddenly get defensive and think about reneging on my kindness and magnanimity towards religious folk.
What I have to tell myself is that right-leaning nut jobs like Rick Scarborough, are dyed-in-the-wool members of the American Taliban and that he doesn’t represent most religious practitioners in America, just a small, vocal minority. Oh, but an annoying minority they are.
This morning, one of my favorite progressive radio jocks, Rachel Maddow, of Air America, graciously extended an invitation to Scarborough, to talk about his book, Liberalism Kills Kids. With the book’s provocative title and more than enough experience with small-minded religious bigots, like Scarborough, I wasn’t feeling overly optimistic for Maddow’s chances of conducting an honest interview with Scarborough. My doubts had nothing to do with Maddow, who is a tough, but fair-minded interviewer. My concern was blowhards like Scarborough, who talk, talk, talk and never allow the host a word, edgewise.
Scarborough didn’t disappoint me. He rarely allowed Maddow any opportunity to conduct an interview. He ran his mouth, nonstop, during the entire segment. Maddow was only able to get an opportunity to talk by shaming Scarborough into giving up the mike for just a few seconds.
The best part of Scarborough’s playing the victim card, was his insistence that America persecutes Christians and prevents them from practicing their faith. What gives so-called followers of Jesus, like Scarborough, such a persecution complex? They continually assert that their rights are being violated, with little hard evidence to support that contention. In fact, I'd say that anti-intellectual bigots, like Scarborough, have had more than their fair share of face time given them, by the mainstream media. IMHO, I'd be more than happy to see them crawl back under the slippery rock they slithered from.
Monday, March 27, 2006
Myths, stereotypes and scapegoating
America is a nation of myths. Many Americans, refusing to learn the sophistication necessary to resist hate speech and anti-immigrant propaganda, continue to perpetuate many stories and urban legends regarding those who come here from other countries. Additionally, the use of stereotypes and scapegoating apparently helps them to feel more secure.
Take for example, a story on Saturday, in the Boston Globe. This illustrates how looking at facts and evidence dispels many of these myths.
The example found in the Globe, shows that drug usage, often blamed on those damn “minorities,” is actually fueled by white people and their predisposition to illegal narcotics. Yet, even though the Globe story references a study commissioned by the Boston Public Health Commission, many Bostonians will continue to blame the scourge of drugs on people with darker complexions.
The current furor being raised over immigration is another example of how it is so much easier to stereotype and scapegoat Hispanics and others, wanting to come here, with aspirations for a better life. However, politicians and others have used fear and misinformation to once again paint an ugly picture that varies remarkably from the facts.
Our country has a long history of anti-immigrant bias, going back to the 18th century when Ben Franklin said that German immigrants “will never assimilate, learn English, and understand freedom.”
When American deplore our country being “taken over by immigrants,” the actual percentage of foreign born citizens currently stands at 8 percent of the total population, compared to the rate being as high as 15 percent from 1870, to 1920, when my own grandparents arrived from Germany.
Rather than most immigrants arriving illegally, eight out of 11 actually arrive via legal means. And rather than focusing on the “scourge” of illegals swarming across our borders, endangering us, we might want to look at the history of how immigrants are exploited by corporations and other true-blue Americans, such as Mount Olive Pickle, and others. This is the real story of immigration. Groups like the Coalition of Immokalee Workers and their ongoing work to publicize the way that immigrant farm workers continue to be mistreated and experience an uphill struggle to be treated with dignity and receive fair pay for honest work, is just one example of an organization bringing some sanity to the discussion of immigration. The problem with the truth, however, is the capacity it has to make bigoted and racially backward white people a little uncomfortable, enough so that they return to their palatable stereotypes and the scapegoating of immigrants.
I urge readers to refrain from stereotypes and scapegoating and learn to break down long held myths, often rooted in lies and half-truths. The tactics of divide and conquer used by the elite in our nation, makes all the rest of us weaker and vulnerable.
Take for example, a story on Saturday, in the Boston Globe. This illustrates how looking at facts and evidence dispels many of these myths.
The example found in the Globe, shows that drug usage, often blamed on those damn “minorities,” is actually fueled by white people and their predisposition to illegal narcotics. Yet, even though the Globe story references a study commissioned by the Boston Public Health Commission, many Bostonians will continue to blame the scourge of drugs on people with darker complexions.
The current furor being raised over immigration is another example of how it is so much easier to stereotype and scapegoat Hispanics and others, wanting to come here, with aspirations for a better life. However, politicians and others have used fear and misinformation to once again paint an ugly picture that varies remarkably from the facts.
Our country has a long history of anti-immigrant bias, going back to the 18th century when Ben Franklin said that German immigrants “will never assimilate, learn English, and understand freedom.”
When American deplore our country being “taken over by immigrants,” the actual percentage of foreign born citizens currently stands at 8 percent of the total population, compared to the rate being as high as 15 percent from 1870, to 1920, when my own grandparents arrived from Germany.
Rather than most immigrants arriving illegally, eight out of 11 actually arrive via legal means. And rather than focusing on the “scourge” of illegals swarming across our borders, endangering us, we might want to look at the history of how immigrants are exploited by corporations and other true-blue Americans, such as Mount Olive Pickle, and others. This is the real story of immigration. Groups like the Coalition of Immokalee Workers and their ongoing work to publicize the way that immigrant farm workers continue to be mistreated and experience an uphill struggle to be treated with dignity and receive fair pay for honest work, is just one example of an organization bringing some sanity to the discussion of immigration. The problem with the truth, however, is the capacity it has to make bigoted and racially backward white people a little uncomfortable, enough so that they return to their palatable stereotypes and the scapegoating of immigrants.
I urge readers to refrain from stereotypes and scapegoating and learn to break down long held myths, often rooted in lies and half-truths. The tactics of divide and conquer used by the elite in our nation, makes all the rest of us weaker and vulnerable.
Friday, March 24, 2006
Leadership deferred
Often, it’s difficult to focus the laser of critique on one cause for the current myriad of problems besetting America. While there are obviously many that choose to wear rose-colored glasses in looking at the world, a realist doesn’t have to look long, or hard at these issues, to recognize that something just isn’t right.
At the risk of sounding simplistic and incurring the charge of playing the nostalgia card, I think one of our core deficiencies as Americans is the dearth of any kind of leadership, whether we’re talking about politics, business, sports, or any other sphere of American life.
The current culture of corruption that appears to be a pandemic has overtaken every aspect of our daily routines. From the very top, flowing downwards from D.C. to Peoria, Poughkeepsie and Portland, this lack of leadership is exacting a heavy toll in the present, but more importantly, the ramifications concerning our future are infused with greater gravity.
Last night, during question time after my presentation to a small, but spirited audience at the public library in South Portland, the subject came up concerning the changes in our towns that have led to the loss of community and connectedness. One gentleman talked about how youngsters today, have every aspect of their lives organized for them. Unlike the past, when sandlot baseball games and other childhood pursuits forced children to learn how to deal with conflict, our present day finds childhood overly structured and totally controlled by parents and other adults. As a result, young people never experience real-life crisis management and don’t learn how to resolve differences and conflict.
By extension, this leads to an entire generation who not only haven’t acquired leadership skills, but also, the current crop of so-called elders, who should be modeling leadership, are instead teaching our youth that pragmatic corruption is the way to go.
Here is just one more example of how our current president, says one thing and when the cameras and microphones are turned off, resorts to his usual duplicitous ways. How can we expect and exact honesty, integrity and ethics from our youngest citizens, when at every turn, they see corruption, greed and cruelty applauded and handsomely rewarded?
This culture of corruption and greed is a national crisis and unless we corporately find a way to correct this downward spiral, I can’t see much hope at all for the future. I’m obviously not a believer in Social Darwinism. To hold to that philosophy leads to a race to the bottom, which is the direction we are headed as a nation.
How do we correct this and right the ship? I’m not optimistic that we can, unless we see a radical re-engineering of society. We are way beyond the ability to put Band-aid fixes on our problems. From the crisis of peak oil, to the devastation of our environment and extending to our increasing gap between the rich and everyone else, our fixation on military solutions over diplomacy and ultimately holding the belief that technology can save us from ourselves, is delusional thinking at best and potentially apocalyptic, at worst. Putting our faith in “bling, bling” violates the most basic tenets of religion and it certainly heaps manure on aspects of any kind of meaningful social contract.
Hyper-capitalism, paired with our belief that technology will ride in on a white horse to save us, is a fairy tale. Many pride themselves on their rationalism when it comes to believing in a deity, or higher power, yet they are worse than the most rabid fundamentalist when it comes to recognizing that the gods of money, power, and technology are just as powerless to save them, as is pie-in-the-sky religious belief.
Like any trouble-shooter worth their pay, Americans need to trace our way back to a place and time when things worked. At least a time when democracy hadn’t become a national joke and the defining measure of a man (or woman) wasn’t the size of their bank account (or cup size), or the prestige derived from the automobile they drove, or the house they lived in.
Personally, I don’t have to look back that far to remember people that I knew growing up, who modeled to me the kind of bedrock values I’m talking about. I’m not nostalgically hearkening back to some golden age, either. My late father-in-law, a member of the last great generation of Americans, the WWII set, was a daily example of an American who possessed integrity and carried himself with dignity. He didn’t live a life of glitz and didn’t rely on conspicuous consumption to define who he was. He regularly gave many hours to his community, church (Unitarian Universalist), and family, asking nothing in return. There were tens of thousands of others, just like him, members of a generation that’s disappearing. I fear that no one is willing, or even capable to step forward to fill the void that’s left with their departures.
As I mentioned to my audience last night, I could name countless men and women that I knew personally, growing up in my small town of Lisbon Falls, who modeled integrity to a young lad like me. Many of them were my paper route customers. From the quiet dignity of their lives lived, shaped by Yankee frugality and the golden rule, these people left an indelible mark on me that’s impossible to ignore.
Lately, I find myself thinking a lot about those days of yesteryear. Of living in a place where the size of your home, or the car you drove didn’t matter to your friends, or your family. A place where you knew your neighbors and regardless of what was happening in other parts of the world, your little corner seemed secure and in capable hands.
At the present time, I don’t have any faith that anyone’s at the switch, whether it’s here in my hometown of Durham, at the state house in Augusta, or in our nation’s seat of power, Washington, D.C. Neither am I confident of others I see in charge of our businesses, banks, or our churches.
We are truly up a creek, without a paddle, as the saying goes, and the current keeps pushing us in a direction that some of us do not want to go in.
At the risk of sounding simplistic and incurring the charge of playing the nostalgia card, I think one of our core deficiencies as Americans is the dearth of any kind of leadership, whether we’re talking about politics, business, sports, or any other sphere of American life.
The current culture of corruption that appears to be a pandemic has overtaken every aspect of our daily routines. From the very top, flowing downwards from D.C. to Peoria, Poughkeepsie and Portland, this lack of leadership is exacting a heavy toll in the present, but more importantly, the ramifications concerning our future are infused with greater gravity.
Last night, during question time after my presentation to a small, but spirited audience at the public library in South Portland, the subject came up concerning the changes in our towns that have led to the loss of community and connectedness. One gentleman talked about how youngsters today, have every aspect of their lives organized for them. Unlike the past, when sandlot baseball games and other childhood pursuits forced children to learn how to deal with conflict, our present day finds childhood overly structured and totally controlled by parents and other adults. As a result, young people never experience real-life crisis management and don’t learn how to resolve differences and conflict.
By extension, this leads to an entire generation who not only haven’t acquired leadership skills, but also, the current crop of so-called elders, who should be modeling leadership, are instead teaching our youth that pragmatic corruption is the way to go.
Here is just one more example of how our current president, says one thing and when the cameras and microphones are turned off, resorts to his usual duplicitous ways. How can we expect and exact honesty, integrity and ethics from our youngest citizens, when at every turn, they see corruption, greed and cruelty applauded and handsomely rewarded?
This culture of corruption and greed is a national crisis and unless we corporately find a way to correct this downward spiral, I can’t see much hope at all for the future. I’m obviously not a believer in Social Darwinism. To hold to that philosophy leads to a race to the bottom, which is the direction we are headed as a nation.
How do we correct this and right the ship? I’m not optimistic that we can, unless we see a radical re-engineering of society. We are way beyond the ability to put Band-aid fixes on our problems. From the crisis of peak oil, to the devastation of our environment and extending to our increasing gap between the rich and everyone else, our fixation on military solutions over diplomacy and ultimately holding the belief that technology can save us from ourselves, is delusional thinking at best and potentially apocalyptic, at worst. Putting our faith in “bling, bling” violates the most basic tenets of religion and it certainly heaps manure on aspects of any kind of meaningful social contract.
Hyper-capitalism, paired with our belief that technology will ride in on a white horse to save us, is a fairy tale. Many pride themselves on their rationalism when it comes to believing in a deity, or higher power, yet they are worse than the most rabid fundamentalist when it comes to recognizing that the gods of money, power, and technology are just as powerless to save them, as is pie-in-the-sky religious belief.
Like any trouble-shooter worth their pay, Americans need to trace our way back to a place and time when things worked. At least a time when democracy hadn’t become a national joke and the defining measure of a man (or woman) wasn’t the size of their bank account (or cup size), or the prestige derived from the automobile they drove, or the house they lived in.
Personally, I don’t have to look back that far to remember people that I knew growing up, who modeled to me the kind of bedrock values I’m talking about. I’m not nostalgically hearkening back to some golden age, either. My late father-in-law, a member of the last great generation of Americans, the WWII set, was a daily example of an American who possessed integrity and carried himself with dignity. He didn’t live a life of glitz and didn’t rely on conspicuous consumption to define who he was. He regularly gave many hours to his community, church (Unitarian Universalist), and family, asking nothing in return. There were tens of thousands of others, just like him, members of a generation that’s disappearing. I fear that no one is willing, or even capable to step forward to fill the void that’s left with their departures.
As I mentioned to my audience last night, I could name countless men and women that I knew personally, growing up in my small town of Lisbon Falls, who modeled integrity to a young lad like me. Many of them were my paper route customers. From the quiet dignity of their lives lived, shaped by Yankee frugality and the golden rule, these people left an indelible mark on me that’s impossible to ignore.
Lately, I find myself thinking a lot about those days of yesteryear. Of living in a place where the size of your home, or the car you drove didn’t matter to your friends, or your family. A place where you knew your neighbors and regardless of what was happening in other parts of the world, your little corner seemed secure and in capable hands.
At the present time, I don’t have any faith that anyone’s at the switch, whether it’s here in my hometown of Durham, at the state house in Augusta, or in our nation’s seat of power, Washington, D.C. Neither am I confident of others I see in charge of our businesses, banks, or our churches.
We are truly up a creek, without a paddle, as the saying goes, and the current keeps pushing us in a direction that some of us do not want to go in.
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
Truth arrives unexpectantly, from right field
No matter how much Karl Rove and the smoke and mirrors crew at the White House spin reality, things are not going particularly well for the Bush administration. With poll numbers in the upper 30s and headed south, civil war threatened in Iraq, and Americans growing weary with war, the spin room has its mojo working overtime. Of late, President Bush has been out and about, trying desperately to put a fresh face on his inability to admit mistakes and embrace the miserable failure of a presidency he’s lorded over for eight years.
For much of his two terms, whenever things got tough and public opinion veered from his own views on the war, the president could always pull out his favorite “get out of jail free”card from the deck; that being the face card of fear. And each time, like putty in his hand, the bleating masses would quietly fall back into lock step, chanting, “the war on terror.” Like the boy who cried wolf, however, you can only trot this out so many times before even the most timid of subjects refuse to cower back into the shadows.
With a palpable malaise blanketing the country, there is a sense coming from every corner that something needs to be done to right the ship. The only constituency that Bush seems capable of keeping firmly planted in his pocket, is the hardcore Kool-Aid drinkers of the hard right.
While the mainstream media has been slow to turn on this president, there is much more critical coverage and scrutiny happening of late. Actual questions are being asked concerning wire-tapping and spying on Americans, as well as the long-term forecast for troop deployment in Iraq.
For me, the first significant signal that President Bush has lost his hold on the country and that the tide may be turning, is when longtime members of the establishment begin to circle the wagons and call for wholesale changes. Obviously, former Marine Captain and current U.S. Congressman John Murtha’s call last November for immediate withdrawal from Iraq received press, but Rove and Co. were able to masterfully counter it with spin and trot out their own their own military lackeys to counter Murtha’s gutsy call, going so far as to label Murtha, a “coward.”
Yesterday, Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman had Kevin Phillips on her program to talk about his latest book, American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century.
Phillips is not your typical critic of the current administration. Unlike many Democrats, who voted for the war, authorized increased measures of surveillance via the U.S.A. Patriot Act (USAPA) and then, made an abrupt about face once public opinion began to shift, giving them political cover, Phillips is neither a member of the opposition party and has previously written extensively about the dangers that the Bush family pose to the American people and democracy.
Kevin Phillips was the top Republican strategist for most of the 1970s and 1980s. When he wrote The Emerging Republican Majority, Newsweek called it the "political bible of the Nixon administration." Because Phillips criticism isn’t of the “Johnny come lately” variety—he’s written several other books detailing problems and developments, long before they were acknowledged by the majority of the media and other commentators—he possesses a credibility that most others lack. A casual review of his books will show that Phillips is one of the few Republicans and self-identified conservatives who seem capable of publicly varying from the hard line position and offering an honest critique of the movement from within.
Interestingly, Phillips book was referenced in a question asked of the President in Cleveland, after his talk, on Monday, before the Cleveland Club. The question referenced Phillips contention that many modern-day conservatives have an ideology and view of foreign policy that is wedded to the apocalyptic, end-times eschatology of the Left Behind series (Jesus is coming to get us, so let’s blow this sucker up and he’ll carry us home).
Sunday’s New York Times said of Phillips’ book, (it may be) "the most alarming analysis of where we are and where we may be going to have appeared in many years."
After hearing Phillips’ interview with Amy Goodman, I’d concur that this is much more than the typical hype accompanying a new release, designed merely to sell some copies. Knowing Phillips and having read his work before, including Wealth and Democracy and American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush, I know him to be a good writer and an honest and thorough researcher. Despite our philosophical differences and ideological points dividing us, he’s a writer I’ve come to respect and reference in most matters political.
One of the most startling parts of the interview was an exchange between Goodman and Phillips, where he very reluctantly answered Goodman’s question regarding the imperial presidency and dictatorial leanings of the current administration. Aware that he will probably pay a price for saying it (his unease in giving the answer was very apparent watching the program), I credit his courage for daring to utter publicly, what some have been thinking privately. Once again, keep in mind, this isn’t someone with anarchist, or even socialist leanings, calling for a change in government. This is a lifelong Republican and former Nixon aide, saying we need some type of change in our form of government.
Goodman sets up Phillips answer, by asking him if he thinks we’re edging towards a dictatorship, referencing a speech given by former Supreme Court justice, Sandra Day O’Connor.
AMY GOODMAN: We are talking to Kevin Phillips, former Republican strategist. His book is called American Theocracy. Sandra Day O'Connor, Supreme Court justice -- former Supreme Court justice, gave a speech. It wasn’t recorded. It was in Washington, D.C. Of course, Sandra Day O'Connor, the reports were she was praying for a George Bush victory and helped hand it to him the last time so that she could retire, so that he would be the one to choose her replacement. And she is the person who earlier this month warned the U.S. is in danger of edging towards a dictatorship of right-wingers that continue to attack the judiciary. What do you think of this?
KEVIN PHILLIPS: It’s absolutely true. Tom DeLay, before he was pushed out, but Bill Frist, as well, and some of them have gone to conferences about how they can reshape the judiciary and who they can push through, and so forth. She's obviously very concerned. There are just endless numbers of Republicans that are privately very concerned. And I really don't know what's going to happen here, but if I can make bold with your microphone for a minute, there should be some thought among everybody in the United States -- progressives, conservatives, serious centrists, whatever you want to say -- about how it becomes clear that this man really cannot function as president. We can deal with that situation. I don't happen to believe impeachment is the answer. This has become so sort of trivialized after Clinton and Nixon and the “I'm going to get you because you got us” sort stuff. I think we have to think far beyond that.
AMY GOODMAN: What?
KEVIN PHILLIPS: We need some kind of coalition government now. Before I get into too much trouble for this, let me go back to Britain between the wars, World War I and II, when they were really on the skids. The old parties lost their validity. They were fragmenting. There were small parties, third parties coming up. So they frequently governed by coalition governments. They had one at the end of World War I. They had another for quite awhile during the 1930s. I don't know exactly how we do this, but you have to dismantle this “I'm going to get you because you got us” impeachment business and the way in which they’re always zapping each other and they polarize, and the people in the middle represent only 15%, because they are stalwarts in both parties from safe districts. Now, it’s not that they’re all that unreasonable personally, but when they’re arraigned against each other politically, it doesn’t work too well. So, I think we’re going to face within a few years a further realization of how ineffective our institutions have become.
I nearly fell out of my chair after hearing Phillips say this! Obviously, he knows his history, with the reference to Britain’s problems and how they found a way through them.
This won’t be the last we hear about Phillips and his latest book. If you can, try to listen (or watch) to the Democracy Now interview in its entirety. Also, Terri Gross interviewed Phillips, last night, on her program, Fresh Air.
It will be interesting to see just how much traction Phillips' book is able to gather. While I haven't read it, yet, based upon his other works, I'll wager that it is thorough to a fault and that Phillips will be very concise in his various points regarding our government, the issue of peak oil and the growing national debt that looms over us like a Damocles sword.
For much of his two terms, whenever things got tough and public opinion veered from his own views on the war, the president could always pull out his favorite “get out of jail free”card from the deck; that being the face card of fear. And each time, like putty in his hand, the bleating masses would quietly fall back into lock step, chanting, “the war on terror.” Like the boy who cried wolf, however, you can only trot this out so many times before even the most timid of subjects refuse to cower back into the shadows.
With a palpable malaise blanketing the country, there is a sense coming from every corner that something needs to be done to right the ship. The only constituency that Bush seems capable of keeping firmly planted in his pocket, is the hardcore Kool-Aid drinkers of the hard right.
While the mainstream media has been slow to turn on this president, there is much more critical coverage and scrutiny happening of late. Actual questions are being asked concerning wire-tapping and spying on Americans, as well as the long-term forecast for troop deployment in Iraq.
For me, the first significant signal that President Bush has lost his hold on the country and that the tide may be turning, is when longtime members of the establishment begin to circle the wagons and call for wholesale changes. Obviously, former Marine Captain and current U.S. Congressman John Murtha’s call last November for immediate withdrawal from Iraq received press, but Rove and Co. were able to masterfully counter it with spin and trot out their own their own military lackeys to counter Murtha’s gutsy call, going so far as to label Murtha, a “coward.”
Yesterday, Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman had Kevin Phillips on her program to talk about his latest book, American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century.
Phillips is not your typical critic of the current administration. Unlike many Democrats, who voted for the war, authorized increased measures of surveillance via the U.S.A. Patriot Act (USAPA) and then, made an abrupt about face once public opinion began to shift, giving them political cover, Phillips is neither a member of the opposition party and has previously written extensively about the dangers that the Bush family pose to the American people and democracy.
Kevin Phillips was the top Republican strategist for most of the 1970s and 1980s. When he wrote The Emerging Republican Majority, Newsweek called it the "political bible of the Nixon administration." Because Phillips criticism isn’t of the “Johnny come lately” variety—he’s written several other books detailing problems and developments, long before they were acknowledged by the majority of the media and other commentators—he possesses a credibility that most others lack. A casual review of his books will show that Phillips is one of the few Republicans and self-identified conservatives who seem capable of publicly varying from the hard line position and offering an honest critique of the movement from within.
Interestingly, Phillips book was referenced in a question asked of the President in Cleveland, after his talk, on Monday, before the Cleveland Club. The question referenced Phillips contention that many modern-day conservatives have an ideology and view of foreign policy that is wedded to the apocalyptic, end-times eschatology of the Left Behind series (Jesus is coming to get us, so let’s blow this sucker up and he’ll carry us home).
Sunday’s New York Times said of Phillips’ book, (it may be) "the most alarming analysis of where we are and where we may be going to have appeared in many years."
After hearing Phillips’ interview with Amy Goodman, I’d concur that this is much more than the typical hype accompanying a new release, designed merely to sell some copies. Knowing Phillips and having read his work before, including Wealth and Democracy and American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush, I know him to be a good writer and an honest and thorough researcher. Despite our philosophical differences and ideological points dividing us, he’s a writer I’ve come to respect and reference in most matters political.
One of the most startling parts of the interview was an exchange between Goodman and Phillips, where he very reluctantly answered Goodman’s question regarding the imperial presidency and dictatorial leanings of the current administration. Aware that he will probably pay a price for saying it (his unease in giving the answer was very apparent watching the program), I credit his courage for daring to utter publicly, what some have been thinking privately. Once again, keep in mind, this isn’t someone with anarchist, or even socialist leanings, calling for a change in government. This is a lifelong Republican and former Nixon aide, saying we need some type of change in our form of government.
Goodman sets up Phillips answer, by asking him if he thinks we’re edging towards a dictatorship, referencing a speech given by former Supreme Court justice, Sandra Day O’Connor.
AMY GOODMAN: We are talking to Kevin Phillips, former Republican strategist. His book is called American Theocracy. Sandra Day O'Connor, Supreme Court justice -- former Supreme Court justice, gave a speech. It wasn’t recorded. It was in Washington, D.C. Of course, Sandra Day O'Connor, the reports were she was praying for a George Bush victory and helped hand it to him the last time so that she could retire, so that he would be the one to choose her replacement. And she is the person who earlier this month warned the U.S. is in danger of edging towards a dictatorship of right-wingers that continue to attack the judiciary. What do you think of this?
KEVIN PHILLIPS: It’s absolutely true. Tom DeLay, before he was pushed out, but Bill Frist, as well, and some of them have gone to conferences about how they can reshape the judiciary and who they can push through, and so forth. She's obviously very concerned. There are just endless numbers of Republicans that are privately very concerned. And I really don't know what's going to happen here, but if I can make bold with your microphone for a minute, there should be some thought among everybody in the United States -- progressives, conservatives, serious centrists, whatever you want to say -- about how it becomes clear that this man really cannot function as president. We can deal with that situation. I don't happen to believe impeachment is the answer. This has become so sort of trivialized after Clinton and Nixon and the “I'm going to get you because you got us” sort stuff. I think we have to think far beyond that.
AMY GOODMAN: What?
KEVIN PHILLIPS: We need some kind of coalition government now. Before I get into too much trouble for this, let me go back to Britain between the wars, World War I and II, when they were really on the skids. The old parties lost their validity. They were fragmenting. There were small parties, third parties coming up. So they frequently governed by coalition governments. They had one at the end of World War I. They had another for quite awhile during the 1930s. I don't know exactly how we do this, but you have to dismantle this “I'm going to get you because you got us” impeachment business and the way in which they’re always zapping each other and they polarize, and the people in the middle represent only 15%, because they are stalwarts in both parties from safe districts. Now, it’s not that they’re all that unreasonable personally, but when they’re arraigned against each other politically, it doesn’t work too well. So, I think we’re going to face within a few years a further realization of how ineffective our institutions have become.
I nearly fell out of my chair after hearing Phillips say this! Obviously, he knows his history, with the reference to Britain’s problems and how they found a way through them.
This won’t be the last we hear about Phillips and his latest book. If you can, try to listen (or watch) to the Democracy Now interview in its entirety. Also, Terri Gross interviewed Phillips, last night, on her program, Fresh Air.
It will be interesting to see just how much traction Phillips' book is able to gather. While I haven't read it, yet, based upon his other works, I'll wager that it is thorough to a fault and that Phillips will be very concise in his various points regarding our government, the issue of peak oil and the growing national debt that looms over us like a Damocles sword.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)