Sunday, October 28, 2012
The Inanity of "Politics"
Imagine for a moment that you're sitting down to see a virtuoso musical performance. You're very excited, this has been hyped up as the most anticipated show by this musician in years. Expectations are extremely high. They get up there, start strumming their guitar, cello, whatever, but instead of playing any sort of song at all, they sound like a five year old child just banging away on the instrument. They go on like that for hours. And that's the show.
You read the review in the paper the next morning, and the guy talks about the masterful way in which the artist held the instrument. And the confidence with which they hit the strings. And the one-on-one connection they were able to make with the audience members. Maybe you talk to a friend or two who were at the show a little later, and they're just ecstatic at how good the performance made them feel. No one says a word about how the person you listened to didn't know what they were doing, and how there was never any music at all.
This is a little bit how I feel after watching all the presidential debates.
Take a brief glance at some of the top headlines in r/politics right now. Over 2 million people are subscribed to this subreddit.
Notice what all of these things have in common? It's all meaningless. Almost every single story that's splattering r/politics right now is -- "THIS was just said by SOMEONE and THIS is what you should think about it!" It's gossip. They don't talk about any of Obama's policies unless it's oversimplified to the point of inanity. And even then, they rarely ever talk about Obamas actual policies at all. It's all ROMNEY BAD. All of it.
I realize r/politics is hardly a good sample to take examples from. It's full of complete and utter morons. But it's important to note that the vast majority of people who claim pay attention to "politics," whether on reddit or not, get their news in this format. They all go home in the evening, switch on their MSNBC, or their Fox News, or get on their computers and check out their HuffPo or their Drudge. It's no wonder that nobody has the slightest fucking clue what's going on when they're forced to get their information while trapped inside bubbles.
Reddit is a site where people vote on content -- if people like it, they give it an upvote. The more upvotes something has, the more it will be seen by others, and maybe even reach the front page. People can downvote things too, and many important stories are often buried.
Stories like the ones I mentioned get literally thousands of upvotes. They eat this shit up. On the other hand, here are the kinds of stories that don't quite make it in r/politics, including the upvote/downvote numbers they received:
Some of these are weeks old, this is the best they're going to do. A couple of them got half-decent responses, but I meant it when I said those shitty stories up there get thousands of responses. Most people are never going to hear about these things, and even if by some miracle they do, they're conditioned to ignore them and push them out of their thought processes. It just doesn't register. In fact, if anything is critical of Barack Obama in any way -- even it's based on complete fact -- it's going to get downvoted. If anything is by Glenn Greenwald, you can almost guarantee that it's going to be buried, with dismissive comments about how Greenwald is a one-issue writer, drone strikes we get it, big whoop, that's war, who cares.
This is making me rethink my position that interests within the American media deliberately withhold stories that make people uncomfortable, solely because they go against corporate interests. That's obviously part of the reason (as shown here), but it really does seem mostly that people are conditioned to enjoy bullshit. It's all about the show, it's a game to them. It's a sporting event.
George Orwell noticed similar patterns to this, he wrote an essay about it called Politics and the English Language. He argued that mass contradictory thought in a society not only degrades ideas, but also the very language the society speaks.
All issues are framed in ways similar to this. I've seen it called the overton window, Chomsky called it the "Propaganda Model." Its purpose is to limit the range of acceptable opinion. Chomsky made an analogy once, he said the boot to totalitarian governments is propaganda to democracies. Public opinion has to be controlled in some way so that it will fit in line with political-corporate interests. When both political parties are fighting for those same corporate interests, their supporters need to be distracted with meaningless gossip so no one notices what the politicians actually support.
You read the review in the paper the next morning, and the guy talks about the masterful way in which the artist held the instrument. And the confidence with which they hit the strings. And the one-on-one connection they were able to make with the audience members. Maybe you talk to a friend or two who were at the show a little later, and they're just ecstatic at how good the performance made them feel. No one says a word about how the person you listened to didn't know what they were doing, and how there was never any music at all.
This is a little bit how I feel after watching all the presidential debates.
Take a brief glance at some of the top headlines in r/politics right now. Over 2 million people are subscribed to this subreddit.
- From an 89 year old Florida voter I just called on behalf of President Obama: "Son, I'm one of those women who marched in front of the Supreme Court in support of Roe v. Wade - you can be damn sure I'm not voting for Romney."
- Bill Maher, 'If the Mittmobile does roll into Washington it will be towing behind it the whole anti-intellectual anti-science freak show.'
- Obama Campaign Ad Tries to Name All of Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts Taxes & Fees in 30 Seconds
- Jon Stewart Rails On The Absurdity Of The US Health Care System Refusing To Hire Combat Medics
- While Romney Runs and Hides, a Confident Obama Takes Media Questions in All Formats
- The New York Times Endorses President Obama.
- Another Catholic Bishop Threatens Damnation If Congregation Votes For Obama | Addicting Info
- Biden: America not in decline, Romney in denial
Notice what all of these things have in common? It's all meaningless. Almost every single story that's splattering r/politics right now is -- "THIS was just said by SOMEONE and THIS is what you should think about it!" It's gossip. They don't talk about any of Obama's policies unless it's oversimplified to the point of inanity. And even then, they rarely ever talk about Obamas actual policies at all. It's all ROMNEY BAD. All of it.
I realize r/politics is hardly a good sample to take examples from. It's full of complete and utter morons. But it's important to note that the vast majority of people who claim pay attention to "politics," whether on reddit or not, get their news in this format. They all go home in the evening, switch on their MSNBC, or their Fox News, or get on their computers and check out their HuffPo or their Drudge. It's no wonder that nobody has the slightest fucking clue what's going on when they're forced to get their information while trapped inside bubbles.
Reddit is a site where people vote on content -- if people like it, they give it an upvote. The more upvotes something has, the more it will be seen by others, and maybe even reach the front page. People can downvote things too, and many important stories are often buried.
Stories like the ones I mentioned get literally thousands of upvotes. They eat this shit up. On the other hand, here are the kinds of stories that don't quite make it in r/politics, including the upvote/downvote numbers they received:
- Obama Makes Unprecedented War Powers to Kill by Drone Permanent -- +7 / -11
- Obama signs new Executive Order expanding Homeland Security mission in the U.S. -- +2 / -2
- Whistleblower who revealed CIA torture sentenced to prison -- +25 / -12
- New Stanford/NYU study documents the civilian terror from Obama's drones -- +73 / -25
- Unlike Afghan leaders, Obama fights for power of indefinite military detention -- +17 / -6
- NDAA critic stranded in Hawaii after turning up on no-fly list -- +22 / -14
Some of these are weeks old, this is the best they're going to do. A couple of them got half-decent responses, but I meant it when I said those shitty stories up there get thousands of responses. Most people are never going to hear about these things, and even if by some miracle they do, they're conditioned to ignore them and push them out of their thought processes. It just doesn't register. In fact, if anything is critical of Barack Obama in any way -- even it's based on complete fact -- it's going to get downvoted. If anything is by Glenn Greenwald, you can almost guarantee that it's going to be buried, with dismissive comments about how Greenwald is a one-issue writer, drone strikes we get it, big whoop, that's war, who cares.
This is making me rethink my position that interests within the American media deliberately withhold stories that make people uncomfortable, solely because they go against corporate interests. That's obviously part of the reason (as shown here), but it really does seem mostly that people are conditioned to enjoy bullshit. It's all about the show, it's a game to them. It's a sporting event.
George Orwell noticed similar patterns to this, he wrote an essay about it called Politics and the English Language. He argued that mass contradictory thought in a society not only degrades ideas, but also the very language the society speaks.
All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer. I should expect to find -- this is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify -- that the German, Russian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the last ten or fifteen years, as a result of dictatorship.
But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation even among people who should and do know better. The debased language that I have been discussing is in some ways very convenient. Phrases like a not unjustifiable assumption, leaves much to be desired, would serve no good purpose, a consideration which we should do well to bear in mind, are a continuous temptation, a packet of aspirins always at one's elbow. Look back through this essay, and for certain you will find that I have again and again committed the very faults I am protesting against. By this morning's post I have received a pamphlet dealing with conditions in Germany. The author tells me that he "felt impelled" to write it. I open it at random, and here is almost the first sentence I see: "[The Allies] have an opportunity not only of achieving a radical transformation of Germany's social and political structure in such a way as to avoid a nationalistic reaction in Germany itself, but at the same time of laying the foundations of a co-operative and unified Europe." You see, he "feels impelled" to write -- feels, presumably, that he has something new to say -- and yet his words, like cavalry horses answering the bugle, group themselves automatically into the familiar dreary pattern. This invasion of one's mind by ready-made phrases (lay the foundations, achieve a radical transformation) can only be prevented if one is constantly on guard against them, and every such phrase anaesthetizes a portion of one's brain.We live in an extremely propagandized society. The wars get so much support because meaningless phrases like "Support the Troops" discourage people from questioning anything about the wars. The question on Iran during the foreign policy debate was not about whether Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon at all -- that discussion is obviously over. It was, Iran wants to drop a nuclear bomb on Israel. The end. That's the frame in which the discussion is allowed to take place.
All issues are framed in ways similar to this. I've seen it called the overton window, Chomsky called it the "Propaganda Model." Its purpose is to limit the range of acceptable opinion. Chomsky made an analogy once, he said the boot to totalitarian governments is propaganda to democracies. Public opinion has to be controlled in some way so that it will fit in line with political-corporate interests. When both political parties are fighting for those same corporate interests, their supporters need to be distracted with meaningless gossip so no one notices what the politicians actually support.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
The Third Presidential Debate: A Disgrace to Democracy
To see just how bipartisan America's "two"-party system has become, one had to look no further than the thing tonight that people are calling a debate. Except, maybe you do have to look further I guess, since I'm seeing liberals and conservatives wringing their hands and going into their little corners as if a serious discussion just happened.
Before the debate, I made a comment on facebook warning people about potential distractions, and how we should focus on things that actually matter. I mentioned the "Big Bird" thing. And binders. I wish I would've mentioned "Romnesia," that stupid phrase is all over the place now. Predictably, liberals are gleefully jumping up and down over a fairly condescending comment made by Barack Obama tonight. Romney said, "Our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917." Obama responded:
Romney also made some idiotic comment about how Syria is Iran's route to the sea, which is false. In one of the most completely hilarious displays of ignorance in the entire electoral farce, Romney actually said, "America has not dictated other countries. We have freed other countries from dictators." Obama gave us such classics as, "We've visited your website quite a few times. And it still doesn't work." and "The 1980s called. They want their foreign policy back."
ZING! Wow, what a fucking zinger, amirite. Republicans.
This is fucking stupid. It's pretty damn clever, and I almost suspect on purpose, because if these candidates and their cheerleaders didn't focus on the irrelevant horse race and feel-good zingers, voters might actually take notice of how similar their policies are. I'm seeing tons of comments throughout the internet from liberals wondering why Romney was just reiterating Obama's very policies. Some examples I've copied and pasted from random people:
Am I a survivor in a fucking zombie apocalypse or something? How goddamn stupid can you be? These are not Obama's policies. They are George Bush's policies. Republicans have not shifted politically, democrats have. Romney is agreeing with everything Obama says because Barack Obama's policies are conservative.
Do Obama supporters even fucking know why there are so many critics on the left? Do they even care? We've been shouting this shit from the rooftops, and it flies right over their heads. They think George Bush's foreign policy is Barack Obama's, and Mitt Romney is trying to "claim it as his own." How are you even supposed to respond to these people? No joke -- I've seen the term "political hipster" used to describe leftists who refuse to vote for Obama. These guys just don't get it, and I doubt they ever will.
The debate tonight was nothing more than a 'tough guy' contest, and I regret watching it. It was a complete waste of time. Those internet observers were correct in saying Obama and Romney agree with each other on literally every foreign policy issue. When that's the "debate" going on, the only thing you can do is put on some fake swagger and demean your opponent with funny comments about Battleship. That's the debate.
Here's some better comments from some of those tumblr leftists I've been mentioning lately:
Rocky Anderson brought up an extremely good point during the third party debate on Democracy Now: both of these candidates are proclaiming their undying love for Israel, and neither ever mentioned Palestine. Not. Once. The Israeli occupation is illegal, and condemned in some way by virtually every nation on the planet that isn't the United States. What Israel is doing to the Palestinians is nothing short of ethnic cleansing, and these candidates' unwavering support for it is one of the most disgusting and horrific things I've ever seen.
We heard again the lie that Obama is pulling all of our troops out of Afghanistan in 2014. No one explained why we're still there at all. What is the objective? What are we doing that still needs two years to be accomplished, and how many more of our soldiers, and innocents, are going to be slaughtered in that time, and for what purpose? I've mentioned this before, but we're of course not leaving in 2014, we're keeping thousands of troops there until 2024 to safeguard our imperial spoils. If things turn out in any way like Iraq, then we're leaving behind a barely-functioning, shattered state. This time, in the hands of opium drug lords.
Probably five separate times throughout these debates, I heard loaded questions start off with something like "Iran's nuclear weapons program..." or "Iran is the most serious threat to American security." The entire frame of the discussion is inherently biased before the discussion can even begin. The IAEA concluded that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon. They are not a threat to the United States or Israel, because they would be utterly annihilated if they attacked anyone, and they know it. In fact, Iran's entire military is structured defensively. None of these facts were brought up in the debates, because what we watched were advertisements, not debates. I fucking hate Ahmadinejad and Khamenei and the Irani government, but 90% of casualties in modern war are civilians, and if we're going to be talking about slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent people, at the very least, we should do so based on facts. That's not going to happen here, because there is going to be a war no matter who's president, there are already interests attempting to spark it.
Climate change was not brought up at any point in any of these debates. This is the first time this issue hasn't been mentioned in a presidential debate since 1984. With how hard Barack Obama is pushing fracking and oil drilling, it's pretty safe to assume that the question of the environment is now officially a complete nonissue among America's elites. Their consensus has been reached, and I doubt climate change or the environment will ever become a serious issue ever again in American politics, or at least in the foreseeable future.
I am absolutely ashamed of this country. It's bad enough that the entire process is a sham owned and operated by corporations, completely lacking any serious debate or discussion -- but the vast majority of Americans are actually satisfied with it, and believe they are free. Frank Zappa said that the inauguration of Ronald Reagan "just laid the foundation of the next 500 years of Dark Ages" and I think he was 100% correct. It goes without saying that America's hegemony and influence throughout the world is waning. How we react to this spiral is going to be important. We could use it as an opportunity to look in mirror and reevaluate all the death and destruction we've wrought on the world in the last half-century -- what I thought Barack Obama's campaign was about in 2008. But the way Obama has been acting, that the democrats -- America's left -- have been the ones ushering in endless war and police state policies, gives me absolutely no hope whatsoever for this nation's future. The planet is dying, resources are running out, and everything indicates that these corporate fascists have absolutely no idea how to deal with it. I wouldn't say there's no hope for humanity's future, but the world's power structure as it stands now is never going to give it to us. Ever.
Before the debate, I made a comment on facebook warning people about potential distractions, and how we should focus on things that actually matter. I mentioned the "Big Bird" thing. And binders. I wish I would've mentioned "Romnesia," that stupid phrase is all over the place now. Predictably, liberals are gleefully jumping up and down over a fairly condescending comment made by Barack Obama tonight. Romney said, "Our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917." Obama responded:
"You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines. And so the question is not a game of Battleship, where we're counting ships. It's what are our capabilities."
Romney also made some idiotic comment about how Syria is Iran's route to the sea, which is false. In one of the most completely hilarious displays of ignorance in the entire electoral farce, Romney actually said, "America has not dictated other countries. We have freed other countries from dictators." Obama gave us such classics as, "We've visited your website quite a few times. And it still doesn't work." and "The 1980s called. They want their foreign policy back."
ZING! Wow, what a fucking zinger, amirite. Republicans.
This is fucking stupid. It's pretty damn clever, and I almost suspect on purpose, because if these candidates and their cheerleaders didn't focus on the irrelevant horse race and feel-good zingers, voters might actually take notice of how similar their policies are. I'm seeing tons of comments throughout the internet from liberals wondering why Romney was just reiterating Obama's very policies. Some examples I've copied and pasted from random people:
- Did romney just reiterate exactly what Obama said on Syria?
- Romney said it better because he said it while being white.
- If you're against Obama's policy but you parrot what he says when questioned, you might have Romnesia.
- Is it me or is romney repeating what obama says... never mind obama just pointed it out.
- Every time Romney talks it seems like he's just saying, "I agree with the president, but let me tell you about something the president is also doing that he didn't mention."
- Right now, Romney is thinking of voting for Obama.
- New prediction: Romney is going to reword every statement that Obama makes and try to claim it as his own.
Am I a survivor in a fucking zombie apocalypse or something? How goddamn stupid can you be? These are not Obama's policies. They are George Bush's policies. Republicans have not shifted politically, democrats have. Romney is agreeing with everything Obama says because Barack Obama's policies are conservative.
Do Obama supporters even fucking know why there are so many critics on the left? Do they even care? We've been shouting this shit from the rooftops, and it flies right over their heads. They think George Bush's foreign policy is Barack Obama's, and Mitt Romney is trying to "claim it as his own." How are you even supposed to respond to these people? No joke -- I've seen the term "political hipster" used to describe leftists who refuse to vote for Obama. These guys just don't get it, and I doubt they ever will.
The debate tonight was nothing more than a 'tough guy' contest, and I regret watching it. It was a complete waste of time. Those internet observers were correct in saying Obama and Romney agree with each other on literally every foreign policy issue. When that's the "debate" going on, the only thing you can do is put on some fake swagger and demean your opponent with funny comments about Battleship. That's the debate.
Here's some better comments from some of those tumblr leftists I've been mentioning lately:
Rocky Anderson brought up an extremely good point during the third party debate on Democracy Now: both of these candidates are proclaiming their undying love for Israel, and neither ever mentioned Palestine. Not. Once. The Israeli occupation is illegal, and condemned in some way by virtually every nation on the planet that isn't the United States. What Israel is doing to the Palestinians is nothing short of ethnic cleansing, and these candidates' unwavering support for it is one of the most disgusting and horrific things I've ever seen.
We heard again the lie that Obama is pulling all of our troops out of Afghanistan in 2014. No one explained why we're still there at all. What is the objective? What are we doing that still needs two years to be accomplished, and how many more of our soldiers, and innocents, are going to be slaughtered in that time, and for what purpose? I've mentioned this before, but we're of course not leaving in 2014, we're keeping thousands of troops there until 2024 to safeguard our imperial spoils. If things turn out in any way like Iraq, then we're leaving behind a barely-functioning, shattered state. This time, in the hands of opium drug lords.
Probably five separate times throughout these debates, I heard loaded questions start off with something like "Iran's nuclear weapons program..." or "Iran is the most serious threat to American security." The entire frame of the discussion is inherently biased before the discussion can even begin. The IAEA concluded that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon. They are not a threat to the United States or Israel, because they would be utterly annihilated if they attacked anyone, and they know it. In fact, Iran's entire military is structured defensively. None of these facts were brought up in the debates, because what we watched were advertisements, not debates. I fucking hate Ahmadinejad and Khamenei and the Irani government, but 90% of casualties in modern war are civilians, and if we're going to be talking about slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent people, at the very least, we should do so based on facts. That's not going to happen here, because there is going to be a war no matter who's president, there are already interests attempting to spark it.
Climate change was not brought up at any point in any of these debates. This is the first time this issue hasn't been mentioned in a presidential debate since 1984. With how hard Barack Obama is pushing fracking and oil drilling, it's pretty safe to assume that the question of the environment is now officially a complete nonissue among America's elites. Their consensus has been reached, and I doubt climate change or the environment will ever become a serious issue ever again in American politics, or at least in the foreseeable future.
I am absolutely ashamed of this country. It's bad enough that the entire process is a sham owned and operated by corporations, completely lacking any serious debate or discussion -- but the vast majority of Americans are actually satisfied with it, and believe they are free. Frank Zappa said that the inauguration of Ronald Reagan "just laid the foundation of the next 500 years of Dark Ages" and I think he was 100% correct. It goes without saying that America's hegemony and influence throughout the world is waning. How we react to this spiral is going to be important. We could use it as an opportunity to look in mirror and reevaluate all the death and destruction we've wrought on the world in the last half-century -- what I thought Barack Obama's campaign was about in 2008. But the way Obama has been acting, that the democrats -- America's left -- have been the ones ushering in endless war and police state policies, gives me absolutely no hope whatsoever for this nation's future. The planet is dying, resources are running out, and everything indicates that these corporate fascists have absolutely no idea how to deal with it. I wouldn't say there's no hope for humanity's future, but the world's power structure as it stands now is never going to give it to us. Ever.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
The Second Presidential Debate: Utterly Meaningless
I think I jumped the gun when I said I was hanging up this blog for good. I thought that being exposed to a community of leftists on tumblr and conversing with them would be enough to satisfy me, but I'm still getting the urge to write, especially now that the election is kicking into high gear and there's so much going on. I doubt I'll be updating as much anymore, but check back from time to time, because I'll probably still write occasionally when I feel like it.
It's getting increasingly difficult to sit through these debates without shoving my middle finger through the TV. It's more hilarious than it is enraging to watch Romney fumble around and bullshit his way through his sociopathic shell, but to sit there and watch Obama pretending to stand up for the American people, with how horrendous his record is, is simply infuriating. In 2007, Barack Obama said "If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain, when I'm in the White House, I'll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself. I'll walk on that picket line with you as President of the United States because Americans deserve to know that somebody is standing in their corner."
Fast forward to 2012, and not only has Barack Obama not found those shoes, but he's remained completely silent towards all the union struggles going on the United States. His former Chief of Staff, and current mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, treated the Chicago teachers going on strike for their students with utter disdain. Obama was silent on this, as was nearly every elected Democrat in the country. For all of Obama's crocodile tears towards the "middle class," whenever he's needed the most, there is absolutely no one standing in the corner of workers. He doesn't give a shit.
Tonight in the debate, the issue was brought up on how on earth our job market could compete with China's child sweatshops. I don't quite remember what Obama's answer was since it was few hours ago and it was filled with such little substance; but maybe we wouldn't be competing with sweatshops at all if Obama hadn't signed all those free trade agreements, or if he ever seriously raised the issue of outsourcing. Or maybe forbidding trade with China completely, since they're a fucking totalitarian government and our participation in their economy enables child slavery.
Tonight's topics were supposed to be "Domestic and Foreign Policy," and yet we didn't get a single comment about the longest war in American history, or how there are ongoing talks about how to extend it to 2024. We should be utterly livid by this silence, and yet it isn't even terribly shocking. Next week is supposed to be just on foreign policy alone, so it will be pretty hilarious watching them pretend to be any different whatsoever.
The entire debate was a pretty empty exchange full of meaningless swagger, and liberal partisans are predictably splooging all over the internet over it. Romney made some dumbshit comment about how he looks at potential female employees in "binders," and it was so fucking stupid that it's pretty much replaced the ridiculous Big Bird thing already. Gone was any discussion whatsoever about the surveillance state or indefinite detention or government assassinations of American citizens or Afghanistan or Yemen or Bahrain or the drone war that's massacring hundreds of innocent people. The majority of Obama supporters simply don't give a fuck. At all. Political events are nothing more than god damn football matches with drinking games, not matters of life and death for victims of oppression and starvation and war.
I suppose it wouldn't be unkind to give Obama a little credit for completely handing Romney's ass to him to tonight, but this is presuming that it's at all difficult to beat a Republican in a debate. Their ideas are fucking stupid and indefensible, and it's really fucking easy to tear them down. Let's talk about how Obama bragged tonight about being more obsessed with oil than the Bush administration. Let's talk about how he said he's built enough pipelines to circle around the earth once. Or how he approved of more drilling in the gulf immediately after the worst environmental disaster in the history of the United States. I brought these issues up in the goddamn wasteland that is reddit earlier, and I'm downvoted and torn down with "WELL HOW ELSE YOU GONNA DRIVE YOUR CAR HUH, RIDDLE ME THIS!!" A couple years ago, progressives were making fun of that "Drill, Baby, Drill!" nonsense, and now they're full embracing it. The party lines have completely switched, and nobody fucking notices.
I remember reading his Audacity of Hope manifesto before the 2008 election, and one of his key proposals was investing in a clean, green energy boom -- it would not only provide hundreds of thousands of new jobs in an industry that hasn't yet been exploited, but it would get us less dependent on foreign oil and clean up the planet. That sounded like a pretty damn good idea to me -- it was one of the main reasons why I voted for him -- but with how close he's gotten to the oil giants, I guess it was nothing more than a big fucking lie just like everything else. One of the most hilarious moments of the night was when Obama accused Mitt Romney of letting oil companies write his energy policy, without seeing the slightest bit of hypocrisy about letting the health care industry write his health care bill.
Green Party candidate Jill Stein and her Vice President were arrested outside the university before the debates today. They were protesting the unfair debate format, because it's privately owned by corporate lobbyists -- how it makes sure that all the questions are meaningless softballs, and completely bans other parties from participating. The major candidates sign a contract with each other that forbids them from ever debating a third party candidate, under any circumstances. Stein gave an amazing speech while she stood in handcuffs, and there was more substance in it than in the entire two hour sham tonight. Democracy Now has been doing an absolutely superb job at covering the "debate" farce, how it was highjacked from the League of Women Voters by Democrats and Republicans, and thrown into the hands of private corporations. I highly recommend you watch their report from a couple weeks ago, and their report from today. Glenn Greenwald also wrote an article about it if you don't feel like watching something. This should be absolutely essential knowledge, and I guarantee you will become just as pissed off as I am when you watch/read all of these things.
It's getting increasingly difficult to sit through these debates without shoving my middle finger through the TV. It's more hilarious than it is enraging to watch Romney fumble around and bullshit his way through his sociopathic shell, but to sit there and watch Obama pretending to stand up for the American people, with how horrendous his record is, is simply infuriating. In 2007, Barack Obama said "If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain, when I'm in the White House, I'll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself. I'll walk on that picket line with you as President of the United States because Americans deserve to know that somebody is standing in their corner."
Fast forward to 2012, and not only has Barack Obama not found those shoes, but he's remained completely silent towards all the union struggles going on the United States. His former Chief of Staff, and current mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, treated the Chicago teachers going on strike for their students with utter disdain. Obama was silent on this, as was nearly every elected Democrat in the country. For all of Obama's crocodile tears towards the "middle class," whenever he's needed the most, there is absolutely no one standing in the corner of workers. He doesn't give a shit.
Tonight in the debate, the issue was brought up on how on earth our job market could compete with China's child sweatshops. I don't quite remember what Obama's answer was since it was few hours ago and it was filled with such little substance; but maybe we wouldn't be competing with sweatshops at all if Obama hadn't signed all those free trade agreements, or if he ever seriously raised the issue of outsourcing. Or maybe forbidding trade with China completely, since they're a fucking totalitarian government and our participation in their economy enables child slavery.
Tonight's topics were supposed to be "Domestic and Foreign Policy," and yet we didn't get a single comment about the longest war in American history, or how there are ongoing talks about how to extend it to 2024. We should be utterly livid by this silence, and yet it isn't even terribly shocking. Next week is supposed to be just on foreign policy alone, so it will be pretty hilarious watching them pretend to be any different whatsoever.
The entire debate was a pretty empty exchange full of meaningless swagger, and liberal partisans are predictably splooging all over the internet over it. Romney made some dumbshit comment about how he looks at potential female employees in "binders," and it was so fucking stupid that it's pretty much replaced the ridiculous Big Bird thing already. Gone was any discussion whatsoever about the surveillance state or indefinite detention or government assassinations of American citizens or Afghanistan or Yemen or Bahrain or the drone war that's massacring hundreds of innocent people. The majority of Obama supporters simply don't give a fuck. At all. Political events are nothing more than god damn football matches with drinking games, not matters of life and death for victims of oppression and starvation and war.
I suppose it wouldn't be unkind to give Obama a little credit for completely handing Romney's ass to him to tonight, but this is presuming that it's at all difficult to beat a Republican in a debate. Their ideas are fucking stupid and indefensible, and it's really fucking easy to tear them down. Let's talk about how Obama bragged tonight about being more obsessed with oil than the Bush administration. Let's talk about how he said he's built enough pipelines to circle around the earth once. Or how he approved of more drilling in the gulf immediately after the worst environmental disaster in the history of the United States. I brought these issues up in the goddamn wasteland that is reddit earlier, and I'm downvoted and torn down with "WELL HOW ELSE YOU GONNA DRIVE YOUR CAR HUH, RIDDLE ME THIS!!" A couple years ago, progressives were making fun of that "Drill, Baby, Drill!" nonsense, and now they're full embracing it. The party lines have completely switched, and nobody fucking notices.
I remember reading his Audacity of Hope manifesto before the 2008 election, and one of his key proposals was investing in a clean, green energy boom -- it would not only provide hundreds of thousands of new jobs in an industry that hasn't yet been exploited, but it would get us less dependent on foreign oil and clean up the planet. That sounded like a pretty damn good idea to me -- it was one of the main reasons why I voted for him -- but with how close he's gotten to the oil giants, I guess it was nothing more than a big fucking lie just like everything else. One of the most hilarious moments of the night was when Obama accused Mitt Romney of letting oil companies write his energy policy, without seeing the slightest bit of hypocrisy about letting the health care industry write his health care bill.
Green Party candidate Jill Stein and her Vice President were arrested outside the university before the debates today. They were protesting the unfair debate format, because it's privately owned by corporate lobbyists -- how it makes sure that all the questions are meaningless softballs, and completely bans other parties from participating. The major candidates sign a contract with each other that forbids them from ever debating a third party candidate, under any circumstances. Stein gave an amazing speech while she stood in handcuffs, and there was more substance in it than in the entire two hour sham tonight. Democracy Now has been doing an absolutely superb job at covering the "debate" farce, how it was highjacked from the League of Women Voters by Democrats and Republicans, and thrown into the hands of private corporations. I highly recommend you watch their report from a couple weeks ago, and their report from today. Glenn Greenwald also wrote an article about it if you don't feel like watching something. This should be absolutely essential knowledge, and I guarantee you will become just as pissed off as I am when you watch/read all of these things.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
