« Off to the north country | Main | Nodemsatol, a partial panacea »

Ten Years of Shame

By Al Schumann on Sunday August 15, 2010 06:43 AM

Via Monsieur IOZ, Dolchstoss liberalism is back in fashion.

But what's dangerously myopic about going ballistic as Gibbs did in his statements is that just 10 years ago we had a little event in which only a tiny portion of the base went with a third party bid from the left --- and the consequences were catastrophic. Democrats, of all people, should remember that every vote matters.


Nader-baiting! It's been almost ten years, but the "narrative" retains its allure: A tiny minority managed to put the country in a Wingnut Interregnum. Good King Al (no relation) was robbed of his rightful office by their feckless yet dangerous, disciplined yet hysterical, mindless yet cunning, etc. etc. etc... Where was I? Oh, yes, he was robbed by the left wing stab in the back.

If only it were true. A successful spoiler minority would be a force to be reckoned with. Politics, need it be said, is an ugly vicious business. There is no morality play to it. The party leaders hate their base more than they hate their notional opposition. They inflict regular, gratuitous discipline on it, harvest it for labor and money and react with vituperative outrage at the merest hint of rebellion. In the face of that leave it the liberals to cry, "Disarm! Disarm now! Or all is lost."

There's no need for the panic, but I suppose it gives them something to do while they contemplate the bankster-hugging, Afghanistan-surging, Romneycare presidency of Barack Obama.

Comments (11)


all too true electirc Al

and add this
put flat top pappy at the helm
ionstead of the WHN we got'st
and well
we get pwogs ragng 24/7 "hoover time baby"
and organizing symbolic hunger marches
besieging washington
generally creating fun and frolic

something us woodstockers once delighted in
so much
we missed the entire trajectory
of events for 12 years
mistook the side show snake lady expose
for the center ring elephant dance

surely McCain's navy and his army and air force
and jarheads too
might have ...might have ...
acted with greater force against our planets enemies
might have pusued a more forward
trans national corporate progress policy
but i doubt it
there's objective limits out there
limits like the taliban and hezbollah and the
iranian masses ...
limits like uncle boots of a certain capacity
and stomach ...limits baby limits

as to macro policies of the ohbummer kind
who doesn't suggest the differences
would be largely in the volume of pwog noise

end social security in our time ??
allow official measures of unemployment to reach 15%???

bring it on pappy ???
alas not gonna happen
the problem with the worse the better
the bastards working in satanic tandem
will pull back often ... Just in Time

look at the second term
of the crawford artichoke

nope a king crab gal presidency in 12
is prefered by yours truly
on purely aesthetic grounds

this being said
a large shift is well under way
a change that puts corporate shoulders to the wheel of progress
doing it their way means
catcher's Mitt care
a big soft place for corporate profits to land in
but the out years are real enopugh the social cost curve will be bent

lets not miss the changes
this time forward not backward like the prior 30 years
or waste too much time
noticing the deep similarity
to any plausible two party generated
white house response
there's regotics at work
but that means this time the fun side is our side
we win by losing and we win by ....wining

cut the gloom
and hit the struggle button
on your
its hammer time abuildin' out there
party time
wage grinders frolic time at the job site

a time of large festive routines

busby berkeley break out time

don't miss it posturing in the back parlor

grab two beers and jump.....in


notices the frum crack

pugs fear their base
dems hate their base

why would one expect anything different ???

dems think they're helping
just a little ...but helping

Al, you're gonna confuse those poor pwoggies by reminding them of the thieving practices of the Noble Democrats. Remember, as long as someone somewhere in the Federal Government voted for the GOP, and as long as a GOP partisan holds a public office by election or appointment, it's the fault of those Evil Rethuglicans. It's ALWAYS their fault! Theirs... and Nader's! Occident-Al Petrol-Gore, he was ENTITLED TO those votes! Dammit, if only the dirty greenie hippies hadn't kum-bah-yah'd their way to Naderite Solidarity, Prince Albert would have ascended to the throne! There is treason in the ranks and the traitors must be caught, drawn & quartered, and fed to the hogs!

op, I think bibbidybobbidyboo** likes her Frum and Drum citations, they make her feel like a member of the Harvard Law Review or something. Blue Book form, baby!

**credit to DGH

Activists with a modicum of integrity are always marginalized, be that Ralph Nader or Tom Paine. And you remember what those slave-holding, Indian-killing drunks who drafted our constitution did to Tom.

Digby's blather really is the ultimate in low-hanging fruit. She can't even provide the spittle-flecked intense hatred of Alterman when it comes to Nader. She can't even attempt to refurbish a totally inappropriate catchphrase from the con artists of four or five decades ago as if it gave her warmed-over Party bullshit credence, as can Marcotte when she starts prattling about how "We have to win hearts and minds." Digby's shtick is just amazingly bland and generic. She's like the Nickelback of political blogs or something. Everything sounds like it's been thrice-warmed over from some other, marginally more prestigious Demo stronghold.

But she thinks she's better, because she won't call Nader voters "traitors" to our faces as her more flamboyant comrades will. Whatever. I'm amused that there are at least a few posters over there who recognize how full of shit she is. Just like the rest of the Obamapologists are.

Michael Hureaux:

What no one should forget is that these so-called "progressives", by carrying on the way they did after the 2000 vote, created a political climate under which Ralph Nader could actually have been murdered as a result of their hate parade. The language used to describe Ralph Nader in that moment was in a league with the sort of slanders that were thrown at members of the Left Opposition in the USSR seventy years before. It was absolutely irresponsible. It was a shameful display, springing out of nothing but the sense of entitlement on the part of "progressives" that the votes of disaffected voters by right belong to whoever the "democrats" choose to act as padrone. Fuck those motherfuckers on the so-called "left". Theirs are the sensibilities that got Rosa Luxumburg and Karl Liebnecht murdered. We may have to work with these people, these "democrats", we may have to give them a certain respect, but we don't have to give them any level of trust we do not feel like giving them. And after the experience of Obama- who is probably the most cynical and vicious politician this country has seen at the national level since the days of Plunkett and Tamany Hall- , I don't care how many elections the fuckers lose.

...What no one should forget is that these so-called "progressives", by carrying on the way they did after the 2000 vote, created a political climate under which Ralph Nader could actually have been murdered as a result of their hate parade...

Actually, I think that worthless little pissant Dukkakis really did get on the air not long after the Bush/Gore waltz ended to say that Nader "should be killed." Such charmers, those liberals, especially when they find something smaller and weaker then themselves to pick on. All the nerve they seemingly lack when it comes to confronting their official opponents suddenly comes roaring back to them. It's truly a wondrous thing to behold!

I'm sure the craven little fuck never apologized, either.

Digby is indeed too easy a target, as Ms. X says. Ioz has his posts, and then he has his other posts. Not sure what his aim is, other than preening his own nihilistic perch.

Meanwhile, I rise to oppose the idea of unquestioned Nader-defense on this one. Nobody was going to pop Ralph. Nobody among the allegedly offended actually cared that much. That's a big part of the energy behind Dimbot voting -- politics is supposed to stay easy and convenient, to not get in the way of the next trip to Starbucks to plan where to take the Subaru this weekend. Hence, in truth, no D was ever really as angry at Ralph as some feigned, Digby and Alterman included. Gore lost? Oh well, it made for a Golden Age of bumper stickers.

And, meanwhile, if I recall events properly, Ralph himself pulled a disappearing act right after Election Night. Why wasn't he chaining himself to the Abe Lincoln's marble toe and preaching about the plague of the Electoral College? My surmise is that he didn't want to harm his "run" in 2004.


...Nobody among the allegedly offended actually cared that much...

[shrug] I tend to assume that the people who spew out the kind of rhetoric to which Hureaux refers may not literally hope that their opponents come to literal harm. I can't qualify at what point the rhetoric indicates that they wouldn't mind if something shitty happened to whoever they're mad at for pissing in the punch bowl. Still, it's hard not to wonder about it sometimes.

Regardless, yeah, this should all be more than just about the personality and behavior of somebody who ran for office ten years ago. But how very convenient for Digby and the rest if they can continue to make it all about that. They've done well with this technique before, after all.

But there's a possibility that it could backfire next time, since there's now a great many voting-age adults who don't remember any of the 2000 election antics, because they were too young. Meanwhile, some of them may have the wit to grasp that Obama is screwing them over while his handmaidens continue to justify his actions by dredging up events that are ancient history to them.

It could get interesting.

Al Schumann:

Low hanging fruit. It is indeed. Just that. It's also the conventional wisdom of a large bloc, and that bloc is the biggest, most intractable obstacle to even the most tepid meliorism, never mind anything that moves the country out of corporate feudalism. Digby puts a nicer face on it than the rest of the minor pundits, but it's no less toxic.


it deserves comment that the scariest thing to the left of obama is ten years ago, before every last part of the righty agenda turned to stinking shit.

Post a comment

Note also that comments with three or more links may be held for "moderation" -- a strange term to apply to the ghost in this blog's machine. Seems to be a hard-coded limitation of the blog software, unfortunately.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on Sunday August 15, 2010 06:43 AM.

The previous post in this blog was Off to the north country.

The next post in this blog is Nodemsatol, a partial panacea.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Creative Commons License

This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.31