Letters to the Editor
Paul Rosenberg
Published Letters: 995 Editor's Choice: 16
-
Sea Change From Below
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Immediately after the 2006 election, two things became clear:
(1) There had been a fundamental sea-change expressed at the ballot box. The sea change had been evident for quite some time before that--virtually from the beginning of Bush's Second Term, when he tried and failed to dismantle Social Security--but translating public opposition into instutional power, that was something new.
(2) The media was now public enemy #1. This was immediately clear from their efforts to spin the election as a conservative victory. A reality-based media would have immediately focused on the unlikely triumphs of vocal anti-war Senate candidates John Tester and Jim Webb. Instead, we had endless spinning to portray a largely economic populist crop of new House members as "conservative." This was then seamlessly blending into the rising tide of stories about Pelosi's failed Speakership. The battle lines could not have been clearer.
And so I think it's appropriate to see this week as yet more trickle-up. Just as the November election trickled up from Bush's profound unpopularity, and the GOPs lockstep embrace of him, what we've seen this week is further trickle-up from the mid-term elections. While many things contributed to it, there are at least three factors we need to recognize:
(1) The continued activist oppostion. This is what helped the Democrats keep their resolve, in the face of fierce media opposition, while brining forward and promoting the significance of the US Attorneys scandal--among others. The beating back of the Fox News debates was another major manifestation of this.
(2) The Democrats commitment to oversight and investigation. two words: Henry Waxman. Anyone who's been following what he's done as ranking member, just knew he was going to be kick-ass chair. He's not the only one, by a long shot. But he's the one who started making his investigatory list the earliest. And he's the one with the longest list today. In that sense he's the prototype.
(3) An engaged public. People have not tuned out. From the most passive indicators (Pelosi's continued rise in popularity) to the most active (expressions of outrage with Don Imus, for example), the public has remained more attentive to political matters. It has not just voted and gone home. They really do want and expect change.
With these factors in play, I think that the Imus firing was really the catalyst for the dynamic that came to a head this week. It upped the stakes. It showed that the media elite could be voted out of office, just like the GOP.
But--just like the GOP it shills for--the media stayed in denial mode. And Broder's column epitomized that--particularly when one constrasts it with Jon Stewart's spot-on analysis of Gonzales's Goodfella's performance. The world had changed all around them, and they remained utterly and totally clueless, even after Imus had been taken down.
We can expect their denial to intensify. But it's been forced out into the open, for all to see. The battle is now joined. The combination of the Broder column and the Dems response with the Bill Moyers documentary "Buying The War" marked a clear turning point.
Onward!
It is quite
-
Tenet And Son of Sam
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]RicK quotes David Corn:
But if Tenet indeed believed before the invasion of Iraq that Bush and Cheney were pushing the nation to war without adequately assessing the threat or assessing options other than full-scale war, he had an obligation at the time to make that known--at least to members of Congress, if not the public at large. He did not do so. Consequently, he owes the public a full accounting and an apology--not a sales campaign."
I'd go a little farther. In the spirit of Son of Sam laws, Tenet should be forbidden to make a profit from his crimes.
Seems only fair. If mass murderers in the single and double digits can't profit, then why should those in six digits be treated any differently??
-
Dead Enders
[Read the article: A genuine political sea change?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Granville:
Yes, we're experiencing a sea change, but what will finally change the minds of those 28% to 30% of the citizenry that still insist to pollsters that Bush & Co. are doing a good job?
Nothing will change them. Oh, well, wear them down a little, maybe. Nixon had 22-23% approval when he resigned. This represents the Right Wing Authoritarian hard core. They simply won't abandon their leaders. But they're a small minority as long as they're not allowed to be the building block for a larger infrastructure.
In short, we don't need Bush's numbers to go any lower. We need to tie every other Republican in the country to his coat-tails, something they have already done themselves already numerous times in the past.
You are absolutely right about the need for and possibility of a political realignment. I looked into this prior to the mid-term elections, and I discovered that the unambiguous realigning elections are accompanied by two consecutive House wave elections. So, with the continued disgust/horror with the GOP, and growing support for Pelosi and Reid, the signs are good that we could pull it off.
I, too, think that Edwards looks like the best bet to help pull this off. Clinton/Obama corporate centrism strikes me as little more than Reaganism with a human face.