Monday, August 30, 2010

Mo' Grand

Today is Monday, 30 August 2010.

The Republican Party wore out its welcome no later than 1876, when it stole the presidential election by agreeing to deliver Blacks to segregation, the Second Slavery. Is it not evil to deliver millions of human beings into incalculable suffering in order to abscond with another four years in the White House? Is it “rhetoric” to point out such evil?

I’m reminded of the play, A Man for All Seasons, in which Thomas More rebukes a fellow servant of the king, invoking the words of the Gospel. “What profiteth it a man, if he gain the whole world, and lose his soul?” More rebukes him because he has sold his soul so cheaply: “But for Wales?”

Then there was Barry Goldwater (of Arizona Republicanism, wouldn’tcha know), who in 1964 campaigned advocating the white supremacist “value” of State’s Rights. Oh, to be sure, he didn’t personally discriminate, so noblesse oblige of him, but he would die, entirely theoretically of course, for the right of any state controlled by white folks to treat Blacks like vermin.

And, of course, the Great Recession/Almost Great Depression 2 arrived with a scarlet “Made in GOP” stamped on its forehead, thanks to its proximate origins in Reaganomics. Regulation is nasty! Laws are evil! Let the foxes rule the henhouses!

Removing the GOP from all national political offices is hardly “infinite silliness”. The GOP has the same toxic effect on USA/USE society as the Communist Party of China has on Chinese society. Both are fundamentally committed to preserving and extending the rule of tiny, super-wealthy elites, and both thereby fatally distort and degrade their respective bodies politic.

Not that I’m pleased with the Democratic Party, but at least the latter recognizes that prosperity must be more equally distributed among the masses that actually create it. By promoting policies that increasingly concentrate wealth at the top of society, the GOP helps to impoverish the geese that lay the golden eggs.

In a comment on “Mo’ Piddle”, “Anonymous” suggests that I try to “squirm away” from a comment by “oh really?”. In point of fact, I amble, march, waltz, etc. Some would claim I sashay or strut. I’ve no need to squirm.

Second. “oh really?” and I have fundamentally different analyses of the structural nature of the Republican Party (or “Repugnican”, a term coined by the friend of a Friend). “oh” discerns more of a bottom-up apparatus, while I discern it’s basically top-down.

“fubarbeliever” wrote: "Oh really?" wrote that "All members of the Republican Party are alike? That's like saying all those of the Muslim faith are terrorists."; and "Not all Muslims are terrorists, nor are all Republicans partisan champions of blah, blah, blah, etc, as you describe in your blog 'discussion'."

HH declined to comment because the word "discussion" was in quotes. Amazing to me.”

I wasn’t declining to comment. I regard the assertion as absolutely flawed on its face, and forgot to mention it. I was genuinely baffled by the use of “discussion”: isn’t “discussion” redundant in the context of “blog”, and what do quotes “signify”?

Commenting on “Blech”, “Anonymous” suggests that Glenn Beck is bi-polar and therefore to be pitied. Absent a formal medical diagnosis and perhaps a brain scan for a tumor, I can’t find reason to excuse Beck on psychiatric grounds.

As to Beck’s on-camera persona, note that the tagline on his website reads, “The Fusion of Entertainment and Enlightenment”. My analysis is that his public persona is as highly constructed as that of any performance artist. (For example: as a video on You Tube demonstrates, Beck is entirely familiar with an old acting trick to induce tears: dabs of Vick’s Vaporub under the eyes. Works – trust me.) What seems transparent buffoonery to me and many seems the height of sincerity to many more.

Who the “real” Beck is when he’s off-duty, I haven’t a clue. When the sign flickers “On Air”, Beck is a canny and talented entrepreneur and extreme-right rabble-rouser, making several mints peddling political poisons. (Ditto for Sarah Impale-‘Em.)

(By way of comparison, allow me modestly to direct your attention to the motto of this column: “The public and I have a firm understanding: they never hear what I say, and I never say what they want to hear. – Karl Kraus”. )

On this date in 1967, Thurgood Marshall was confirmed as the first Black justice of the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS).


Anonymous in your corner said...

Clearly your assertion that Republicans deserve to be removed from national political office was not infinitely, or even measurably, silly. I am glad to read the explanation for your statement, and frankly convinced by it (though I must admit I had no objection to the original statement that caused a number of disdainful comments).

I also appreciate the mention of Justice Thurgood Marshall, a personal hero. Any time I hear a Republican attempting to make the word "activist" a four-letter word, I think of him (and sneer at the ignorant Republican).

4:02 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home