Originally Posted by ziggyX65

I've said it here before and I'll say it again: Depending on how the 4T turns out, I think Citizens United could very well be this saeculum's Dred Scott decision in terms of how it fueled public disgust with the status quo and fired up the sentiments of those who believe it was symptomatic of a sick society.

This 4T will either consolidate the dreams of the Master Class for a Corporate State in which a "safe" form of Christianity becomes the control of the working class effectively rendered politically impotent -- or force major changes of American political institutions that close the seams of the democratic political system. We can rule out incremental change because the one generation that can offer it (the Silent) is weakening rapidly.

In view of the behavior of the Roberts Court I can imagine it defining a new "freedom" as more important than anything else -- freedom of contract, which implies that the government must get out of the way of any hard deals that the powerful and wealthy can impose upon the helpless that regulation or law now makes impossible. Such could negate just about every liberal reform going back to the New Deal and even the century-old Progressive Era. Bye-bye minimum-wage law, unemployment insurance, collective bargaining, and perhaps even child labor laws. God Help Us? Not under those circumstances, for the Master Class would then claim to "own" God. Maybe employers would even get to control the votes of employees as part of the "freedom of contract", with the Supreme Court overturning the requirement of secret ballots. One might as well be in China, the political difference being that the Chinese Communists (who have abandoned Marxist economics and might as well call themselves Conservatives) have gutted Mao and some other unsavory characters, our political bosses will have gutted the greatness of Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and FDR. Gutting Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao is a good idea. Gutting Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and FDR is a horrible idea.

Our Constitutional government has survived for over 200 years not because it has no seams, but instead because for nearly 200 years nobody dared seek and exploit those seams. That changed when ruthless operators (mostly right-wing Boomers) entered the scene and decided that their insatiable lusts were the only measure of goodness for the rest of humanity.

I can imagine the worst, a 100%-American fascism that well fits certain subcultures within American life. American-style fascism doesn't need adulation of Imperial Rome (Italy), a racist fantasy based on the elevation of primitive tribes with advanced technology (Germany), or a samurai fantasy (Japan). American fascists have Manifest Destiny to revive; they could use music that Nazis would ban (Copland, Gershwin -- not that either was a fascist); they would use Protestant fundamentalism instead of State Shinto. It would celebrate the greed of elites and submission of the masses to the "Common Good" -- consummate selfishness of elites by permission and selflessness of the masses by command and by lack of alternatives.

The best is that people reject political trends going too far in one direction. Democracy is not the enshrinement of wealth and power. We deal with our own contemporary pathologies in commercial and public life or someone else does in the end on terms not of our choosing.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

This 4T will either consolidate the dreams of the Master Class for a Corporate State in which a "safe" form of Christianity becomes the control of the working class effectively rendered politically impotent -- or force major changes of American political institutions that close the seams of the democratic political system. We can rule out incremental change because the one generation that can offer it (the Silent) is weakening rapidly.

In view of the behavior of the Roberts Court I can imagine it defining a new "freedom" as more important than anything else -- freedom of contract, which implies that the government must get out of the way of any hard deals that the powerful and wealthy can impose upon the helpless that regulation or law now makes impossible. Such could negate just about every liberal reform going back to the New Deal and even the century-old Progressive Era. Bye-bye minimum-wage law, unemployment insurance, collective bargaining, and perhaps even child labor laws. God Help Us? Not under those circumstances, for the Master Class would then claim to "own" God. Maybe employers would even get to control the votes of employees as part of the "freedom of contract", with the Supreme Court overturning the requirement of secret ballots. One might as well be in China, the political difference being that the Chinese Communists (who have abandoned Marxist economics and might as well call themselves Conservatives) have gutted Mao and some other unsavory characters, our political bosses will have gutted the greatness of Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and FDR. Gutting Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao is a good idea. Gutting Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and FDR is a horrible idea.

Our Constitutional government has survived for over 200 years not because it has no seams, but instead because for nearly 200 years nobody dared seek and exploit those seams. That changed when ruthless operators (mostly right-wing Boomers) entered the scene and decided that their insatiable lusts were the only measure of goodness for the rest of humanity.

I can imagine the worst, a 100%-American fascism that well fits certain subcultures within American life. American-style fascism doesn't need adulation of Imperial Rome (Italy), a racist fantasy based on the elevation of primitive tribes with advanced technology (Germany), or a samurai fantasy (Japan). American fascists have Manifest Destiny to revive; they could use music that Nazis would ban (Copland, Gershwin -- not that either was a fascist); they would use Protestant fundamentalism instead of State Shinto. It would celebrate the greed of elites and submission of the masses to the "Common Good" -- consummate selfishness of elites by permission and selflessness of the masses by command and by lack of alternatives.

The best is that people reject political trends going too far in one direction. Democracy is not the enshrinement of wealth and power. We deal with our own contemporary pathologies in commercial and public life or someone else does in the end on terms not of our choosing.

If you imagine oppressed people going for a 'safe God' in this country, consider the historic role of the black churches from slavery days on. Not to mention the backwoods strain of evangelical religion. And the prevalence of voodoo, hoodoo, Santeria, etc as an underground practice of long standing. And witchcraft. Now, if the masters institute a state church and start hunting down and burning heretics, that might be another story. But consider that the one church that did that found itself faced with a rapidly spreading movement for independence from said church, even though the Reformation often served the rulers very, very well indeed. No, sorry, religious rebellion is in our blood.

OTH, 13 years ago I'd have said that certain basic American values, such as a dedication to the Bill of Rights and a marked distaste for being pushed around by officialdom, was also in our blood.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Bush 41, Bush 43, Reagan, Ford--- there's not much difference from a Santorum.

I have to disagree totally on Ford and Bush 41. They both hearken back to the moderate wing of the GOP. And unlike previous moderates like Eisenhower and even Nixon they werte unable to keep the office because of awakening era/ culture war changes in the electorate.

Originally Posted by Eric

All they need is someone with more brains and charisma than the current field, but still just as dedicated to the right-wing cause. By my estimate, Paul Ryan and Jeb Bush are the most likely candidates to do well, followed by Crist or Rubio. Of course, a lot could affect who actually gets into the race 3 or 4 years from now.

I suspect that he Randian Ryan will be totally toxic in all but a safe GOP district like the one he holds by 2016. OTOH, the Bush brand may be rehabbed enough by then for another marketing campaign.

Originally Posted by Eric

"Inner driven" is a very charitable title to give the mindless culture wars the Republicans have imposed on us. There is nothing "inner driven" about them at all...They are sheep following authority. Superstition, maybe; inner driven? Hardly.

My friend, you really don't understand southern culture at all. Here in South Carolina I live and work with dedicated culture warriors on a daily basis.
You may well see them as deluded and superstitious but that hhardly means that they are not inner driven.
They genuinely believe in the way as they see it. I could use a lot of adjectives to discribe why trying to retuen to a 1950's that never really existed is a bad idea, but it's all been written before. The point i they believe it and act on it to a point that aftwer 30 years of unrelenting cultural warfare the only foe that is likely to stop them is the fact that they are running out of time demographically.

Originally Posted by Eric

On the other hand, the culture war is not the nub of the red/blue divide today anyway, since we are in a 4T. Something like 40% of the people are hooked, hook, line and sinker, on the Reagan economic philosophy. The culture wars of the religious right do feed into that, mainly by giving people the habit of fanatic, unthinking belief. It remains to be seen if the religious right will decline enough as millies mature in red areas so that it separates its influence from the economic free-market, "help-the-job-creaters" dogma that is now the main element of right-wing politics.

You may not realize this but you've come across something that I understood at a gut level, at least to the point that a 20ish college student could understand such at the time, about why the Morla Majority and allied groups were the beginning of the end for traditionalism being a dominant force in American life.
See, back in the 19th/early 20th century most of your Protestant Fundamentalists like William Jennings Bryan were also economic populists. Therre flock grazed on the marginal lands of the American economy. They were the outsiders. That's why the new deal coalition made sense. The average "redneck cracker" from the deep south was as much an outsider as the miserable "kikes" and "wops' and "dagos" of the big northern/midwestern cities. The little people could only be heard when they united.

This unity ended as the culture war coalition replaced the new deal coalition demographically. Protestant fundamentalism took on the airs of the establishment and endoresed the policies of the 3T era economic elite. The flock has been given a stone instead of a fish so to speak. They have discredited themselves with the young. Southern millies by and large have no taste to fight cultural battles that are based on issues from before their time.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

Anyway, here's the kicker:



Romney won the orange states, and Santorum won the green ones.

This means that the Republicans from safely red states won't be too enthusiastic about showing up on election day: They don't like Romney, either!

Good, and very telling, map.

You can almost predict which way the remaining states are likely to go, both now in the primaries and with a few exceptions in the general, based on their geography.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

I have to disagree totally on Ford and Bush 41. They both hearken back to the moderate wing of the GOP. And unlike previous moderates like Eisenhower and even Nixon they werte unable to keep the office because of awakening era/ culture war changes in the electorate.

I can't see any relevance of the culture war to their failure to be re-elected. The economy did not perform well enough, plus Ford had the Nixon pardon problem. Nor do I see much difference in policy; they governed by VETO because they thought many bills would interfere too much with free enterprise. Same story; same ideology; just somewhat more extreme now than then. By the 1970s and 80s, "moderate" had become what "extreme right" had been before. Now the bar has moved even further right than in the 1980s. But it's the same ideology.

I suspect that the Randian Ryan will be totally toxic in all but a safe GOP district like the one he holds by 2016. OTOH, the Bush brand may be rehabbed enough by then for another marketing campaign.

All the GOP hopefuls for over a century have been "Randian" to one degree or another; I don't see anything at all different about Ryan, except that he has a good chart, and he's smarter and more charismatic than the current field.

My friend, you really don't understand southern culture at all. Here in South Carolina I live and work with dedicated culture warriors on a daily basis.
You may well see them as deluded and superstitious but that hardly means that they are not inner driven.

Yes, I don't know what superstition and delusion has to do with being inner driven. They are driven by authority. That is the opposite of inner driven.

They genuinely believe in the way as they see it. I could use a lot of adjectives to discribe why trying to return to a 1950's that never really existed is a bad idea, but it's all been written before. The point is they believe it and act on it to a point that after 30 years of unrelenting cultural warfare the only foe that is likely to stop them is the fact that they are running out of time demographically.

That's right. And it's hardly "inner driven," since it's fanaticism which you describe very well.

You may not realize this but you've come across something that I understood at a gut level, at least to the point that a 20ish college student could understand such at the time, about why the Moral Majority and allied groups were the beginning of the end for traditionalism being a dominant force in American life.
See, back in the 19th/early 20th century most of your Protestant Fundamentalists like William Jennings Bryan were also economic populists. Their flock grazed on the marginal lands of the American economy. They were the outsiders. That's why the new deal coalition made sense. The average "redneck cracker" from the deep south was as much an outsider as the miserable "kikes" and "wops' and "dagos" of the big northern/midwestern cities. The little people could only be heard when they united.

This unity ended as the culture war coalition replaced the new deal coalition demographically. Protestant fundamentalism took on the airs of the establishment and endoresed the policies of the 3T era economic elite. The flock has been given a stone instead of a fish so to speak. They have discredited themselves with the young. Southern millies by and large have no taste to fight cultural battles that are based on issues from before their time.

I think so; we can hope.

About the map, I think Republicans are starting to close ranks around Romney. Some of the states that might have fallen into the Santorum camp geographically, may now tilt toward Romney in a close vote.

Originally Posted by Chas'88

I don't know what Santorum has been smoking, but he's obviously not sharing, because Benjamin Harrison (R) beat Grover Cleveland (D) just fine in 1888. And Harrison was anything but Conservative--at least how Santorum would describe it with his "Billion Dollar Congress", his "High Tariff", wanting to secure voting rights for African-Americans, and Harrison wasn't a friend of big business what with his antitrust laws. So again, I don't know what Santorum's been smoking, but he's obviously not sharing. Which isn't cool of him at all.


~Chas'88

He's looking at the result of the last election and using McCain as the example of which should not be repeated or followed and he's basically right.

A great take on Romeny that's worth it for the humor if nothing else. Quantum Romney.

Today I listened to the podcast, Take the Money and Run for office, on This American Life, here. . I highly recommend it to everyone. Ziggy has a point. You can't imagine how bad the Washington environment is until you listen to it--and how pathetic it is, frankly, to expect anything from this Congress.

With the help of Citizens United the Republicans may get into office. But then, all bets are off. They can't possibly stabilize things--we will go further downhill and it will be obvious, with essential public services breaking down and poverty exploding. I really don't know what would come next. We are going to learn, however, that an economy in which the rich take all the gains is not a sustainable economy--period.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Today I listened to the podcast, Take the Money and Run for office, on This American Life, here. . I highly recommend it to everyone. Ziggy has a point. You can't imagine how bad the Washington environment is until you listen to it--and how pathetic it is, frankly, to expect anything from this Congress.

With the help of Citizens United the Republicans may get into office. But then, all bets are off. They can't possibly stabilize things--we will go further downhill and it will be obvious, with essential public services breaking down and poverty exploding. I really don't know what would come next. We are going to learn, however, that an economy in which the rich take all the gains is not a sustainable economy--period.

These are the very issues that the Occupy movement is addressing. It may be a steep uphill climb, but at least they are attempting to expose the dastardly relationship between Washington and the corporations. They realize that without a strong voice from the people, we are doomed to all of what you indicated in your post.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

This means that the Republicans from safely red states won't be too enthusiastic about showing up on election day: They don't like Romney, either!

Almost from the get-go, the GOP race has been between Romney and "not Romney". It's just that the latter changes from time to time depending on who the media-anointed leading "not Romney" is -- whether it's Cain or Perry or Gingrich or Santorum. Whoever is perceived as having the best chance to beat Romney is the flavor of the month

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Today I listened to the podcast, Take the Money and Run for office, on This American Life, here. . I highly recommend it to everyone. Ziggy has a point. You can't imagine how bad the Washington environment is until you listen to it--and how pathetic it is, frankly, to expect anything from this Congress.

With the help of Citizens United the Republicans may get into office. But then, all bets are off. They can't possibly stabilize things--we will go further downhill and it will be obvious, with essential public services breaking down and poverty exploding. I really don't know what would come next. We are going to learn, however, that an economy in which the rich take all the gains is not a sustainable economy--period.

I think the Citizens United ruling is helping the Democrats as much as the Republicans. Maybe more.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Today I listened to the podcast, Take the Money and Run for office, on This American Life, here. . I highly recommend it to everyone. Ziggy has a point. You can't imagine how bad the Washington environment is until you listen to it--and how pathetic it is, frankly, to expect anything from this Congress.

With the help of Citizens United the Republicans may get into office. But then, all bets are off. They can't possibly stabilize things--we will go further downhill and it will be obvious, with essential public services breaking down and poverty exploding. I really don't know what would come next. We are going to learn, however, that an economy in which the rich take all the gains is not a sustainable economy--period.

Success in winning political control does not lead directly to success in meeting the desires of the electorate -- let alone convincing people that one's side offers workable solutions. A political clique that wins one election can make fools of itself. If people hate the political clique, then all the money in the world might not buy continued tenure of high office through free elections. Of course if that political clique gets in the position in which it can rig elections and dominate the media it might entrench itself while destroying democracy.

I've read several articles referring to poll data indicating that women are leaning more towards the Dems than they did already because of the surge of sexist BS coming from the Republicans. If this is true then this is going to be a landslide election for the Dems.

Originally Posted by Wallace 88

I think the Citizens United ruling is helping the Democrats as much as the Republicans. Maybe more.

Prove it, rather than just spouting propaganda.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...oll/53930684/1

MILWAUKEE – President Obama has opened the first significant lead of the 2012 campaign in the nation's dozen top battleground states, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, boosted by a huge shift of women to his side.

In the fifth Swing States survey taken since last fall, Obama leads Republican front-runner Mitt Romney 51%-42% among registered voters just a month after the president had trailed him by two percentage points.
The biggest change came among women under 50. In mid-February, just under half of those voters supported Obama. Now more than six in 10 do while Romney's support among them has dropped by 14 points, to 30%. The president leads him 2-1 in this group.

Romney's main advantage is among men 50 and older, swamping Obama 56%-38%.

Republicans' traditional strength among men "won't be good enough if we're losing women by nine points or 10 points," says Sara Taylor Fagen, a Republican strategist and former political adviser to President George W. Bush. "The focus on contraception has not been a good one for us … and Republicans have unfairly taken on water on this issue."

In the poll, Romney leads among all men by a single point, but the president leads among women by 18. That reflects a greater disparity between the views of men and women than the 12-point gender gap in the 2008 election.

Obama campaign manager Jim Messina says Romney's promise to "end Planned Parenthood" — the former Massachusetts governor says he wants to eliminate federal funding for the group — and his endorsement of an amendment that would allow employers to refuse to cover contraception in health care plans have created "severe problems" for him in the general election.

"Romney's run to the right may be winning him Tea Party votes," Messina said in an interview, but he says it's demonstrated that "American women can't trust Romney to stand up for them."

He adds: "It would be hard for them to win if you have this kind of gender gap."


Remember how James (who has been gone since) wailed and moaned about the requirement by the Obama administration that Catholic-owned institutions cover contraception? Even Mark Shields along with his Newshour partner David Brooks called it a "disaster." Well it looks like the shoe has been put on the other foot on this one!

What amazes me in the article is how off track and screwed up "men over 50" are in this country. Wow, I am not proud to be an "American male over 50." What lousy company to be in. And we know where most of those men are, too (OK Justin, The Rani, Odin: you can hit me again now).

Originally Posted by Wallace 88

I think the Citizens United ruling is helping the Democrats as much as the Republicans. Maybe more.

The real question is not which party is helped by Citizens United, but which party helps Citizens United. We know the answer.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

A great take on Romeny that's worth it for the humor if nothing else. Quantum Romney.

Yes very good; highly recommended, and quite a scientifically-accurate description of "romneality."

Originally Posted by Wallace 88

I think the Citizens United ruling is helping the Democrats as much as the Republicans. Maybe more.

Quite possibly true. Smart people engaged in the art of bribery bribe both sides; it's not a partisan thing.

The ones it's hurting are the people.

Originally Posted by Wallace 88

I think the Citizens United ruling is helping the Democrats as much as the Republicans. Maybe more.

Every cent of union money put together is a drop in the bucket compared to what Corporate America can raise for political activism.

Having said that -- unlike unions, corporations tend to hedge their bets to make sure they have some "skin in the game" with the winners.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Quite possibly true. Smart people engaged in the art of bribery bribe both sides; it's not a partisan thing.

The ones it's hurting are the people.

Right on the mark! We so often wear rose colored glasses when it comes to *our* side of the aisle. Maybe if we took those glasses off, we could see, as you indicate, both sides are taking the bribes.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Good, and very telling, map.

Not so sure about that. The way the EC works, the "safely red states" aren't the ones the GOP candidate needs to be enthusiastic. The number of electoral votes isn't affected by voter turnout, and most states are winner-take-all, which means there's no need to win by a wide margin. The ones that Romney is winning are the ones that the Republican candidate needs to lose sleep over -- the ones he might well lose, and if he does, he loses the election, too.

Originally Posted by ziggyX65

Every cent of union money put together is a drop in the bucket compared to what Corporate America can raise for political activism.

Having said that -- unlike unions, corporations tend to hedge their bets to make sure they have some "skin in the game" with the winners.

Do you mean.....

President Obama clinches the Democratic nomination.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

President Obama clinches the Democratic nomination.

Do you think Romney will ask Santorum to be his partner in crime? Um, I mean, running mate. After all, he would bring over a lot of votes from the fundamentalist groups.

Originally Posted by Deb C

Do you think Romney will ask Santorum to be his partner in crime? Um, I mean, running mate. After all, he would bring over a lot of votes from the fundamentalist groups.

The GOP side of this Presidential election is so crazy that it could do anything except nominate someone Constitutionally ineligible to be President.