Taking the country back....to the 1850s

Writing this before midnight on election night, it seems that while several key teabagger politicians have been defeated, many many teabagger candidates won their elections. Republicans are now set to control the US House of Representatives, and the Democratic margin of control of the US senate is now paper-thin. Will professional liar John "Pumpkinhead" Boehner be Nancy Pelosi's replacement? Or will the "tea party" challenge him for house leadership?

While laughing-stock candidates like Delaware's anti-masturbation activist and teen Satanist Christine O'Donnell and stone-cold racist and bestiality fan Carl Paladino were defeated, others like "Ayn" Rand Paul and Marco "Gusano" Rubio coasted easily to victory.

The next two years will be, how to put this...interesting. The ultra-right marches on. Caveat emptor, Amerikkka.

Election Day: Vote Against the Tea Party

Today is election day, 2010. Midway through President Obama's first term, the Democrats who swept to power only two years ago are widely expected to be savaged. While control of the US Senate is less in doubt, control of the House of Representatives is expected by most to pass to the Republicans. In local elections across the country, Republicans are expected to do well in gubernatorial races and local state house races, which could spell problems for the upcoming legislative sessions that will reapportion congressional voting disticts according to the recent US census. That census has population moving south: a number of northern states are set to lose representatives in favor of states like Florida and Texas. Republican gerrymandering of election districts could result in permanent damage to the allegedly representative nature of the House. (Interestingly a number of Republicans and teabaggers have come out against the constitutional amendent that provided for direct election of US senators; apparently across the board the right wing hates both Democrats and Democracy.)

I'm voting for the Working Families Party line here in New York State. The WFP is a progressive, independent party in the state with its own platform and basis of unity. In truth most of the candidates on the WFP line are also the Democratic Party candidates, though in the city council district I used to live in here in Brooklyn the WFP ran a candidate against the Democrats; a candidate who also happened to win. I think the WFP model is a useful one for this day and age: it allows people to the left of the Democratic center to organize around our own values, while passing electoral votes to the Democrats to defeat right-wing candidates that, frankly, need defeating.

This voting for the WFP line means voting for some candidates, like gubernatorial candidate Andrew Cuomo, who are not particularly progressive. Indeed while Cuomo has taken a number of progressive positions (marriage equality among them), he promises to be a nightmare for organized labor, and here WFP has been forced into a corner to make a deal with the devil. According to NY State Law, third parties maintain their ballot line by getting a certain number of votes in state-wide contests. Thus WFP needed to endorse Cuomo to preserve its ballot status. Unfortunately running a candidate to the left of Cuomo would only be a losing symbolic gesture--and there are others already making that gesture. Fortunately voting for Cuomo does mean the probable defeat of our local teabagger candidate, the angry racist and anti-gay bigot Carl Paladino.

The WFP has also endorsed two US Senate candidates, Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer. Gillibrand has been trying hard to impress liberals with her bonafides; in general I find her candidacy no more or less offensive than any other liberal Democrat. Charles Schumer is, unfortunately, deeply tied to the Israel lobby. He among the most hawkishly pro-Israel members of government...if Harry Reid is defeated by his racist opponent Sharon Angle, it's likely that Schumer will be up for the job of Democratic Senate Leader. Democratic performance in the Senate has left much to be desired this past season, as right-wing Dems hold a pivotal balance of power. However, given that the Senate will be controlled by either Republicans, newly juiced up with ultra-rightwing teabagger candidates, or by Democrats, at least paying lip service to some causes important to me, I believe that preventing a teabagger takeover of Congress is worthwhile. The Senate remains a den of thieves: its members are largely racist, warmongering, anti-gay, and anti-working class. But that's the job description of capitalism: My vote is against giving the far right legislative control. I wish a victory for the Democrats would imply that a progressive agenda had a snowball's chance in Washington. I don't think it does.

The election of Obama two years ago was a moment of hope. I mean that sincerely: for all of his failings, both the ones we knew about in advance and the ones that took us by surprise, something important happened. I believe that for a moment, the good guys won. And by good guys I don't mean the Democratic machine, and I don't think I even mean Obama himself. Obama is likable, gives a damned good speech, and....is, well, the President of the U.S. in all its contradictory glory and awfulness; he does terrible things; that's what Presidents do. It saddens me that Americans proved to be so politically unsophisticated creatures with such short memories; that the independent streak that Obama capitalized on has now turned on him with a bunch of dangerously crazy and ultra-rightwing candidates set to win their contests. I don't know, ultimately, who's going to win the war for America's consciousness: the progressive aspirations of the left or the fear and hatred and anger of the right.

It's so important to continue to dream of what could be possible: to organize for justice, for peace, for liberation, for economic justice, for a new collective reality. But sometimes you gotta look down in the gutter and pick a side, even if that means voting for a bunch of sell-out Democrats. It could most definitely get worse before it gets better. And if voting is ultimately not how transformational political change will be made it seems foolish to sit out the electoral game.

I've read leftists pissed off at Obama saying they won't vote for Democrats. I think that's, well, stupid. These leftists accuse people like me of playing the "fear card" by invoking the teabaggers, by invoking the threat of a Sarah Palin presidency as a manipulative cover for supporting Democrats. And my answer to that is that Sarah Palin should scare the fuck out of you. John Boehner? Mitch McConnell? Mainstream republicans who scare the crap out of me. And they are positively liberal compared to the teabag lynch mob coming up from behind. So yes, it is appropriate to play the fear card. They are a real threat. These elections, and the next ones, and the ones after that until there is some fundamental paroxysm in electoral politics, will not be won by a progressive third party. These elections will be won by Democrats or by Republicans. That's not the way it should be, but it is the way it is. Organizing in groups like the WFP is an important step in the right direction, but the bottom line remains that compromised victory in a deeply compromised country is about the best we can expect.

So get out there and vote...against the "tea party" takeover.

Yesterday in third parties...

"KPD...End This System" reads this poster from the Communist Party of Germany, ca. 1932. The Communist Party came in third in the 1932 German elections, after the Nazis and the Socialists. Without suggesting that this year's elections are as momentous as those of waning Weimar, or that the Republican/teabagger side is quite as precipitously genocidal as the Nazis were, I'd like to note that bad strategy by the left in those long-ago elections resulted in the victory of the far right.

It's easy in the upcoming election to be pissed off at President Obama's failure to advance more than a centrist agenda given his rhetoric about fundamental change. It's not wrong to point out all the defective similarities between the Democrats and the Republicans, to note that neither party is actually on the side of regular people. It's not wrong to look to long-term strategies which would repudiate the class bias of these two parties and the lock they hold on the American political system. But as I have said before, elections have winners and losers, and the fact that many people--but not enough people--think neither of these parties represents a vehicle for progress and justice is ultimately irrelevant. The year 2000 elections had a very strong showing by a left-of-center third party candidate, and the victory of George Bush was the result. (It should be noted that most third-party candidates who make a showing in American presidential elections are distinctly right of center.)

Now is a time of deep class division, but not a time of deep class struggle. Early 1930s Germany was a time of both. And yet the failure of the left with mass popular support to make strategic choices like uniting against the fascist threat meant that the vast numbers of politically active progressive forces still lost. Today in the US I think it is fair to say that the activist majority is right-wing. Those who would sit the upcoming elections out or throw a vote away on a protest candidate are doing only the ascendant teabagger movement a favor.

Should the Democrats pull off an unlikely win in the midterms, they will give us plenty of reason to be pissed off at them: that is a known danger. But a teabagger win has many disastrously ugly potentials, and if this is not 1932 Weimar Germany, it might be 1923 Germany when economic collapse sowed the seeds of future calamity.

Save the Country

Sunday I got it in my head to listen to a bunch of Laura Nyro, one of my favorite singer-songwriters. I loaded up my iPod and have been reliving her songs. Well it turns out yesterday would have been her 63rd birthday; sadly she passed on in 1997. My favorite Laura Nyro song, and there are very many Laura Nyro songs I love, is "Save the Country."

Come on, people
Come on, children
Come on down to the Glory River
Gonna wash you up
And wash you down
Gonna lay the devil down
Gonna lay that devil down

Come on, people
Come on, children
There's a king at the Glory River
And the precious king
He loved the people to sing
Babes in the blinkin' sun
Sang "We Shall Overcome"

I got fury in my soul
Fury's gonna take me to the glory goal
In my mind
I can't study war no more
Save the people
Save the children
Save the country, now

She recorded it many times; among my favorite versions is the live acoustic/vocal harmony version on the CD anthology released just before her passing; it's also been covered beautifully by many other musicians. It's such a simple statement, a sort of reworking of the old spiritual "Study War No More," and despite its late-1960s vintage, it's lost none of its evocative power. With its gospel allusions and oblique reference to Martin Luther King Jr it transcends utopian naivete, saying to me, anyway, that we can do this... if we want to.

It resonates to me now as I read an article in the paper about how the country's two unjust foreign wars are registering near zero in importance to voters in the upcoming elections. Americans are so shut off from these events it's as if we have trained ourselves not to gaze upon the horror, hoping it will go away if we don't pay attention to it. Movies about the wars go made but unseen, photos of the fighting and the dead on all sides go unprinted. I notice on the radio now it is always reported of casualties in Afghanistan that "NATO soldiers" rather than "American soldiers" have been killed in Taliban attacks, knowing that nobody will care. Except the families of the dead American "NATO soldiers," perhaps. Nevermind the total American denial of the value of Afghan or Iraqi life.

There's no election choices we can make coming up that will end these wars, that will end war. That should give us all pause. There's a lot of fury in the American soul, most of it misdirected and misguided. How much longer can Americans waste their fury on the ridiculous objects of Fox News' or even MSNBC's and ComedyCentral's contempt? So much wrong in this country and people are up in arms over government spending? There is so much to overcome.

Thanks Laura Nyro for your love and wisdom: In my mind I can't study war no more

Legalize It!

For all the awful choices in the upcoming elections, one good thing may happen in California. Marijuana, reefer, ganja, cheeba, weed, pot, hemp, molta, is finally up for legalization with Ballot Proposition 19. Prop 19 seeks to legalize pot, recommending turning it into a profit center for the government through taxes and legal control. While I believe pot should be legal for the simple reason that it is an entertaining herb arguably less toxic than alcohol or tobacco, if this economic approach works then so be it. Fascinatingly and tellingly, the greatest special interest behind efforts to oppose Prop 19 has been the alcohol industry, not eager for possibly cheaper and less centralized mind-altering entertainment. I'm sure ultimately business will find a way to coopt and commercialize pot, and that will be sad; but better that than the dangerous and utterly hypocritical status weed has today.

The illegality of recreational drugs has been the gift that keeps on giving for the international narco-terrorist empire, corrupt police, and the forces of repression. The so-called war on drugs has been an utterly stupid waste of money, life and civil liberties. While there are chemical drugs that should probably remain controlled just like health-giving presciption chemical drugs are, marijuana is widely recognized to have therapeutic qualities. And not that I am admitting to any illegal activity, but smoking weed is -- reputed to be -- good clean wholesome fun, making everything from social interaction, bad television, complicated music, sexual encounters, and junk food a hell of a lot more fun. Legalizing pot and narcotics would undercut many of the world's most dangerous criminals, sure, but it would also help stressed out people across this stressed out country lighten up a little.

While pot has been widely decriminalized in recent years, it's time to just legalize it. California is hopefully leading the way with this upcoming referendum. While predictably--and stupidly--the Obama justice department is suggesting it will continue to persecute federal drug laws in California, our nation's politicians, who smoke weed behind closed doors just like everybody else does, need to listen to their heads and stop their foolishness.

Again I'm quoting the immortal Grace Slick: "Feed your head."

Yes on 19 in California; legalize it nationwide!

Obama's Gay Problem

The following is based on a comment I made in a discussion on the Joe.My.God. blog about the Obama justice department choosing to appeal the recent court ruling overturning DADT.

At the state of the union address this year President Obama urged Congress to repeal DADT. It passed the House, and then stalled in the Senate, eventually being voted down, opposed by all the Republicans and two Democrats, toward the end of the recent Senate session. Meanwhile Obama mobilized his chiefs of staff to oppose DADT, while also endorsing a study of the impact of repealing DADT on the armed services that looked to some as a delaying tactic. I have written elsewhere on The Cahokian on my mixed feelings on this issue. Meanwhile a lawsuit against DADT brought by, of all things, gay Republicans during the Bush adminstration finally bore the fruit of a federal judge ruling that it was unconstitutional, and immediately nullifying its enforcement throughout the American armed forces. Despite the fact that Obama has repeatedly stated his opposition to DADT, his justice department decided to defend the law of the land and appeal the decision banning DADT.

Immediately many in the gay community, especially its highly vocal blogosphere, have cried foul. Obama has even met vocal opposition to this move at town hall meetings for the upcoming midterm elections. He responded by affirming his intention to end DADT "on his watch." Many in the gay blogosphere are now calling him a homophobe, a failure, a liar, and worse.

I acknowledge this is frustrating and confounding. But all this crap about Obama being a homophobe is a conspiracy theory no different than the ones the right wing is spinning. Many in the gay community are caught up looking for simple answers to complicated problems. They're being swept up in the same know-nothing anti-intellectual media shitstorm that the teabaggers are swimiming in. But there is no actual evidence that Obama is a homophobe. The gay community has hurt feelings, and some in the blogosphere are quite shrill in their accusations. But the gay blogs tend to avoid reporting on how some Obama supporters defend his strategy of seeking pure legislative overturn for DADT...and contrary to the additional conspiracy theories floating around the blogs, not everybody who believes that Obama is actually committed to what he says he is on this instance is a paid agent of the Democratic National Committee or the mainstream gay lobbying organization the Human Rights Campaign.

I'm not sure I agree that the president has chosen the correct strategy here. I freely admit I don't understand the ramifications of either possible path based on the DADT court ruling. But I am absolutely certain that the response of so many in the gay blogosphere is way off base.

I think it's quite interesting in a perverse way that this discussion has been going on since 2007. While Obama had a lot of gay support, large sections of the gay community lined up behind candidate Hillary Clinton, and bitterness endured past the Democratic primaries. By and large the sides haven't changed much: many in the gay community unhappy with Obama now were unhappy with him them. It's been established that white men are the constituency least behind Obama; this is mirrored in the gay white male community though it's certainly not true that the only gay people having huge problems with Obama are gay white men. But I do think the distrust between the white gay community and the black community does color this continuing distrust and worse that many gays have with him. I've read gay men, for instance, suggest that Obama learned to hate gays at the hands of "anti-gay preacher" Jeremiah Wright, not knowing that Obama's old and now-renounced spiritual mentor was in fact thoroughly pro-gay, wrongly assuming that he was just another anti-gay Christian preacher.

Let's look at the past, at the things that pissed us in the gay community off before. Donnie McClurkin, a hugely popular gospel star who also happens to be a bigot: Obama bridged his fans and supporters and us for votes. End of story; we won that when Obama got elected. Megachurch leader Rick Warren: The guy made a bumbling inarticulate speech at the inauguration and now, as an acknowledged Obama supporter, we haven't heard too much from him in two years; in fact he was even shamed into denouncing his friends in Uganda. Obama bridged his fans and supporters and us because, like it or not, he's all of our president. I think we won that one, too.

DADT, DOMA [the defense of marriage act which bans gay marriage], ENDA [the employment nondiscrimination act which would ban discrimination in hiring]: Some strategic choices were made here. I would rather this whole fight was over ENDA not DADT. I'm not sure who to thank for that, HRC maybe. But even the one thing that as many point out has 75% popular support, repeal of DADT, wasn't able to get through Congress. Because of the Republicans, not Obama, not the Democrats. And the blogosphere is saying this is just SIMPLE? Are they fucking nuts? For that matter can we imagine getting a bill calling for ending discrimination against transpeople through the current senate? Really???

I believe Obama honestly opposes DOMA. I also believe there is not a snowball's chance in hell of touching it in congress. DOMA is hugely popular on the right and center, and even Hillary Clinton wasn't for its blanket repeal.

I don't think any of us foresaw the massive teabagger reaction to Obama's election. We all thought, oh Obama can win, the country must have changed magically from the nightmare of the Bush years. Well maybe it didn't. It's frustrating. It's confounding. But this country is a mess. And coming up with lefty conspiracy theories to match the right wing ones is just stupid. And that is all the notion that Obama is a homophobe is, it's a conspiracy theory.

I HATE Obama's foreign policy. But it's pretty much what I expected, it's what American presidents do. I want socialized medicine. But I also want a beach house in Puerto Rico. I hate the money that was given to banks. But I'm pretty sure I would hate living in a cardboard box and going to breadlines more. I'm sorry Obama is a flawed human being. I wish he was still going to Jeremiah Wright for advice. But things could be so so much worse. I remain unregretful of how I spent my vote. I wish there was a Democratic Socialist party out there to give the Democrats and Republicans a run for the money. But there's just not.

These are frustrating, dangerous times. There's an election in a couple weeks. I'd rather see a frustrating party that struggles to get things done remain holding the reigns of power than the teabagger movement. I think that's a simple choice. It is not a blanket endorsement of the Democratic Party. But when the shitstorm is swirling around on election day and everybody's pissed off at Obama, even if some of the people are pissed off from the left and some from the right, when the teabaggers win we're all gonna be swimming in shit and nobody's gonna care who the stink came from.

(Photo snagged from the CS Monitor)

I Would Rather Have Sex with a Horse than Vote for Carl Paladino

(A note to Googlers: It has come to my attention that this is statistically one of the more popular posts on my blog, and that's because it comes up in google searches for people looking for pictures of people having sex with horses. First, this is an article about politics not bestiality. Horses do not want to have sex with people, and people, if you're looking to have sex with horses you have a problem. Seek professional help. Sex is about intimacy, intimacy that it is not possible to have with animals. If you're looking for pictures of women being brutalized or degraded, you are not welcome here; do the world a favor and go someplace and cut your dick off. Finally, let me say that while I continue to be glad that a pig like Carl Paladino was defeated, turns out Cuomo is his own kind of pig. I regret my vote for this Democrat; never again. —ISH, August 2013)

"I just think my children and your children would be much better off and much more successful getting married and raising a family, and I don’t want them brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is an equally valid and successful option — it isn’t...I didn’t march in the gay parade this year — the gay pride parade this year. My opponent did, and that’s not the example we should be showing our children." Republican candidate for New York State governor Carl Paladino on Sunday, Oct. 10

"Exposing [children] to homosexuality, especially at a gay pride parade — and I don’t know if you have ever been to one, but they wear these little Speedos and they grind against each other and it’s just a terrible thing." --Paladino defending his remarks the following day.

It was a good weekend for Democratic candidate Andrew Cuomo. Andrew Cuomo is a moderately liberal career politician who believes he is entitled to the job once held by his father, Mario. Mario Cuomo sought, and got, the endorsement of the fake "Independence" Party, the unlikely coalition of the Fred Newman mind-control cult and wealthy business interests. He blackmailed the progressive Working Families Party into backing his policies in return for accepting their endorsement: WFP is dependent on getting a certain number of votes in an election to stay on the ballot, so they've been forced to toe Cuomo's line to keep their electoral viability. But Carl Paladino, who won the Republican primary by a huge margin over the establishment candidate who had been expected to win, probably just handed Cuomo the election.

Citycouncil member Charles Barron is running a left-of-center campaign from his newly formed Freedom Party, but for me, Paladino has just gotten me to vote for Cuomo. I don't want Carl Paladino spouting his anti-gay, racist crap from Albany. Cuomo has denounced Paladino's remarks. I'm sure--and saddened--that Paladino's remarks just reinforced his support among the plentiful bigots who voted for him already. But hopefully more people are disgusted by his latest remarks.

Carl Paladino is a real estate developer who has taken millions in tax breaks who complains about government spending. He's a marriage-equality opponent who cheated on his wife and had a child out of wedlock. He is renowned for sending out racist emails like the one below, as well as sexually-objectifying emails like one reputedly showing a woman having sex with a horse. He's endorsed by the teabaggers and by anti-gay organizations.

Well, Carl, I'd rather have sex with a horse than vote for you.


Above is one of the horrifying racist graphics emailed by Carl Paladino. The rest can be seen here.

Carl Paladino is the true face of the so-called "Tea Party." Let them win the midterm elections at your own risk.

Don't Believe the Big Lie

There is a disturbing narrative being painted about the so-called Tea Party movement: That it is just a bunch of people outraged about high taxes and government spending. That it is not interested in so-called social-issues conservatism. But do not be fooled, this is a big lie. And the teabagger victories in last week's primary elections reveal the depths of this lie.

As if rushing to its defense, the media has been constantly portraying the Tea Party movement as an economic movement. Official Tea Party spokespeople are constantly quoted saying it's all about government spending, about unemployment, about the size of government. But this is a lie for media consumption. Even when the media notices, as the New York Times did, that the teabaggers and Republicans are all about portraying President Obama as some kind of un-American "other" they fail to identify the underlying truth that is plain to see: the teabaggers are actually motivated above all by social issues chief among them racism, with hatred of gay people bringing up a close second. Apparently deeming the word "racism" uglier than the phenomenon itself, the media have given a free pass to right-wing forces to prettify their message.

But let it be clear: when Sarah Palin and her ilk talk about taking America back, the first thing that needs to be asked is, well, back from whom? The teabaggers of Palin and Glenn Beck believe that the financial crisis was caused by too many mortgages being given to poor black people, and then compounded by "illegal" brown people stealing jobs and social services from "real" Americans. And they believe that the 2008 election was won by Obama because of ACORN (ie, black people) stealing the election. Calling an Obama a socialist, a communist, a Hitler: these are bizarrely social acceptable substitutes for calling him a ni**er. The outrage of the teabaggers, of Palin and Beck is carefully coded hatespeech. It should be a national scandal that a racist movement has crossed over from radical fringe to the mainstream. When they say they're taking it back, they mean from the likes of us.

Upstate NY businessman Carl Paladino just crushed smug Long Island conservative Rick Lazio in the New York State Republican primary for governor. Paladino is renowned for forwarding racist emails to all his friends. Emails like the video showing an African tribal dance labelled "Obama Inauguration Rehearsal." Emails like the fake "motivational" poster labelled "Run ni**ers, run!" Emails like the one showing Obama and his wife Michelle decked out like a pimp and his whore. Echoing the violent thuggishness of f*gbashers and lynchmobs, Paladino has threatened to go to Albany and solve the corruption problems with a baseball bat. Paladino has suggested poor people be sent to prisons where they can be given job training and learn about "hygiene." Oh sure he was sorry that soem people found them offensive. But he found them hilarious! This man's economic platform is irrelevant. He is a stone cold racist running on a platform of taking the state back from the ni**ers and f*gs and not only does everybody know it, but 62% of Republicans voted for this man. Almost 300,000 New Yorkers endorsed his racism or chose to look the other way. And he might win!

In Delaware's primary, the Senate Republican primary for U.S. senator was won by Christine O'Donnell. O'Donnell has been a conservative Christian activist for years, championing among other socially conservative causes the so-called "ex-gay" movement that claims it can "cure" people of homosexuality. Hilariously she has become known as the anti-masturbation candidate, but what she stands for is no joke: she stands for the deprivation of gay people's civil rights. This woman won the primary for the U.S. Senate. This is not batshit crazy Michelle Bachmann winning a congressional election in a gerrymandered suburban congressional district; this is an election for the political elite in this country. And she might win!

Oh Sarah Palin has claimed she is not anti-gay. But she has endorsed all these people who are. The Republicans, right-wing and moderate alike are standing by and cheering these people on. Paladino and O'Donnell are showing the "tea party" for what it is. And that is mortal danger to civil rights and justice. These are the KKK without sheets.

Don't believe the hype. The tea party is only a party for straight, white Amerikkka. For the rest of us it's going to be a wake.