Book of the Month

Another Trope's picture

2012 approaches - Hey Ho Let's Go

by Another Trope 9/6/2011 - 5:36 am

Whether we face Perry or Romney (and it looks like Perry at the moment), the next election will go far in defining the parameters of the socio-political discourse in this country.  No matter how one feels about Obama in terms of ideology (ie he is Republican-lite), the outcome will either be a step forward for liberals (Obama wins a re-election) or a step backwards (Perry/Romneu wins).

 

 

When I was young teenager in the late seventies, this song was my politics, modified by this:

 

 

 

No future. No future.  God save the Queen.

All this in the era of Carter.  Then came Reagan.

It would seem these days that Johnny Rotten makes even more sense than he did in his heyday.  Yet does he? 

I have to say no. 

Yes there are grand crimes committed by the status quo.  Yes Obama will do little to change this trend that stetches back over hundred and thousands of years.  But we have to be more sophisticated than a bitter fourteen year old.  Our politics has to embrace the realities our condition and our political environment.

We have to believe we have a future.  Otherwise we might as well just slit our wrists, politically speaking of course.

 

 

  • Share this
  • Add new comment
  • 1017 reads

Right on. No more nice guy!

by Oxy Mora 9/6/2011 - 6:47 am

No matter how one feels about Obama in terms of ideology (ie he is Republican-lite), the outcome will either be a step forward for liberals (Obama wins a re-election) or a step backwards (Perry/Romney wins).

One could say that the outcome will be either a step backward for America (it's not just liberals) or ten steps backward. Regardless, Republican-lite (one step backward) is better than xtra-Republican (ten steps backward).

Of course, for all of the moaning about where our country is headed (and I've been known to moan myself about it), occasionally I like to step back (no pun intended) and notice all of the progress we've made. 100 years ago women couldn't legally vote, minorities couldn't realistically vote, being homosexual was illegal in many (if not most) locations, interracial marriage was illegal in many (if not most) locations, child labor was legal, there was no minimum wage…

by Verified Atheist 9/6/2011 - 8:31 am

Gee whiz, Trope.

Here, pick one!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSrYIfMMoRw


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRAYdWeRbmc

 

 

by flowerchild 9/6/2011 - 8:20 am

An alternative view by Matt Stoller:

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/09/04/favoritesonsanddaughters/index.html

by Dan Kervick 9/6/2011 - 9:56 am

That is an alternative view - the question is given the realities of the moment which path is one going to put one's energy.  I have no problem ultimately with someone going down the challenge Obama on a primary level.  But if one does, then one better do it full tilt.  If one doesn't then one better get behind this current push by Obama and his supporters in DC.  Sitting on the sidelines and saying there is no difference between the two sides is an utter poo-poo excuse for disengaging.  The mere fact that someone like Perry has a shot at the Oval Office says how much work still has be done in this country.

by Another Trope 9/6/2011 - 10:08 am (re: Dan Kervick)

Well, someone has to step forward and run.

by Dan Kervick 9/6/2011 - 10:41 am (re: Another Trope)

That would help, indeed.  But is there really someone like Kennedy of 1980 out there who not only can talk the talk but also be immediately seen as viable in a general election?  No one comes to my mind.

by Another Trope 9/6/2011 - 10:56 am (re: Dan Kervick)

Which is in part what I mean by being realistic about the current conditions.  To believe one step back (re-electing Obama) can be equated with ten steps back (electing Perry) is ludicrous.  So if no challenger from the left steps up, it's time to buck up and get to work for Obama (even as one continues the criticisms).

by Another Trope 9/6/2011 - 11:01 am (re: Another Trope)

Why does Obama need any regular people to work for him.  He's got Time Geithner and all his friends.  Isn't that enough?

by Dan Kervick 9/6/2011 - 11:59 am (re: Another Trope)

I don't think viability is the key issue.  We need someone who can at least generate a debate and attract some media attention.   Democratic politics is being suffocated under lazy thinking and vapid ideas of the visionless and conservative Obama administration.  He's sucking all the fire and brightness out of the party.

If Obama fails to get bold and steers the country into another major recessionary dip, he will destroy the Democratic Party for a generation.  "Democrat" will become a byword for incompetent and clueless government.   Then where will you be with your "realism"?

by Dan Kervick 9/6/2011 - 11:08 am (re: Another Trope)

He's sucking all the fire and brightness out of the party.

That fire burned out long ago. Obama's just pouring water on the ashes.

by Genghis 9/6/2011 - 11:47 am (re: Dan Kervick)

I do not see Obama as the alpha and the omega of the Democratic Party.  Part of the problem in my opinion is that people are looking for an external inspiration rather than finding an internal one.  If one has the person in the White House to be inspirational, that would be super.  But if not, it is no excuse. 

by Another Trope 9/6/2011 - 1:25 pm (re: Genghis)

Well, if he can't inspire people, perhaps he can at least refrain from tearing the party apart and destroying its brand?   It's all about results.  If he continues to deliver crappy results, people will reasonably conclude he is a crappy president.   And if they conclude Obama is a crappy president, that loss of reputation will inevitably rub off on the Democratic Party.

by Dan Kervick 9/6/2011 - 2:18 pm (re: Another Trope)

By "long ago" do you just mean three years ago?   Because I seem to recall a wildly enthused and optimistic Democratic Party when the Obama administration began.

by Dan Kervick 9/6/2011 - 2:21 pm (re: Genghis)

Touché.

by miguelitoh2o 9/7/2011 - 1:53 pm (re: Dan Kervick)

Sorry, I thought that we were talking about vision and ideas. Not to absolve Obama of responsibility, but Democrats have been struggling with those for a while.

by Genghis 9/7/2011 - 2:47 pm (re: Dan Kervick)

Touche touche :)

 

by LisB 9/8/2011 - 7:40 pm (re: Genghis)

The Koch brothers do not apparently agree that Obama is a hopeless and pseudo-Republican wimp who is destroying the progressive movement.

Mother Jones was given a clandestine recording of the exclusive non-public Koch billionaire/GOP get together on June 26, 2011. Koch compared Obama to Saddam Hussein, and said 2012 will be 'the mother of all wars'. MJ:

Audio technicians even set up outward-pointing speakers around the perimeter of the outdoor dining pavilion, according to sources, emitting static to frustrate would-be eavesdroppers.

They do not want the people listening in on their war plans for 2012.

For those who so cavalierly dismiss what Obama has done, and what he is up against, and what he may do in the future, you might take note of the apocalyptic frenzy to defeat him by the wealthy GOP supporting oligarchy.  The filthy rich see Obama as a major threat to their control of the government, and they have their very deep pockets open to defeat him.

by NCD 9/6/2011 - 1:08 pm

Interesting.  Thanks, NCD.

All's I know is that it's us on the left versus whatever hell represents the right, next year.  And yes, it looks like Perry, maybe.

That's really all I need to know.  The rest of it is static emitting from speakers I no longer listen to.

Hey, Trope, good blog.  I wish you'd thrown in some Clash, but the Ramones are just as good.  ;)

xo

 

by LisB 9/8/2011 - 7:43 pm (re: NCD)

Latest Comments

more