Mind Control

I guess you could call it mind control, were minds involved on the receiving end.

Nevertheless, it goes well beyond amazing that the Republican party and its RWS™ and, downhill from the privy, its teabaggers, have, without the slightest hesitation or shame, turned to one guy, one cynical and very rich, very successful, brilliant even, propagandist extraordinaire, to put words into their mouths which they then, without a second thought, parrot and repeat, in unison, regardless of truth -- because it's untruthful -- robotically, unceasingly, willingly, unblinkingly, knowing as surely as the big lie always has, that it'll eventually become, in the minds (were thinking involved) of enough people, some perverse and zombified if unrecognizable version of truth, if by "truth," we accept the RWS™ meaning: namely, lie. Whew. Excellent sentence, if I may say so.

Frank Lunz gave us "government takeover" for the health care debate, when government takeover was (is) the last thing the bill was (is.) But to the teabaggers, it became and remains truth of Kenyan proportions. And now, to prevent the inarguably needed regulation of the Wall Street version of banking, he's given us "bailout" as a way of defeating legislation aimed, among other things, at ending the need for bailouts. Even as the ink dried, Mitch McConnell picked it up like a kid finding a shiny quarter on a dirty street and ran off with it, jowls jiggling, eyes blinking. In unison, his fellow lobotomates slavered their simultaneous sycophancy. None, not a one, cared to point out that the "bailout" fund was paid for by banks, to prevent tax money from being so used again. And when the offer came to remove the provision, it had no effect on their opposition, despite their claim that it had been their main objection. Their words are popcorn: empty puffery, dissolving in their mouths even before they are spoken.

Never mind that McConnell's mouthing of Luntz immediately followed a meeting with Wall Street bankers. Such overt pandering and craven disregard for the needs of the country no longer bothers him or any of his breed. Never mind that the lie is too much even for Mark Halperin (that link is worth a click). Certain of his echo chamber and the credulity given it, Mitch finds no need to hide his deception; not even the pretense, in his view, matters any more. You're dumb enough to buy it, he says to the baggers.

I must say, though, that even to a cynic like me it's pretty astounding that the beholden nature of Congressional Republicans to Wall Street and its money, and their patent unconcern for anyone not supremely wealthy is so undeniable, yet so unimportant to the teabaggers. I guess when you live downhill from that privy for long enough, shit starts to smell like team spirit, and crap tastes like chicken.

So here's the deal, teabaggers. Mitch McConnell, Frank Lunz, Fox "news" and the rest of the RWS™ don't actually care about you, except as votes. Tax cuts? The only ones important to them are the ones for the richest of the rich. Balanced budgets? Which Republican administration has ever had them? A talking point for the benefit of the credulous. Remember "deficits don't matter?" Trickle down economics? Did it work? (At least Obama isn't claiming his deficits -- and those inherited from Bush -- aren't serious; and he's doing something about them.) Wall Street reform? Last thing on their minds, other than as a hook in your mouths. Those bankers are their real constituents; those guys are them. Is there any doubt?

The fact is, teabaggers, the aforementioned Rs, their propaganda organ known as Fox "news", their word smiths and their screamers, all think you're stupid and gullible, susceptible to the most elementary of manipulations: words. They're treating you like it without so much as a twinge of doubt or compunction. So far, you haven't proved them wrong.

There's still time to wake up.

But not much.

Traction

When planning surgery, weighing the options and discussing them with patients, I always had to consider the worst possible outcomes. Or maybe it's just because I'm a Democrat.

Whatever the reason, I find myself less than confident that Obama will win the election. After flailing around aimlessly, bouncing from one ineffectual theme after another, revealing his central lack of conviction on pretty much anything, the McCain campaign seems to have settled on something that's getting apparent traction: Obama's a socialist, and Joe the Plumber doesn't like him. It makes no sense, it's completely baseless and unfactual; it's cynical and nasty.

In other words, it's the perfect Republican strategy.

And, watching interviews of pundits and of McCain's fellow-travelers, it appears people are buying it. "Socialist," they holler. "Marxist." One is left to wonder how many of those hooters could define either socialism or Marxism; and one is quite certain that they could no more outline specifics of Obama's economic plans that amount to it than they could name ten presidents. What they can do is latch onto that perfect phrase: "income redistribution." I've written about it before, nearly laughed it off because it's so ridiculous.

God knows I have abiding faith in the superficiality of the American voter. That both candidates voted for the bailout (which can rightly be viewed as a partial step toward socialism, except that it isn't the long-term goal) escapes them. Perhaps that's because John McCain was so two-faced about it that he nearly ran himself down dashing in and out of the room. And mainly, the fact that what Obama proposes is simply a readjustment of tax rates -- just as McCain (and every candidate who's ever run for president) does, except that McCain's proposals exacerbate the inequities and deficits and disaster we've gotten under Bush -- makes no difference: McPalin says it's socialism, and therefore by golly it is.

From the beginning, McCain has made it clear he thinks the electorate is stupid. It was just a matter of finding a message sufficiently idiotic to match up. No sense appealing to our better selves; no point in facing facts: Obama's pretty much got that segment locked up. Find something really moronic, dumb it down to the most simple-minded, and run with it. And so he did. And so I'm worried.

In my state, Washington, the lowest turnout in the primaries was among the 18 - 25 age group. Now it's true that on the Democratic side, the primary was essentially meaningless because the caucuses had already determined the outcome. Still, it concerns me. It's that group that has come out in huge numbers at rallies, and who are the core of the grunts in the campaign. I worry that they'll follow prior form and not vote in the needed numbers. Which would be doubly tragic. It's their future that has been mortgaged away and degraded by the presidency of George Bush. It's their security that would most certainly be placed further out of reach by John McCain, who differs from Bush on the economy and on foreign policy only in the ways he'd worsen Bush's mistakes. The "socialism" theme has the crazies riled up; the recent polls might have the young people overconfident.

There is, of course, one actual socialist on the ticket: as governor of Alaska, which owns its oil, Sarah Palin annually redistributes the wealth of the state to its people. And every time they hear about it, her crowd of America-lovin' socialism haters cheer and weep and look for an Obama supporter to beat up.

Down is Up

A friend sent me a link to this post. I think it's pretty good. Always the anti-inflammatory, I'd say it only a little differently. It's not really about white privilege. It's about how easily people rationalize, on behalf of their political beliefs, support for things they'd clearly oppose were they associated with someone from the other side. And vice versa. It's about cynicism and duplicity. It's about the uncanny ability to flip positions willy nilly, without a moment's hesitation. Was there ever a better poster-child than Sarah Palin? Don't her supporters most perfectly demonstrate the two-facedness of political persuasion? Can you imagine any of them not screaming derisively, high-horsed, had the Democrats put forth a candidate like her?

Nor can we ignore the ease -- I don't think she gives it a thought -- with which Moosellini respires lies in response to the Troopergate report. It says, in actual writing using English words and simple phrases, that she violated ethics rules and abused the power of her office. Her response: she's glad it cleared her of violating ethics rules and of abuse of power. Simply stupefying.

Mad Cow

I type, or I scream. Really. It's beyond containment within even a marginally sane head. They're like a pin-ball machine; blindfolded kids swinging wildly at a piñata, poking the tail on a donkey. Reeling around like drunken idiots. Or, maybe, like senile old men. And by "they," I mean John McCain and his team.

The economy locks up. The White House comes out with a plan. It gets modifed. McCain takes personal credit. Brags about his role in the passage, derides Obama., popping off a little prematurely. It doesn't pass. McCain's side, who voted 67% against the bill, blames Obama's side, who voted 60% in favor, for the failure. Claiming he politicized the process.

I'm sure it makes sense to someone.

Not satisfied, yesterday morning the Republicans came out with and ad blaming the bill itself on Obama. While McCain said it's no time for placing blame.

This says it all, if you can stand to stay to the end.

I've seen politicians accuse others and deny they did what it is they decry. I don't recall anyone doing A and castigating B, then doing B and denying A within the space of twenty four hours. Repeatedly. For weeks on end, bald-faced and breathtaking, like McCain and his handlers.

Insanity is the kindest explanation.


Update: Of course, Jon Stewart says it much better.

Sarahndipity

When I first went into practice, my partner asked me if I wanted to do vascular surgery. I'd done some in training, I told him -- fixed a carotid artery or two, repaired a couple of aortic aneurysms -- but I really didn't feel I'd had enough experience to do it in practice. "I'll help you do the cases until you're comfortable," he offered (and lest anyone think otherwise, he was an excellent surgeon and a really good guy.) Not wanting to pass myself off as something I was not, I demurred. The thought of trying to convince people to let me paw around in the inflow to their brains, knowing I'd be relying on someone else to make it happen, sat unwell.

At some level, watching the videos of Sarah Palin's interviews with Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson (Sean Hannity, as expected, never asked her anything harder than what it's like to be a mom), I found myself nearly feeling sorry for her. She's clearly in way over her head. It's possible she's smart; undoubtedly she has certain political skills, at least the ones necessary to succeed in small towns and in corrupt states. It might well be that, given time, she could become a decent Senator (if she can separate herself from her crazy religious beliefs.) But it's clear to everyone but the most damn-it-all-I don't-need-no-facts partisans she's absolutely not ready for the national stage. Looking furtively at her notes, mixing up her talking points, blithering.

But here's the thing: when McCain asked, she said yes. Surely she didn't think she was ready. (If she did, that's game, set, match: she's too clueless to be there.) She could have said no. Like I did, back then.

It's shameful. The shame is hers to share, but more than anyone, it's McCain's. Selecting her, whether it represents supreme carelessness or scary impulsiveness or craven cynicism, is an absolute disqualification from being president. It's reckless, and disrespectful. It's deeply worrisome; it disgraces both of them. I wonder if we'll ever get the truth: does he regret it now, or is he 100% cynicism. As the revelations rain upon them, are there second thoughts? Are his handlers angry as hell at him, or was it their idea? What are they saying, in private?

And, mostly, how can ANYONE, man or woman, look at her performance and remain enthusiastic?

[Update 1: Here's a more authoritative, and much lengthier statement, by a more famous person than I, which, it turns out, says much the same. Other than the surgery stuff.]

[Update 2: Well, by golly, lookee here.]