Meet Your Congress

As I've said repeatedly, it'd be one thing to see Dems go down based on some sort of actual, factual, reactual. But when it's based on overt insanity, what's a person to think? Where are we headed? What will become of us? I refer to these guys:

Allen West (R) in Florida's 22nd

West first gained notoriety during his military service in Iraq, when he was forced to retire from the Army for engaging in abusive interrogation techniques. More recently, he'sincorporated violent rhetoric into his campaign speeches, and made demonstrably ridiculous claims about his own background. Last month, we learned about West's ties to a violent gang of criminals, which the Justice Department believes is involved in drug running, arson, prostitution, robbery, and murder. Yesterday, he won by eight points.

Renee Ellmers in North Carolina's 2nd

Ellmers is perhaps best known for running on a virulently anti-Muslim platform, and based much of her advertising on her opposition to the Park51 project (which is nowhere near her district). In September, she appeared utterly humiliated during an interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper, but nevertheless narrowly won yesterday.

Austin Scott in Georgia's 8th

Scott ran on a platform that would, among other things, push mandatory drug testing for those Americans who receive unemployment benefits. He won by five points.

Scott DesJarlais in Tennessee's 4th

Roll Call reported a couple of months ago that DesJarlais, during a messy break-up with his ex-wife, allegedly held a gun in his mouth for three hours and was accused of spousal abuse. He nevertheless defeated incumbent Rep. Lincoln Davis (D) yesterday in a landslide.

Ben Quayle in Arizona's 3rd

Quayle, the son of the ridiculed former V.P., is perhaps best known for having contributed to a raunchy, sex-themed website -- and then lying about it. Yesterday, he won by double-digits.

And how to explain this, in Florida, a state where Medicare is like ATP reductase?

Rick Scott is, of course, best known as the disgraced former head of the Columbia/HCA health-care company that got caught up in a massive fraud scandal in the 1990s -- and nothing says victory in Florida like "Medicare fraud." Scott's firm later pleaded guilty to charges that it overbilled state and federal health plans, and agreed to pay $1.7 billion in fines, a record penalty for a health care company. The fines covered fraud perpetrated under Scott's watch, and he was forced out of his job as a result of the scandal.

More recently, Scott used his personal fortune to hire the Swiftboat liars' p.r. firm, and proceeded to launch a breathtakingly deceptive right-wing ad campaign in opposition to health care reform. He is, by the way, also at the center of an ongoing scandal stemming from his alleged fraud at a different health care company he created.

When the initial HCA scandal broke, and Scott was forced to give a deposition about his role, he pleaded the Fifth Amendment -- 75 times. After the second fraud scandal broke, Scott gave another deposition just days before he announced his gubernatorial campaign, but refused to let the public know what he said.

And despite his scandals and alleged crimes, and the fact that he's never held any public office and at any level, Rick Scot will now be the chief executive of one of the nation's largest states.

Usually, far-right Republicans get elected and then become criminals. It's not every day an apparent crook gets caught and then gets elected.

So what shall we make of all this? One thing, for sure: the power of Fox "news" to control the message and influence elections is complete. Absent ideas -- and Republican candidates' ideas were nothing if not absent -- elections can be won simply by ginning up rage over falsities, counting on the bottomless gullibility of teabaggers, and spending huge sums of money on deceptive ads.

Sour grapes? Maybe. But until someone can show me anything -- anything -- a R winner proposed during the campaign that was specific, sensible, and based on reality, my conclusion stands.

And riddle me this: a plurality of voters blame the economic crash on Wall Street (George Bush is next). And among that group of voters, the majority of them voted Republican. The party, in case no one noticed, that wants to remove the few traffic lights Democrats placed there...

Logic? Coherent philosophy? Anything? Bueller? Bueller?...

No, whatever explains the results, it isn't sound reasoning. And to get whole swaths of people to vote unreasonably, it takes a relentless and cynical propaganda machine, albeit brilliant enough to sense people's vulnerabilities and to feed them like goldfish.

Sadly we know, sooner or later, where we goldfish always end up.

That's The Ticket

I, for one, welcome our new teabagger overlords.

I'm sure they'll get that this is a satirical site, only pretending to be a left wing liberal. Yeah, I mock them for what they are: America-haters, socialist Nazi terrorist Muslim-loving atheist Jews. The bastards. I loved sucking them. Suckering, I mean.

I totally believe the earth is six thousand years old. Carbon dating? Hah. Believe that, you'd believe you could get heat out of rocks. Evolution? A myth. I've been to the zoo: the animals look just the same now as they were the last damn time I was there. Seriously. I'm you. Birth certificate? Not believing it till they show it to me. Even then... If they sneaked him here from one 'a those ashrams, they sure as hell can phony up a piece of paper. Besides, Hawaiians look an awful lot like Mexicans.

So when you come for the non-Christians, know that it's not me. I'm with you, a thousand percent. Know how much I'm with you? I don't even know what percent means. It's not even English, is it? When I went to Russia that one time? It was to gather intelligence. They fell right after, you know that, right? Coincidence? Yeah, like it's coincidence that the black guy and Osama have the same middle name.

You don't need to waste your time reading the religion stuff I've written here, 'cause it's all just made up. Trying to get a rise out of those liberal atheists, so we could identify them for times like these. I got names, if you want them. And IP addresses. And I sort of thought God might believe I was serious, so He'd bring on the rapture sooner. For us good guys. And, damn right I'm capitalizing now.

Hey, I hate taxes as much as the next guy. The less you pay, the more the government gets, right? Been that way since the Romans, right after God made the heavens and earth. I'm glad you're gonna privatize social security. Those gay green checks? What's up with that anyway? Health care, too. People get sick, it's on them, not me. You know I'm a doctor, right? Never had a problem with good old American care. I can show 'em the door good as the next guy.

Speaking of which, I completely agree that being gay is a choice. Although I don't get the really tight clothes, given that they have such big, you know...

You say the debt is all Obama's fault, Democrats' fault, and I say pour sugar on me dip me like Darjeeling. If I claimed otherwise here, well, numbers are sure debatable; hell, the damn Islams invented them, didn't they? If it weren't for that Colosseum and lions thing, I'd say gimme Roman numberals any day.

Well, since you probably already know, I admit I sort of went to a kind of elite college. But I turned down a seven-year scholarship to Harvard, really, I did. And when my wife went there I bet it was only because she couldn't get in anywhere else. And one of the guys I roomed with is a preacher now. And I never wanted to be summa anyway, because to do that you gotta learn way too much. I'm a gut guy, especially in the last coupla years. Ask my wife. I say we can save a hell of a lot of money on schools if we only give them one book. And we all know which one I mean. I know where we can get them for free. See? Balancing the budget already.

So welcome. We'll have you over for dinner if you want. Burgers and fries okay? Some Bud? (The kind in a can I'm sure you knew that.) I'm already tuned to Fox NEWS, so we're good to go.

Right? We're good. Right?

Bipartheid

Here's something else that's been rattling around for several days, as we hear from Johns Boehner and McCain that the stimulus plan is "unacceptable:" among other things, the election was about Republican policies of the last eight years. Tax cuts and deregulation at home, "f*uck you" as policy abroad. It was also about a desire for bipartisanship. But let's be real: Republicans lost, because their ideas have failed. The burden of bipartisanship, therefore, falls more on them than on Barack Obama. The meeting ground is not in the exact middle. More like 365/538 of the way to the left.

To a greater extent than we've seen in what feels like eons, President Obama (I miss being able to say PEBO, because I liked its sound) has invited the opposition into the discussion, and has altered policy to accommodate them. But enough is enough.

Now, as I've said many times, I'm no economist. I have no idea where the balance point is between tax cuts and government spending (and it's my impression no one else really does, either.) There's some sense in the idea that putting money in people's hands is the more immediate way to inject money into the economy; on the other hand, it's hard to see how the benefit to the individual of several hundred bucks in the pocket outweighs the detriment to the government of the millions-multiplied lost revenue.

In a world that exists only in my imagination, the Democrats would have come up with a greatly more simple and direct plan: this much goes to the states, with controls, to be spent on infrastructure projects; this much goes to extending such benefits as unemployment and health care; this much goes to education; this much to tax relief. Period. Not countless pet projects, not opening the door to pettifoggery.

And in that same world, Barack Obama would now be turning to the people, addressing the nation: make the case for his priorities, and why they are better than the alternatives. Remind them that it's the policies of the past that got us here, point out that, like that definition of insanity (continuing to do the same thing, and expecting a different result), the Republicans are simply demanding more of the same. Invite people to get on the phone, on their keyboards, lick their stamps, calling on their Congressfolk to get on board. Put down the marker: we believe this is the best plan, and here's why. It's time to act. Those who support it can share the credit for its success. We've gone as far as we think we can go to make the opponents happy.

If they can't sign on, so be it. They can take the electoral consequences when the economy turns around and they're on record as having said "NO." And if it doesn't, well, they can say "I told you so" as we sink below the tides.

That's the way it works.

.

Rebound

As usual, The Onion demonstrates that satire is separated from truth by the thinnest and most permeable of membranes (if this isn't prescience, I don't know what is). I do indeed find myself re-entering the world of the living, tentatively, warily, toesomely testing the waters, if somewhat less pathetically than in the above video. My obsessive reading and re-reading of my favorite political blogs, while not entirely absent from my life, is more resistable; in fact, I sense less energy in them as well. Mine, too, for that matter.

I still want news; I'm still most interested in how the transition will unfold, whom the President-elect will pick for what positions. I look forward to his inaugural speech, and I anticipate with some anxiety the first few months of actual governing. I don't want to be disappointed in my belief that he'll be a pragmatist, searching for the best solutions from the best people, catering not too much to any political faction.

Mainly, though, for now there's a tremendous sense of relief, manifested in a certain lightness of foot. Ever take a long hike with a heavy backpack? Know that amazing feeling of lightness when you put it down, a literal feeling that you could float away? I guess it's sorta like that: as one who found the Bush presidency nearly unrelentingly leaden in its incompetence and disregard for the law and for reason and for us, there's a giddy joy in contemplating a government run by unapologetically smart and informed people. I don't deny that my glasses are erubescent: still, it's only the most partisan of dead-enders who could deny the difference in style and substance when listening to Obama speak, compared to his predecessor. How welcome, the sense of leaning forward to hear, as opposed to reaching to switch if off.

Are my expectations too high? No doubt they are, fueled by a longing to see things set right, and by the simple pleasure of feeling positive for a change. But I cling to the belief that if enough people demand it, our lawmakers might actually be forced, in numbers large enough to carry it off, to look beyond self and party. In this election, I sense the desire. It could happen. Couldn't it?

A Moment, For A Moment...

Watching the celebrations, seeing the tears on the faces, hearing John Lewis say, when asked if he'd ever imagined this in his lifetime, "all we were trying for was to let black people sit at lunch counters, and ride a bus," this song was in my head, and I let it play, ignoring for a while the certainty that it's not really true. Indeed, to be alive when such a thing has happened is a gift of circumstance for which I'll be forever grateful, about which I'll be forever amazed. No matter what happens.

I have no words, I have a million words. We're not there yet. The problems are daunting. Reaction from some -- certainty that Barack Obama is in league with terrorists, that he will destroy the Constitution (as opposed to RESTORE IT!) -- saddens and worries me. Despite his restorative speech, John McCain -- and Sarah Palin even more -- deserves blame for much of it, for making the required work harder.

I thought Barack Obama's speech was near perfect. I'm as certain as I can be that that is who he really is: inclusive, not ideological; hopeful but practical; inspirational but serious. I think he'll do his best to run a centrist (center-left) government, to reach out and listen to those who disagree. If I'm wrong, I'll be disappointed. And surprised.

Nor will he have much room to work: wars, deficits, economic lock-down will constrain him. He'll have to speak truth both to the far right and the far left; as I read somewhere recently (spoken by whom I don't recall), it'll take an entire first term to "unwind" the disasters of the Bush administration. If he's able to make sufficient headway to earn reëlection, in a second term he might be able to lead the sorts of reforms he's talked about: health care, education... So there's reality with which to contend.

But last night, I just let it wash over me: the moment, the hope that things might change for the better, the witnessing of the best version of America, a sense of retaking the higher ground in the eyes of the world. I felt relief that the hatred spewing from the right didn't take hold -- at least not enough, for now, to turn the election. Was it a rejection of that kind of politics? Might we not see it again? I'm not that starry-eyed.

And yet, for that night, it was real: like a red-peach sunrise, a scene to drink in for its own sake, to bathe in and let it wash over oneself, simply for the pleasure of it. A gift of time suspended, an instant of immersion in sensations, all good, letting it go, a weight lifted, wiping away in a single scene the disappointments of the last eight years. Pure escape, for a while. I liked it. The tears on the faces I saw were mine as well: I shared them even as I could barely understand.

This morning, while I still can conjure it, the feeling is increasingly tempered by the reality that hasn't changed. Nearly half the country is disappointed; unknown numbers of those are angry and filled with fear and hatred. In all three states where they ran, initiatives passed banning gay marriage. Why? Why? Who is harmed?

We have a long way to go.

But it's a hell of a start.