We just came from a private meeting with Maurice Hinchey, one of the "most progressive" Democrats in the House, "we" being ten Ithacans and 8 folks from Binghamton. Maurice took a special flight for this get together (the reasons for this I'll expand upon in a post later tonight or tomorrow) which was to be about the Resolution to Impeach Cheney but wandered off into other areas as well. Someone brought up the fact that Maurice was a "progressive" yet has gotten behind Hillary in her rum for The Presidency. They mentioned her war vote and a few other things and how this would seem to conflict with Maurice's stated views. In a nutshell here was what Maurice said, it was mind-boggling and pretty much left everyone in the room shaking their heads and looking in disbelief at one another:

"Well we from New York (meaning the political apparatchiks from New York) decided to get behind Hillary because we know her and feel comfortable with her. While I don't agree with Hillary on many issues and I do support her candidacy with some reservations I have a lot of respect for her. And of course she's from New York."

This was really pretty amazing and he babbled a bit about how he had a great deal of respect for Edwards and that Richardson was a close personal friend of his.

So Elizabeth, sitting to my left, says, "Uh, Maurice, Hillary's not really from New York she moved here for political reasons she's actually from Illinois."

Maurice replied while nodding his head in agreement, "That's true, Illinois by way of Arkansas." And that was that.

There was this sort of moment in the room where everyone really could believe what they just heard. Not that he supported Hillary but how utterly facile and empty was his reasoning for supporting Hillary.

It was an breathtaking 2 hours of obfuscation and illogic and I hope to capture much of it in a later post. By the way there is zero chance he is going to support Kucinich' resolution. He made that clear in between the numerous times he state point blank. "There is noone more for impeachment than I" and stated that he would vote for an impeachment resolution if it made it to the floor.

Unbelievable what we heard tonight. And by the way if Hillary gets elected Spitzer selects the next NY Senator to fill her void. Hinchey stated he would take that position in a heartbeat but stated he thought the likelihood of Spitzer selecting him was small.

Why do these fuckers do this shit? It seems to my simple mind there are only two choices:

1) bought off

or

2) some inexplicable, organic reason perhaps best capsulated as 'class' to me, but maybe a more nebulous sorta thing that many call "reasoned" and "pragmatic."

What is this dood's net worth?

Why do these fuckers do this shit? It seems to my simple mind there are only two choices:

1) bought off

or

2) some inexplicable, organic reason perhaps best capsulated as 'class' to me, but maybe a more nebulous sorta thing that many call "reasoned" and "pragmatic."

What is this dood's net worth?

This is the teeniest of morsels from today's meeting. I say that not to tease I just can't even hardly process and put together all that went down today. Two people got into "in your face" dress downs with Hinchey at the meeting, yep I proudly admit it, and one more got right in Hinchey's face, I mean like two fighters before the bell starts round one, as Hinchey was trying to leave the building.

Unfuckingbelievable all that we heard today.

But we got the fucker on tape and video and we are going to take out radio ads and broadcast video in public places throughout his district showing his blatant contradictions. People are pissed and many of these people were once staunch supporters of Hinchey.

Great stuff. Look forward to the full report.

Why do these fuckers do this shit? It seems to my simple mind there are only two choices:

1) bought off

or

2) some inexplicable, organic reason perhaps best capsulated as 'class' to me, but maybe a more nebulous sorta thing that many call "reasoned" and "pragmatic."

What is this dood's net worth?

They aren't bought off. Not quite. What they get is social acceptance from the "winners," entrance into the winner's circle, and a chance to be a winner themselves.

You know why, Rusty. You know who is behind this. Lots of examples in Highland Horrors right near you. It is pressure from the upscale liberals. The odd thing is this - it is more like social peer pressure than it is political pressure; pressure to make people conform to social standards rather than political ideass. This is reflected in the statements you often hear - "don't get me wrong, I agree with you, but...." what follows that "but" is never a political argument, but a social conformity argument.

That way, liberals can be "for" left wing politics, while working relentlessly to destroy left wing politics.

It is all happening on a local level, and it just gets echoed in national politics.

They aren't bought off. Not quite. What they get is social acceptance from the "winners," entrance into the winner's circle, and a chance to be a winner themselves.

You know why, Rusty. You know who is behind this. Lots of examples in Highland Horrors right near you. It is pressure from the upscale liberals. The odd thing is this - it is more like social peer pressure than it is political pressure; pressure to make people conform to social standards rather than political ideass. This is reflected in the statements you often hear - "don't get me wrong, I agree with you, but...." what follows that "but" is never a political argument, but a social conformity argument.

That way, liberals can be "for" left wing politics, while working relentlessly to destroy left wing politics.

It is all happening on a local level, and it just gets echoed in national politics.

I was thinking the other day about how different this period of unemployment is than any I ever had before and how different my aspirations are now than they ever were before. At base, what I really realized is that most folks aspire to exploit. Exploitation = "success" - you know, being a 'manager' and the like.

It's just fucking nuts.

Yesterday I was rehanging an entry door to the detached garage of the old house my ex owns. He came home from his workday for the brief window before heading out to some play or restaurant he would review. He is semi-patirician east coast by roots and has always had a bent for snappy conservative clothes, etc. Anyway, he came out in the backyard in his khaki slacks and de rigueur downtown boy blue blazer. Filthy in an old t-shirt I was wearing for the second day (it saves water and didn't stink), I asked him if he dressed that way every day. It turns out that it was somewhat of a special day. He he now a board member of the Dallas Press Club, and they had a luncheon. So he had on a bow tie as did all his comrades; this was a sartorial shift. Of course he knows as well as I do it is all a role to play; he however likes playing it.
So yeah, I do see the social conformity in action. Still though, it seems just astonishing to me that such a thing would trump actual policy. How naive of me, right?

They aren't bought off. Not quite. What they get is social acceptance from the "winners," entrance into the winner's circle, and a chance to be a winner themselves.

You know why, Rusty. You know who is behind this. Lots of examples in Highland Horrors right near you. It is pressure from the upscale liberals. The odd thing is this - it is more like social peer pressure than it is political pressure; pressure to make people conform to social standards rather than political ideas. This is reflected in the statements you often hear - "don't get me wrong, I agree with you, but...." what follows that "but" is never a political argument, but a social conformity argument.

That way, liberals can be "for" left wing politics, while working relentlessly to destroy left wing politics.

It is all happening on a local level, and it just gets echoed in national politics.

I was thinking the other day about how different this period of unemployment is than any I ever had before and how different my aspirations are now than they ever were before. At base, what I really realized is that most folks aspire to exploit. Exploitation = "success" - you know, being a 'manager' and the like.

It's just fucking nuts.

Yesterday I was rehanging an entry door to the detached garage of the old house my ex owns. He came home from his workday for the brief window before heading out to some play or restaurant he would review. He is semi-patirician east coast by roots and has always had a bent for snappy conservative clothes, etc. Anyway, he came out in the backyard in his khaki slacks and de rigueur downtown boy blue blazer. Filthy in an old t-shirt I was wearing for the second day (it saves water and didn't stink), I asked him if he dressed that way every day. It turns out that it was somewhat of a special day. He he now a board member of the Dallas Press Club, and they had a luncheon. So he had on a bow tie as did all his comrades; this was a sartorial shift. Of course he knows as well as I do it is all a role to play; he however likes playing it.
So yeah, I do see the social conformity in action. Still though, it seems just astonishing to me that such a thing would trump actual policy. How naive of me, right?

Liberals like to talk about changing people - sort of a hearts and minds program - and see that as a prerequisite to political success. People are to be converted - educated or whatever - to become like-minded people. The problem is that this conversion program is not political. Converting people to be more like liberals - in sentiment, preferences, likes and dislikes - is a big job, and a useless one, as well, politically. The idea there is that social problems are caused by individual people being bad - violent, bigoted, wasteful, stupid - and that social problems can be solved by converting individual people to be good, as we are - loving, kind, caring, peaceful. Almost everyone in the general public has already heard it all, and things get worse, not better. Now what?

At the same time, you can't go an hour without hearing some apology for "success" usually accompanied by a "what can you do" shrug, or encouragement and admiration for any "clever" or "realistic" moves you have made.. This "success" mentality will tolerate no serious discussion of social or political problems. Let's say someone wants to talk about this or that happening in their life, whatever - his career, his life (which is all anyone ever wants to talk about) - and you want to talk about public transit. Not the personal "green" choice of riding a bike or public transit to work - that would be about the person's individual life again - but actually have an intelligent and serious conversation about it. Good luck, right? People immediately get impatient - why would anyone want to talk about that? If it was a special interest of yours, like a hobby, well then fine except "I am not really into that." It is OK to have hobbies, and people are free to ignore you because they are "not into that" as a hobby activity or interest. People will ask "what good does it do for you to be interested in public transit?" They don't mean to question the social value of discussing that, they mean how does it advance you personally? Are you planning a career in "the field?" Are you an "expert?" Is it making you money, is it increasing your social status?

The pressure to socially conform is pressure to do two things - be clever, and be realistic. "Be realistic" means stop worrying about the problems in the world, you can't do anything about those anyway, and who are you to think you "have any answers," and worrying about other people or the community is taking time and energy away from looking after number one. Be realistic means give up all of those ideas you may have about intellectual, creative or political pursuits. "Be clever" means make the right choices - feather your nest, don't take any risks, find the angles, get with the program.

Wolf has described for us how being a writer - driven by the need to write - and success in "the field" of journalism are incompatible - hostile to one another. I can tell you that this is true in the music field, and it is quickly becoming that way in farming, as well. Every creative and intellectual pursuit is incompatible with the success mentality - it is an illusion that society provides work for artists and intellectuals. It is an illusion that those who are successful - Sara Brightman or Thomas Kincaid come to mind - are successful because the cream has risen to the top. The commercialization of all creative and intellectual pursuits is a meat grinder that destroys both the audience and the artists.

This is not a situation of "oh well what can you do," it is not a "well people are just that way." It is caused by commercial interests being given higher priority at all times and in all things than is given to the creative, intellectual or the social. It is not happening off there somewhere in policy decisions in Washington, it is an ongoing battle every minute of every day in everyone's life. Nor is it some deep dark flaw in human nature that we need to reform one person at a time.

Unlike liberal activism, which calls for a tremendous amount of time and energy in the hopes of reforming people's sinful nature, and that brings very small and useless results in return, confronting the commercialization in our daily lives is much more productive - a small amount of effort can cause enormous effects because everyone is caught in this trap, and it is miserable and people want out of it. The more resistant people are to confronting this, the more in love with their own role and status in the system they are. It is a relatively small number of people, but they dominate the Democratic party and liberalism.

Liberalism turns every single cause inside out and backwards. Problem: the automobile culture and attendant social and environmental problems. Liberal answer: individuals buy bikes or more environmentally friendly cars and we lobby for converting railroad right of ways to bike paths. To advance that, we "educate" people that bikes are better than cars, and shame people who won't get on that program. Exactly backwards. Take a discerning look at every liberal cause. Problems that are clearly caused by individualism are addressed by an even more individualistic and esoteric solution. Problems that are obviously caused by rampant unregulated capitalism invading every aspect of our lives are addressed by "green" investment ideas, or responsible corporate behavior ideas - an increased and refined faith in and reliance on capitalism and free markets and profit motive.

The assumptions - that everyone is in it for themselves; that personal success in gaining wealth and status are the only and the ultimate measure for the validity and value of anything we set out to do; that social problems are cause by the choices that individuals make; that profit motive is the only tool for social change that we can consider; that corporate hierarchy is the only way to organize people; that commercial marketing and sales models are the only models for communication - are more rigidly and stubbornly adhered to by liberals than any other people. You don't need to go looking for those - we are bombarded by those messages every minute of every day.