THE FAMILIAR COMFORT OF DYSFUNCTION

At least on the surface it seems like such an untenable position I’m hesitant it even address it, yet increasingly I’ve come to believe that inspite of the proclaimed indignation, anger, and general carping the majority of the electorate find a measure of comfort in the familiarity of current governmental and societal dysfunction.

That it’s better to stay with the pig in a poke than to actively pursue the change that is needed in this country.

If that is correct it speaks to two motivations, one being fear and the other complacency.

A fear that if the boat is rocked things will become worse or a complacency based on a belief that all is as it should be and both corporations and the government actually have our best interests at heart.

People want to believe, and often enough the mere desire to is sufficient to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to the realities.

Politicians know this, for them it is axiomatic, and so they enage in a rheotric that facilitates this desire to believe, so much so I’ve actually heard individuals qualify this in saying they don’t take the campaign talking points as actually being what a politician will do or attempt to do.

That’s a wtf moment for me – you don’t actually believe them, which is to say you acknowledge or interpret that what they say are lies and yet will vote for them anyway?

Which in turn seems to substantiate the previously mentioned motivations – fear and or complacency. Seemingly untenable as I said but I’m hard pressed to think of a different explanation.

I suppose there could other possibilities like party allegiance come hell or high water or that casting a vote singularly on the grounds that a woman is running.

But in my estimation they too have a dysfunctional basis as gender in and of itself is far from being a qualification.

Change doesn’t occur overnight, especially when it comes to the political process.

It is incremental in nature – a path is chosen with x number of required steps.

Steps that would include the reinstatement of Glass Steagall and either a retooling of trade agreements like NAFTA that opened the gates to a tsunami of jobs and production leaving the country or the complete dismantling of it.

Medicare and SSI shouldn’t be attacked they should be fortified – when a conservative says the opposite ask them how many parents, grandparents, friends, or constituents do they have who have depend on both? Ask them if they’re willing to kick them under the bus?

If they don’t like a healthcare system that provides services to all regardless of income or ethnicity and say it’s all about family values and taking care of ones own ask them if they or everyday working people have the financial ability to do so?

When they go on about the evil of a tuition free college education ask them if they believe only the best and the brightest seek a higher education or have the ability to afford one?

I seriously doubt the rank and file conservative working class are any better off than others – they have to contend with the same oppressed wages, the same exportation or jobs, and the same financial uncertainties and burdens – yet the familiar comfort of dysfunction is acceptable as long as it’s wrapped in a layer of guns, immigration, ISIS, and the flag.

It’s like being offered the choice of losing an arm or leg, choosing one, and then chanting USA, USA, USA.

America, the land of political savants? I don’t think so, more of a naivete staggering in proportions.

HELP WANTED

Scott Walker, Wisconsin governor, is in the running for conservative poster boy in this country, his approach to governing has been that of a slash and burn policy directly impacting education, the environment, any form of social programs, and equity those who work for a living.

To say that Walker envisions himself as presidential material is an understatement, he is a man who would be a King capable of arbitrarily imposing his will upon his subjects, and like feudal kings of past and present apparently favors his own version of serfs and servitude.

Walker’s ties to the infamous Koch brothers is in itself an indictment, his record of such an association defining.

In the expansion of governmental power, often times not only illegal but unconstitutional as was well, I think it appropriate to in turn “monitor” their activities, and hopefully this request to monitor Walker as he romps about Europe in an attempt to resume build for a presidential bid will further expose the global reality and threat of corporate owned Scott Walker presidency replete with it’s own version of sharia law.

Walker is doing his best to maintain the continuity of “god fearing, America love or it leave it,” Republican bobble heads.

Republicans are long on talk about reducing the size of government, something many in this country agree with, including myself –  but such a reduction should be accompanied by empowering people, the Republican and Tea Party model however is one that would transfer power to corporations as being good for “bidnus” and America.

On the other hand the Dems are all about increasing the size and expenditures, that resonates with many who believe government is meant to be a bottomless well providing any and everything a person might need overlooking the reality that the more any government is capable of doing so two things occur – taxation skyrockets and again a transference of additional power takes place as illustrated in the “prolonged detention” video. Not only that but dependency in nearly facet of life  increases.

The threat of a “new legal regime” constructed by the Obama administration negates any “good” talking points his supporters may offer, though they just can’t seem to bring themselves to say so – the threat of a Walker administration will be accompanied by it’s own rule of law, and likewise Walker’s supporters can’t bring themselves to admit that.

These are the realities that lead me to say once having gotten past the rhetoric, partisanship, and fluff there isn’t a nickles worth of difference between the parties  where it truly matters, and that is the Constitutional empowerment of the people and “certain inalienable rights”.

The similarities between Walker, Nixon, and Bush are obvious, so obvious in fact one might be driven to question if there is a familial bond, all of the persuasion that an imperial presidency is what the country needs….but then Obama with his new law “regime” seems to think so as well.

And so the question becomes not a matter of who cares but who are willing to hold those they elect accountable?

http://wcmcoop.com/2015/02/15/president-walker-primer-4-things-you-should-know-about-scott-walker-before-its-too-late/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbslm1h8xjI

THE CHICKENS ARE COMING HOME TO ROOST

Great article and a bitter pill to swallow for those who stress a “difference” between parties and the Bush Obama administrations.

For those who wave a party banner and grant absolution for all offenses.

“Change” and “transparency” in the end set the fox to guard the hen house, and the chickens have come home to roost.

The real concern now should be that Obama is in his last term, doesn’t need to worry about hollow rhetoric to insure re election. In that scenario I suspect the worst is yet to come.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-froomkin/obama-makes-bushism-the-n_b_5761642.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1ISLW0sZH0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6Hx1aDp0ZU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

 

 

 

 

 

POLITICAL PARTYS, THE ELECTORATE, AND COMPLICITY

Either by nature or acquired inclination when it comes to politics I claim no party affiliation, if pressed though I will allow that I would have to declare myself a contrarian, as I believe that the adage “if their lips are moving they are lying” when it comes to elected officials is a truism.

I had an interesting conversation with an acquaintance who is a committed apologist and defender of not only the current administration but all Democrats past, present, and no doubt any who will emerge in the future.

His dislike of Republicans and the Tea Party can only be characterized  as an obsessive compulsive disorder-no extreme is too far to go when castigating them or alternately defending the Democrats.

Our discussion began  with the nsa and the spying on German Chancellor Una Merkel and other national leaders-almost immediately he attempted to lay the blame on the Bush administration.

When I asked where does the buck stop at the end of each day he floated his personal opinion that Obama was merely continuing what had become an established “custom” under the previous administration and somehow blameless.

In his world both Bush and Cheney are war criminals and should be tried as such, and Obama richly deserved the Nobel he received-I haven’t  an argument with trying Bush and Cheney, but I have a serious one with the Nobel.

If war crimes consist of conducting a bogus war, maintaining Gitmo, and the drone killing of innocent non combatants that includes women and children, then any who engage in or authorize such measures are in my opinion guilty of and complicit in the commission of such crimes and should be included in the equation.

Having said that this individual nearly became apoplectic, and inspite of their personal opinion of being a political pundit slash savant the defense and explanations they launched into would have at a minimum been embarrassing for any not so afflicted.

But that’s the way of partisanship-it’s almost singularly about passing the buck-a device that will insure a continuation of every wrong, it is a blindness that obscures and denies not only existing realities but perpetuates them.

Cultish in nature, lacking only a secret handshake and initiation rituals- in the end it is a surrender of commonsense and a genuine  concern for the national welfare so often expressed by all political figures.

Change will not result from partisanship-it will be the product of demanding something better, and viewing all things, all politicians with the same critical eye commonly reserved for those of an opposing party.

My personal opinion is that the tipping point has been reached and passed, too much power has been accumulated-and history has shown time and again that once power is acquired it is never surrendered.

The thing about domestic spying is that it has not only violated numerous Constitutional rights but laws as well-the attempts to mollify the public now with a deluge of new bills and legislation related to this is basically meaningless-it is a though to say…well sure, all these rights have been violated and laws broken but the new ones won’t be.

Anybody really believing that?

And isn’t it funny that the very ones who voted for legislation like the patriot act etal are now saying trust me to look out for you?

It’s as though a coup has taken place while the electorate slept with their head on the pillow of partisanship, they can lay the blame where they will in whatever partisan way that suits them, but they cannot deny their own complicity in doing so…..or the results.

VAWA- VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT

It’s business as usual in the halls of the people’s representative government when it comes to the passage of a piece of legislation referred to as VAWA -the Violence Against Women Act-Bill S 47.

Legislation that would empower the nations to address and ajudicate such crimes committed against women.

Those attempting to block passage predictably reside on the Republican side of the aisle and are attempting to qualify their “concerns” as a matter of constitutionality, while also claiming that passage would enable tribal authorities to arrest non indigenous at will.

Though it has passed in the Senate it now heads to the House where Republicans and their misogynistic cohorts the Tea Party hold sway.

The constitutionality argument is entirely without merit based on the Supreme Court ruling related to the United States vs Lara where it clearly  states that Congress does have the constitutional authority to remove restrictions pertaining to a tribes jurisdiction in criminal matters.

The reality is that little in the history of the governments dealings with the nations has been constitutional in nature.

What I believe is the motivation behind this resistance to passage is the long held belief of the Republican party that whites are gifted with some innate superiority regarding other ethnic groups,specifically white males, that, and they apparently see the passage of this bill as an incremental step  that would further the nations credibility in seeking and claiming  sovereignty.

In a union of  states where power is wielded by a centralized authority a sovereign nation or nations with the ability to govern themselves, create their own laws, and enter into treaties and agreements with whoever they desired to be sitting in their  midst  doesn’t go down well, it isn’t deemed acceptable. Especially in the present political climate of rumblings about states rights and even secession.

What shouldn’t be overlooked when our people rightfully take issue with this is that it is basically the same argument Russell Means presented when the Dine attempted to hold him accountable for the assault of his one armed eighty year old then  Dine father in law.

Russell claimed that in not being of their nation the Dine did not have the authority or essential sovereignty to arrest or try him.

This despite the fact that he was married to a Dine woman, living on Dine land, and committed his crime on their land.

Among Russell’s more inane and predictable arguments was that it was his belief  he wouldn’t receive a fair trail, as if to say his treatment of his father in law was fair-but then we’ve heard that often enough from those in the AIM leadership haven’t we?

Maybe the Republicans can present the same argument and follow the trail Russell blazed in claiming a non indigenous person wouldn’t receive a fair trial because he surely had the same sense of entitlement.

Russell claimed to be a lot of things he wasn’t, and he vacillated back and forth between political party affiliation and positions as it served whatever agenda he had-but I think one would have to say  he was at a heart a Republican when it came to issues  regarding our ability to adjudicate matters and sovereignty,when it came to empowering and protecting women despite all the self promotion in talk of matriarchy, liberation, patriotism, and sovereignty.

What is going on related to this legislation should be a Howard Beale moment for us, for our indigenous journalists-we should all stand up, say we’re made as hell, not going take it anymore and demand passage. That would be the true “liberator” “patriot” thing to do, and might set an example for the AIM leadership.