Today is one of those days where I felt a rant coming on and was powerless to help myself – or you. But before I get started, here is a word from our sponsors. . . .
We have so many insightful and powerful diaries written here at Daily Kos. Our diaries inform, inflame, impassion, and even entertain. We Kossacks have strong voices and an even stronger will to be the change we wish to see in this country.
One of the richest, and perhaps most under-appreciated, areas of thought come in the form of comments attached to these diaries.
Here at Top Comments we strive to recognize and promote the talent of this community by highlighting outstanding comments found throughout the day by the diarist, and through nominations by other Kossacks. So when you find a comment that enlightens, entertains, or encourages, send it to:
topcomments at gmail dot com.
Comments should get to the inbox by 9:30 EST to be included that day (but we will carry over later ones). Don’t forget to include
- your Dkos screename,
- a link to the nominated comment, and
- a brief note about why you think it is a Top Comment.
You know what they say: No news is good news. Recently I have begun to realize the truth of that adage and another one: Ignorance is bliss.
As a scientist, I have never put much stock into willful ignorance. In fact, I have always found it to be extremely irritating, whether it I found it in lazy students or right-wing ideologues. And even though I am not much of a TV watcher, I have always kept up with both broadcast and print news. But recent events have taught me some things both about myself and about the value of news.
Like many of you, I don’t have much use for the mainstream television news, either broadcast or cable. However, I do have my favorites that I try to keep up with – DemocracyNow!, Rachel Maddow, and Keith Olbermann, along with a smattering of PBS and al Jazeera and the local news. But lately the self-generated political crisis that is the debt ceiling has rendered even those programs impossible for me to watch.
It’s not that the programs are different. It is that the “news” that is there to be covered is so insipid as to be impossible to endure. Today, even the local business reporter was openly derisive of the current “political process,” announcing to the wide-eyed anchor that the Republicans were just engaging in political theater because they couldn’t possibly be stupid enough to not understand the consequences of default. He went on to clarify that this “crisis” is one entirely of their making, without any basis in reality except for the very real impact their behavior is already having on the economy.
So disgusted am I with the current “news” that I turned for relief yesterday to an old favorite, Conversations with History. And I didn’t even turn it off when I saw host Harry Kreisler was interviewing ex-neocon Francis Fukuyama. The irony of an appearance on Conversations with History by Fukuyama, who wrote his infamous The End of History in 1989 and tried to bring it about with his promulgation of PNAC in 1997 (along with such political masterminds as Bill Bennett, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, "Scooter" Libby, Norm Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Donald Rumsfeld, and, of course, Paul Wolfowitz) , was too much to ignore.
A Brief Pause
Now for a momentary pause in today’s rant ...
And speaking of Paul Wolfowitz, I wanted to take a moment to point out one of the great benefits of writing researched and linked diaries. While exploring details of the PNAC crew, specifically Wolfowitz, I ran across a source that you might not be familiar with – the Dickopedia, a wiki of dicks. And they aren’t kidding, either. The entries include not only political dicks, but representatives in the media, entertainment, sports, business and international categories. There is also a miscellaneous category for dicks like The Flu and Santa Clause, as well as individuals like Pat Robertson and Rick Warren, whose odiousness spans multiple categories. IMHO, Dickopedia is deficient in the category of religion, and really needs some help beefing up the Business category, so feel free to help them out, particularly if you happen to have information about Lawrence Summers or Tim Geithner or Lloyd C. Blankfein or Vikram Pandit or Ben Bernake or any of the other architects of our financial disaster.
Rant Redux
As you can probably tell from the absence of a link to Fukuyama’s talk, even though he alone among the PNAC signers has had the grace to renounce the project, I still consider his opinions to be largely without merit. However, I was struck by the fact that the present political impasse in Washington seems to have changed his mind somewhat about the End of History. His basic argument in
The End of History was that Western liberal democracy may be the end point of humanity's sociocultural evolution and the final, highest form of human government. So awesome did he find the U.S. political system that he believed all governments would eventually evolve into market-driven democracies.
Now, however, Fukuyama cannot help but see that there is a flaw in the system that might indicate it is less than perfect. Typical of Fukuyama, he sees this flaw as the “checks-and-balances” part, which has caused the system to grind to a halt. Well, no one ever accused him of having a corner on deep thought, but he is right at one level. There is a problem with the system, and it is with one component of the checks-and-balances system, but not with the system as a whole.
What is becoming increasingly clear is that the problem lies with the one part of the system which has no realistic check – the supreme court. And before you rush to tell me about the check that Congress imposes on the supreme court, stop and think about intent vs. reality. How much of a check will a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America like our current Congress pose for a supreme court whose majority, apparently, is also wholly controlled by their corporate masters?
How many of the problems we are currently dealing with can be traced back to the activist judges who allowed to stand the original error of corporate personhood? And to the Roberts court, which has done so much to amplify and extend the concept? According to Reclaim Democracy:
One of the most severe blows to citizen authority arose out of the 1886 Supreme Court case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad. Though the court did not make a ruling on the question of "corporate personhood," thanks to misleading notes of a clerk, the decision subsequently was used as precedent to hold that a corporation was a "natural person."
From that point on, the 14th Amendment, enacted to protect rights of freed slaves, was used routinely to grant corporations constitutional "personhood." Justices have since struck down hundreds of local, state and federal laws enacted to protect people from corporate harm based on this illegitimate premise. Armed with these "rights," corporations increased control over resources, jobs, commerce, politicians, even judges and the law.
A United States Congressional committee concluded in 1941, "The principal instrument of the concentration of economic power and wealth has been the corporate charter with unlimited power...."
There’s another little irony for you: the same 14th amendment used to railroad through many corporate personhood rulings may hold the solution to the current “debt ceiling crisis.” However, the Obama administration rejects that solution because they think the clause was intended for a narrow purpose, while it wholeheartedly embraces the theory of corporate personhood, which has no constitutional origin at all and relies on an even smaller part of a clause that clearly was not intended to convey personhood on corporations.
Developing expertise regarding the Constitution does not mean respect for the Constitution or intent to uphold it. Sometimes deep knowledge just gives cover, or worse, allows for devising ways around Constitutional prohibitions. It seems our government is full of people on both sides of the aisle and in all three branches who are willing to ignore both the spirit and the letter of the Constitution for political gain.
So, while you are mulling what is next and how Republicans can ignore the “wishes” of their corporate masters, ask yourself who stands to gain if there is no deal. We are told that interest rates on everything will rise – cars, homes, national debt, everything. And who stands to profit if that happens? The same schumcks that got us into this in the first place? The same schumcks that have already been made completely whole at our expense? The same schumcks that are enjoying bonuses and salaries even higher than they were when they brought our economy to a grinding halt just a couple of years ago? So don’t be too surprised if there is a last-minute “grand compromise” that hammers the middle class and poor, followed by an increase in interest rates brought on by “market uncertainty.”
If you are familiar with Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine and Crisis Capitalism, you already know what all of the sturm und drang is about. And you are pretty sure how it is going to end. As Atrios puts it: Better Living Through The Suffering Of Others.
Tonight’s Top Comments. . . .
From A. Lizard:
blueoasis points out the neocon Holy Grail in Deep Harm's excellent $22 trillion Social Security surplus revealed on C-SPAN.
From
brillig:
In today's Today in Congress, Detroit Mark asks why the press is so fascinated with teabaggers' ability to shut down debate and offers a comparison
From
Dragon5616:
In SwedishJewfish's recommended diary, Horrible Glenn Beck fans featured in New York Times, G2geek asks a question about Norwegian culture, and Andhakari offers a lengthy but worthy answer.
Want to see some really fine Kossack art? Check this painting by Friend of the court in boran2's weekly art diary, ArtKos: Saturday Painting Palooza Vol.311.
From
trashablanca:
Diogenes2008 made a stellar comment and sparked an interesting discussion in gchaucer2's rec listed diary, The Whitening of DKos4.
From
Fed up Fed:
In my diary on the concept of government as business, gilas girl responded to a post by theotherside on the willingness of libertarians to debate their ideology with a dead on characterization of the personal politics behind their disengaged worldview.
From
Angie inWAState:
I nominate this comment by Mimikatz in LaFeminista's shock doctrine diary because anyone who makes me laugh out loud before I finish my first cup of coffee deserves a nomination, or maybe because it's just a fricking perfect analysis of the krazee infecting the fools who pretend to be Politicians in our nation's capitol city, but mostly for "Banana Republicans," because that is going to go viral, I guar-an-damn-tee it.
From
me:
Flint writes an excellent note to the President that lays the facts out clearly in xaxnar's excellent NPR Airt Truth About Budget Fiasco.