There's been this 'unifying' theme kicking around in my noggin churning, lately: Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS).
Somehow it is the key to unraveling the political minefield that lies before us, I suspect. And if you have the time, allow me to explain those underlying uniting themes, with this post ...
Obama Derangement Syndrome -- urbandictionary.com
The acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the statements -- nay -- the very existence of Barack Obama.
Jon Stewart has called ODS:
Baracknophobia.
Rand Paul says "Barack Obama is turning the United States into a 'socialist nightmare'."
Even president Obama himself joked about it recently, at the 2014 correspondents dinner:
"You'll miss me when I'm gone. It'll be harder to convince the American people that Hillary was born in Kenya."
So it is plain that there is this fear of all-things Obama-related --
irrationally held by some. But what explains this mass-hysteria phenomena, and how is it different from say,
BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) -- that gripped the nation not so many years ago?
Perhaps this irrational, hot-button fear and anger ... just goes with the Presidential territory?
Most here, would be hard-pressed not to cringe or wince, at the mere mention of the name: Dick {Darth} Cheney.
Of course if any one man, deserved all the citizenry fear and loathing, shadow-president Cheney would certainly qualify ...
Because isn't this why the human species instinctive bands together into "groups" in the first place -- so we can nominate someone to Lead ... AND so that we can conversely have someone to Blame, too?
... when all the complexities of life gather up, and fail to go {quote} "our way"? {end-quote}
The human species seems predisposed to nominate our Heroes, and alternately castigate our Scapegoats, when things go awry.
Whereas the truth of the matter probably falls somewhere in the middle, seeing as we are all human, and seeing how that Congress itself is the source of most of our collective inaction, lax oversight, and faulty legislation. That THEY really should suffer the blame ...
Believe it or not, before there was ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome), there was {quote} BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) {end-quote}. And even odder yet, we have Charles Krauthammer to thank for inventing this broad-brush-swiping 'illness':
Bush Derangement Syndrome -- rationalwiki.org
Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) is a neologism coined by neoconservative pundit Charles Krauthammer. As he defined it in a 2003 column, it is:
“...[T]he acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush.”[1]
BDS was originally coined by Krauthammer to attack Howard Dean, Barbara Streisand, and Bill Moyers in a pathetic attempt to equate them to full-on conspiracy theories about Dubya like Cynthia McKinney's endorsement of 9/11 "truth", and it soon became a convenient way for wingnuts to handwave away any criticism of Bush.[2] Unfortunately for those alleged to be suffering BDS, it is not listed in the DSM [The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders] and as such unlikely to be covered by the average insurance plan.
[...]
These Pavlov-like Syndromes may vary in their degrees of factual accuracy, and intended objectives -- but their effects are the same. They lead to oppositional,
divided government. They prevent the nation from moving forward, and pro-actively addressing the many complex problems, that any complex, modern society will inevitably face. Simply
banding together as a group, has its advantages to a species. But it has many disadvantages too -- such as
who speaks for me, my family, my career, my city, my causes? And what if their words -- of my advocates -- end up simply
falling upon deaf {or deranged} ears?
In those cases, many of those social-banding advantages ... then will end up transforming into simply trying to endure 'the government we got' ...
How Obama Derangement Syndrome is unlike that of Bush
Liberal Librarian, thepeoplesview.net -- Sep 14, 2013
[...]
Obama Derangement Syndrome is different [from Bush Derangement Syndrome] because it’s all-consuming. Nothing that he does can be credited. Everything he does must be deligitimized. He has to be shown as an empty suit, a buffoon, a clown, an incompetent, someone good at entertaining with speeches but completely out of his depth at governing. The more success he racks up, the greater the volume of this banshee wailing. The Republican Party and the Right in general have ceased standing for anything positive; they merely exist to oppose Obama in everything, no matter the damage it will do to the state. The Right’s only purpose is to conduct a scorched-earth campaign against the president.
[...]
Last time I checked, scorching the earth "on principle" was not a very pro-active nor constructive policy platform. Even though it might make the fire-brand carriers 'feel good' over their vocalized protests, and expressions of resistance.
To blame some-ONE for our problems, is only human nature. Even though that blame might not always trace back to that one person, alone. No matter -- "The Buck has to Stop Somewhere!"
Sometimes the Blamers may actually have to share in the Blame. Afterall, we {the collective we} are the ones who actually send the "clowns" to Congress -- that is when "we" actually cared enough to bother to vote for the bums the hurlers-of-blame.
We {someone} should ask Krauthammer: Where is the Congressional Derangement Syndrome (CDS) -- that blames all-things Congress-related -- you know that uniquely American institution, where our cherished American Dreams, all go to quietly die ... ?
Here's a word test for you. I'll give a few "hot-button" phrases, you give your gut-level emotional response to each of them ("internal gut-checks" are fine for this little DS experiment):
Iraq War
War on Terror
Pre-emptive Strikes
Abu Ghraib
Guantanamo
Unknown Knowns
NSA Overreach
Home Foreclosures
Out-sourcing Opportunities
Homelessness
Keystone Pipeline
Occupy Wall Street
Bush Tax Cuts
Tea Party Patriots
Bloated Bureaucracy
Government Shutdown
Student Loan Crisis
Jobs, Jobs, Jobs
Drill Baby Drill
The Food Stamp President
Two Americas
What should be apparent (I hope), is that our outsized emotional responses are not always limited by our individual "party allegiances." And when those very "human outrages" stray across traditional party-lines, I would raise this possibility, and ask this political touchstone question:
Do such common outrage responses, provide some hazy horizon-lines to that unstructured political territory, that some dare to call Populism?
In politics as in life, "outrage" will only get you so far, especially toward solving "our problems."
Because at some point the "outrage" fades, and all that will remain are the "Heroes" and the "Scapegoats" -- AND those still unsolved problems -- that at some base-level, "we" all share in common ... as bumbling, fragile, imperfect human beings, inhabiting a limited planet. No matter the leadership caps, we each may be temporarily handed, at one of our many stations in this journey called life.
It seems to me, whoever can best tap the common vein of 'frustration and futility' -- will likely be the next one we will collective nominate to Lead/Blame, our uniquely American, and very exceptional never-ending national parade.
Afterwhich, our un-examined Presidential Derangement Syndrome (PDS) will morph again, and will eventually keep us once again, appropriately constrained {and frustrated}. ... Consumers in waiting. With only Jeb/Hill to blame, this next blame-game time around.
Defining "our problems" which we need to commonly solve as a Society ... would be a very smart, first Populist step (if you'd asked me). Especially if we ever hope to, practically and effectively, break out of our National PDS rut ... (Blame the President rut.)
To solve a problem, we first have to agree on, just what that problem is. Such are the limitations of language, and competing group consensuses.
Or so it is becoming more obvious to me. That Populism is the uniting-theme who's time has finally come. Our group "Dems" would be wise not to miss this uniquely empowering, and politically crass opportunity. ... Afterall isn't this one of our Party Platforms, that we are the Party of the People?
Dems had better start acting like it (more 'Populous') ... if ever things are to really change. And the real clowns of inaction, are ever to be held to their well-earned, blame-worthy account.