I’m Mad as Hell and I am not Going to Take This Anymore

By Tom Kando

The 1976 movie Network was not as good as many people think. It is best remembered for News anchorman Peter Finch’s famous words, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore.”

This was a safe and meaningless outcry, because the movie never said what he - and you - were supposed to be mad about.

This reminds me of the mindless anger of many people today, especially those enamored by demagogues like Glenn Beck and the always-angry Sarah Palin. (She recently asked for White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s firing because of some foul language he used in a meeting).

I see angry folks like that in the news - the Tea Party people are a prime example - and in my dentist’s waiting room. An old geezer maybe, who seems to be really mad at the world (I’m also an old geezer, but my brain hasn’t atrophied that much, yet). These old geezers are angry, but they don’t know at whom, or why. Is it incipient Alzheimer’s? Some variant of Tourette’s Syndrome?

I can imagine the following conversation with one of them:

After watching the news for a moment on the TV set in the waiting room, he looks away, disgusted, and mumbles, “they should all be shot!”
I ask, “who should be shot?”
“All of them!”
“Why?”
“They’re all a bunch of crooks and thieves and liars. I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore.”
“What are you mad about?”
“The whole corrupt mess, the politicians, and the media, and all the big shots. They are all in cahoots together. The country is going to hell in a handbasket. And the kids are no good. They only care about drugs and sex anymore...”
“So the problem is with the politicians and with the kids?”
“...and the lawyers, and the professors, and the government, and Wall Street, and the media, and Hollywood...”
“Anybody else?”
“Yeah, everybody else, too!”
“But not you?”
“Nah, I’m okay...I keep my nose clean...”
“Mmm...So what should be done?”

“I’ll tell you what should be done: fire all the bastards and go back to square one. When I was young, we didn’t put up with this garbage.”

This is the level of political sophistication around us. Inchoate rage. Solutions? Zero. Just say no to everything. Propose a plan of action? Never. Blame everyone else? Sure. Might you be part of the problem? No way!

Anger and frustration during this terrible economic recession are understandable. But this unfocused, uninformed, nihilistic anger is part of the disease, not the cure. leave comment here Read more...

Traveling Back in Time

by Madeleine Kando

I really don’t like what I have done with my hair. The picture I saw in the magazine looked so nice. I even went to the trouble of photoshopping it and superimposing my own features to see what I would look like. I was very pleased, so as soon as my hairdresser could squeeze me in, off I went with my photoshopped illustration in my purse and a vision of looking like a film star. What I ended up with was totally different.

Not only did I not look like a film star. I looked like an oversized carrot with a perm. I barely made it to the dark safety of my car (with a parking ticket stuck under the windshield wiper to boot) where I started to sob uncontrollably. I knew my life was ruined. I could not be seen in public any more.

As I was driving off, barely seeing the road through my tears, I was contemplating giving the steering wheel a sharp twist to the left so that I would crash into the oncoming traffic and end it all right then and there.

I had to pick up the kids from school and didn’t have time to drive home to turn on the gas and shove my carrot colored head in the oven door. The look on my children’s faces when they spotted me will be etched into my memory forever. For a brief moment they simply did not know who I was. After a while they silently climbed into the car and just kept staring at me without uttering a word.

I knew I had made the biggest mistake of my life. I started to think feverishly. Can you glue hair back on? Can you undo a bleaching? Can you straighten a permanent perm? I could hear a resounding ‘no’ to all these questions.

But WHY? Who made this stupid rule that you cannot undo things? Whoever is responsible for having created the world must have been the biggest idiot. I mean if you have the power to create an entire world, why not do it right and make bad things be undoable?

If I had been in charge I would not have been so cruel as to force gullible housewives into walking around like oversized carrots. I would have made time reversible. I would have created time like space. You don’t like where you live? Just move to another town. You don’t like what you did to your hair? Just move to another time where no such deed took place.

I can hear you think already: ‘but space has dimensions and time doesn't. Time is something that we have invented to prevent everything from happening at once.’ Yeah, yeah. I heard that argument before. Another argument you hear is that if time were reversible entropy could decrease which would violate the second law of thermodynamics (if left alone, anything will eventually revert back to chaos).

Well a little less chaos wouldn't be such a bad thing, would it? Besides I don't need help from father time in that department. I am very good at creating chaos all on my own, thank you very much.

My conclusion is that time is irreversible because we don’t live long enough. Take my hair for instance. If I were to live 3000 years and I would look back on my life as if I was watching a movie, my carrot hair would take up a brief moment of that time and then would return to its normal color. This might happen a few times (depending how many stupid hair-mistakes I would make over a 3000 year span). As I would watch the life-line of my hair, I would be able to play it back in reverse and it would look the same as if I played it forward. Like watching a tree turn brown and green over and over again over the course of many seasons.

So, is the solution to all bad things to let enough time pass? Would bad things eventually revert back to good things and vice versa? Unfortunately we do not have the luxury of living for 3000 years and undo all the bad things we have done during our lives. Maybe that’s why the concept of time is inevitable. It keeps us in line. It keeps us from making too many foolish mistakes. After all, if everything can be undone: why do the right thing to begin with?

Note: If the above theory sounds somewhat illogical it is because I am suffering from post traumatic hair disorder. leave comment here Read more...

Jury Convicts Pro-Abortion Activist

by Madeleine Kando

Why is violence always committed by the pro-life extremists? Here is a fictitious scenario where the tables are reversed:

Less than an hour after deliberation, the California jury found Max Conwell, the notorious pro-abortion extremist guilty of first-degree murder in the shooting death of pro-life organizer Sam Penskew.

According to the prosecution this was a ‘clear-cut case of first degree murder’. The defense wanted the jury to consider a charge of voluntary manslaughter because of Conwell’s strong pro-abortion convictions.

He firmly believed that anti-abortion organizers deserved to be killed since they ruined the lives of pregnant teens and victims of rape. A representative of the pro-choice movement said: “We condemn any such acts of violence regardless of motivation. The pro-choice movement works to protect the rights of women and the unlawful use of violence is directly contrary to our goal."

Conwell’s defense attorney was very disappointed. He said Conwell was so up front with his admissions of guilt that the voluntary manslaughter defense was hopeless. “The jury never got a chance to get inside Conwell’s head. What about all the pregnant teens whose lives woud have been ruined at Penskew’s hand? I believe they needed to be heard in court.”

Some pro-abortion activits signed a petition arguing that Conwell committed justifiable homicide and they didn’t think that justice was served. “The jury didn’t consider Conway’s motive of promoting abortion. He should have had a more just trial”.

Penskew’s family members said they hope that this brave anti-abortion hero will be remembered for his service to the numerous unborn babies he helped save. leave comment here Read more...

The Misinformation Society: The Liars Leading the Ignorant.

By Tom Kando

Only one thing aggravates me more than the mistakes of the electorate - as exemplified by the Democratic loss in Massachusetts on January 19: The conformity and stupidity of the media chatter afterwards.

The pundits have been Monday-morning-quarter backing ever since. They got it all figured out: Take Michael Gerson, Washington Post, Jan. 22: People are angry at Obama; he must scale back health reform. Or a professor recently interviewed on NPR: People are concerned about the deficit. Or other “experts,” who see the voters’ desire for the country to move more to the center (Republicans are at the center?), or the independent voter’s opposition to more taxes, or anti-government populism; etc.,etc...

The truth is: these pundits know as much as the ancient Roman augurs knew - nothing! The goat’s entrails are dark, this means that Caesar will win the battle tomorrow.

I’ll tell you why the people of Massachusetts voted that way on January 19, and why Obama’s ratings have gone down by 20%. For only one reason: They have been bombarded with misinformation for the past 10-12 months.

In politics, only one thing talks - money. Whoever has the resources to repeat its message - including its lies - the most often to the largest number of people, wins the election. The candidate with the most money and the most sympathetic media coverage wins.

Polls don’t reflect the opinions or the will of the people. They reflect the indoctrination of the people. The people’s votes are based on misinformation.

Here are some illustrations:
1. Many people blame Obama for bailing out Wall Street. They confuse two rescue packages: TARP (the Troubled Asset Relief Program), which was the Bush-Paulson $700 billion bailout program for investment banks. And Obama’s stimulus package, the $787 billion ARRA (American Recovery and Investment Act), aimed at creating jobs and helping people with their mortgages.

2. We can still remember the widely publicized case, last year, of the old geezer who attended one of those town hall meetings with a picket sign saying, “The government should keep its hands off my medicare.”

3. On January 21, NPR had a call-in panel discussion on health care. A fellow called in and said: “I oppose Obama’s health care reform package because I don’t want the government to take on another massive program.”
The NPR panelists could have reminded him and millions of listeners that he was misinformed, and that there was nothing governmental left in the final package being considered by Congress - no single-payer plan, not even a public option. But they didn’t. And so, the lies live on. The Democrats’ near-capitulation to the Insurance Industry got them nothing in return, not even a better informed public, a public which understands that “socialized medicine” has long been off the table.

4. Recently, a college student was quoted in the Sacramento Bee saying that it is “unconstitutional to force someone to buy something he doesn’t want, namely health insurance.” So then, mandatory car insurance, home insurance, fire and flood insurance, clothing in public, motor cycle helmets, etc. these things are all unconstitutional?

5. Pregnancy is a pre-existing condition which can prevent a woman from obtaining health insurance. A few years ago, a young female friend of mine was pregnant. She had no insurance. Delivery and pre- and post-natal care of her baby would cost more than thousand dollars, which she didn’t have. She really wanted the child, but given the situation, she had no choice but to abort. This should please the right-wingers who sank health care reform.

Here is an idea for the insurance companies and for the congressmen in their pockets: Be consistent. Since all fertile women are potentially pregnant, why not declare that they all suffer from a pre-existing condition, and deny all women health insurance?
Well, you get my point: Absurdity. leave comment here Read more...

Quotes of the Day

By Madeleine Kando

After the recent victory by Republican Scott Brown over Martha Coakley in Massachusetts, I came across an old quote by Bertolt Brecht, which I thought was very applicable. I took some liberty in reproducing it here:

1) Only the stupidest hogs choose their own butcher.

Here are a few more quotes that I like:
2) Republicans vote to have the same sky as the corporate giants. They just don’t get the same horizon.

3) If only God had limited the Republicans’ stupidity, not just their intelligence.

And here are some quotes that apply to the Democrats:
1. The one sure way to conciliate a tiger is to allow oneself to be devoured.
2. Bush poisoned the soup that Obama has to eat.
3. Don't be afraid of Republicans so much as an inadequate Democrat.
4. There are many elements to a Presidency. Leadership is number one. Everything else is number two.

And some for the Independents:
5. It is easier to rob by setting up a bank than by holding up one.
6. Hungry men are reaching for the bible, it is a weapon.
7. Society cannot communicate so long as it is split into warring factions.
8. The law was made for the exploitation of those who don't understand it, or are prevented by naked misery from obeying it.

Any more you can think of? leave comment here Read more...

It's About Time

by Madeleine Kando

I don’t like to think about time too much. It makes me confused and not sure about anything any more.

Here I am, Madeleine sitting at my mac typing. I like to think that I am going to be sitting here tomorrow and the day after, still the same Madeleine. But what about in 10 years from now? Will I still be the same Madeleine typing at my Mac? Mmmm. And what about when I was 6 years old? Was I a different Madeleine then? I know my body was made up of different cells altogether, up to the smallest piece in my fingernail.

I know that my ability to think was the size of a pea. But what about the ME? And if I WAS a different Madeleine – when did I stop being the Madeleine I was then and start to become the Madeleine I am now?

Changing our names every decade or so would simplify things. We don’t keep other things throughout our lives, do we? We change houses when they become too small. We change schools, shoe sizes; our voice changes, our eyesight... So why keep our names throughout our lives?

If had been called ‘Sue-Ellen’ when I was 6 I could talk about the day I stole my best friend’s black lacquered shoes this way: ‘You know what Sue-Ellen did? She took Monique’s shoes home with her. She pretended she had found them. Her mom made her bring them back and apologize. But Sue-Ellen left them on the front steps and ran back home before anyone could open the door. Isn’t that cute?’ Right now it is one of the many many monkeys on Madeleine’s back but if I could have been Sue-Ellen instead..

If I had been called Shirley when I was in my early teens I could talk about the day I almost burnt the yard down because I was smoking in secret this way: ‘Shirley did something really stupid…’ and I would shrug it off like one of those silly things Shirley had done instead of hearing about it ad nauseam at every family reunion.

It would also solve the problem that many parents have with their children. Mothers look at their 30 year old daughters and see a cuddly baby instead. Next time your mom tells you that you need a hair cut or that your skirt is too short, tell her to go talk to Sue-Ellen or Shirley and leave you in peace.

Yes, time is a funny thing. Take Zaza, our cat for instance. She was such a devoted mother to Rosy. Licked her clean all day, played with her, taught her how to catch mice.. One day all of that love and affection, gone … disappeared right out the window. Rosy had become a rival. Had to be chased away, hissed at, scratched and bitten. Clearly animals don’t recognize their own offspring once they have reached adulthood.

Babies don’t even have a concept of time. To them everything is forever. No wonder they scream their heads off. Can you imagine having wet diapers forever?!

What about old age? Time has a tendency to slow down when you are waiting for something. Whether you are a prisoner waiting to be released, or very old waiting to die.. time can slow down until it almost stands still. Then again time can speed up. When you fall in love and don’t ever want it to end, or when you are watching a sunset and don’t want the sun to sink into the ocean.

Wouldn’t it be great if my twin sister and I could do the ‘twin paradox’ experiment. I would be sent out into space at close to the speed of light while Juliette would stay on earth. Supposedly, when I come back I would be younger than my twin. Juliette, all wrinkled and shriveled up. Me, all glowing with youthful energy. Of course we would fight tooth and nail over who gets to be the space twin.

So what is time really? Is it just a trick of our mind? Or is it real, like the trees and the snow? Maybe all of time is already out there, like the space around us. We just cannot see it. We are like blind men in a room full of furniture. We are bumping into whatever is in front of us, as we move through life, our blind brains unable to encompass all of time at once. Besides, time unlike space, is a one-way affair. You can never purchase a return ticket, even if you have frequent flyer miles. leave comment here Read more...

Two Americas

By Tom Kando

I have often wondered how to reconcile my love for America with the mistakes which this country makes. This schizoid situation was awakened in me again when I juxtaposed (1) Jan’s comment on Madeleine’s What’s the Matter with Kansas? post of January 9 and (2) Ken Burns’ The War - the magnificent 7-part documentary film about America in World War Two, which I recently saw again.
I agree with just about everything Jan writes, in her scathing critique of American politics, and at the same time I see the nobility and the greatness of the American people, as depicted by Ken Burns. How can this be?

The most obvious reconciliation of these two perspectives is to see this as a class conflict, a conflict between the people and their corrupt elite, who cleverly brainwash the population. Jan is right, there is much of that. I see the deterioration of which she speaks in even allegedly “liberal” media such as NPR and the Sacramento Bee, which devote inordinate space to reactionary voices, under the guise of “equal time.”

But there is another perspective. I can see two Americas in another sense, too. Not just in the sense of poor vs. rich, of progressive vs. reactionary. I can see two Americas within the spirit of the American people.

1. The enduring greatness of the American people is documented in Ken Burns’ The War: It shows not only the heroic sacrifices of our men overseas from 1941 through 1945, but also the courage, strength, goodness and selflessness of all Americans, both overseas and at home. The footage alternates between the bloodbaths of Omaha Beach, Iwo Jima and a thousand other places on the one hand, and the wise, sensitive and intelligent comments of veterans, relatives, widows and others on the home front.

I know, the war caused far more death and suffering among other people. For every American killed by the war, 60 Russians died, 40 Chinese, 15 Jews, 20 other Europeans, 30 Germans, 30 Japanese. “Only” half a million Americans died, almost all soldiers. A majority of Russians, Jews and others were civilians - women and children.

But this is not what I want to write about. What strikes me, in Ken Burns’ rich historical document, is the nobility and the morality of the American people....and the contrast with the mentality of their enemies, and even that of some of their allies.

It’s quite simple: America saved the world. And it did this with calm strength, not rancor. Leaders like FDR and Eisenhower, and the masses of the American people, were determined, not bitter or enraged. Their hearts were filled with courage and an unfailing belief in goodness, not frenzy.

Courage takes many forms. There is the pathology of the Japanese kamikaze and of today’s deranged suicide bomber. Loyalty to country and to cause is also universal. But the courage and determination of the American people have been of a special kind: Americans never became nihilists, killing for the sake of killing. They never lost sight of the ultimate good, the value of human life and happiness. Even during the depth of the mayhem, comradeship, a loving family back home, a glass of beer, the war’s eventual end - such things continued to sustain Americans, who continued to appreciate and to look forward to life, and to occasionally smile through it all.

To the typical Japanese fighter, the noble thing was to die in combat and to take a maximum number of enemies with you. In occupied countries, people suffered and waited to be liberated.

Americans were free from the viruses which had infected much of the world - fascism, imperialism, genocide and cynicism. Americans were psychologically healthy. They did not doubt that they would win, because they knew that lunatics like Hitler and Tojo could not. Americans did not hedge their bets. They knew that they were the only ones capable of beating back the beast. Equivocations such as Clint Eastwood’s movies about Iwo Jima, which show moral equivalency between the Americans and the Japanese in the Pacific war, are reprehensible.

To this day, this remains a good culture, a great culture.

2) But we have morons like Glenn Beck and his followers, like this college student interviewed in the January 11 Sacramento Bee. According to a Time Magazine survey, Glenn Beck is the most popular man in America today. The Sacramento Bee student said that it is unconstitutional to force Americans to buy something against their will, namely health insurance. Morons.

So the question is: where does the stupidity come from? Why does this noble people willingly accept so much bs? Accept the lie that unfettered free enterprise works for the greater good of all (after nearly 3 years of that system’s catastrophic performance).

Maybe the naivete is rooted in the very nature of the American people. Americans believe in inherent goodness, and they are very slow to anger. They find political fights tedious. They’d rather be happy. And help someone who is downtrodden. They are the quintessential bon vivant. Life is too short to be angry. Even when they get into a fight, Americans are rarely angry. That’s what I saw in Ken Burns: Even in Iwo Jima, they weren’t really angry. They just tried to survive. They killed so as not to be killed.

What this means, for America’s current confrontation with international terrorism, is this: What to do, and how to it, are complex questions. But there is no doubt that radical Jihad and terrorism are just as wrong as the Nazis and the Japanese militarists were 60 years ago.

 leave comment here Read more...

Avatar

By Tom Kando

We just saw James Cameron’s movie Avatar. At a cost of $400 million, and earnings of 1.1 billion during its first 3 weeks, it may break all the records, including Titanic, the previous record-holder and also a Cameron film. Story: Earthlings try to colonize the distant planet Pandora in order to exploit its mineral riches (a metal called Unobtanium). This leads them to wage a war of extermination against the native Na’vi. The Na’vi are noble savages who, unlike modern humans, live in harmony with nature. They are like American Indians in movies such as Dances with Wolves.
Scientist Sigourney Weaver has a clever Avatar program: She can put a human into deep sleep in a pod, and temporarily transfer his consciousness into an Avatar, i.e. a pre-fab Na’vi body. Such an Avatar can then go and mix with the Na’vi, to either befriend them, or to spy on them and harm them. The movie’s hero, Jake Sully, is one such individual. At first, he is sent as a spy for the terran (translate: US) military, but he turns native, like Kevin Costner did. Thanks to Sully, the Na’vi win the battle, and the earthlings are forced to return to - quote - “their dying planet.”

To begin with: I agree with everybody that the special effects are stunning and that the movie is a visual feast.

The problem with the movie is that (1) it is aimed at a 12-year old audience and that (2) it is full of political messages. Hemingway once said that writers should write stories, not messages. I don’t go to the movies to get sociology lessons, especially when I am already familiar with the material.

The film is drenched in political correctness. Now don’t misunderstand me, I am pretty politically correct myself. But why do I have to be told by Hollywood, in a really dumbed-down way, that:

1. Modernity is bad
2. Pre-industrial peoples are better and have better values.
3. Green is good. The destruction of forests is bad.
4. American military intervention overseas is cruel and heavy-handed

The Na’vi noble savage is so obviously modeled after groups such as the Sioux in Dances with Wolves, it’s almost embarrassing. The language, the rhetoric, the lifestyle, the mysticism, everything reminds you of some earlier film. When the hero hunts down and kills a deer-like creature, he thanks his prey and assures it that by eating it, they will join and become one. When hauling things cross-country, the Na’vi use drag sleds because, like American Indians, they haven’t invented the wheel. You recognize aspects of Kicking Bird and Wind-in his-hair from the Kevin Costner movie. One, a wise man, the other a hothead warrior who first wants to kill the hero, but then learns to love him... The movie is a melange of borrowed elements. Every five minutes I had a deja vu, whispering to my wife, “ there goes Kevin Costner,” or “that’s right out of Apocalypse Now.”
The message, “Green is good” is also very thick. The destruction of Pandora’s rain forest is an obvious reference to what’s going on Brazil and elsewhere, including the loss of plants with medicinal value.

And then there is the military operation, which takes up almost the whole second half of the movie, to the point of tedium. Here, we see enormous airplanes, helicopters, stinger-like missiles, jungle warfare. It’s all so familiar, right out of footage from Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s all about the heavy-handed and destructive way in which America has waged war around the world for decades. It’s obvious that the sky people are white and that they are Americans.

God knows I have criticized modernity myself (for example, I find Ken Wilber’s writings fascinating). But here, it’s all so simplistic. Don’t forget that the most virulent critics of modernity are Osama Bin Laden and his associates. That should make you pause. And as to the noble savage: Mel Gibson’s Apocalypto shows us a different face of pre-industrial civilization. He exaggerates Mayan cruelty, you say? A caricature? Maybe, but no more than Avatar, and probably less naive.

Another faddish idea is borrowed from the Matrix: when riding horselike and giant birdlike creatures, the Na’vi plug their own tails into part of their mount’s body, which connects the rider’s and the mount’s energies and consciousness. The idea that in order to achieve total connectedness, one-ness - “mind-meld,” one just needs to find a plug and an outlet, seems to have great appeal among the electronic generation.

The funny thing is that while reviewers recognize much of what I have just said, many of them still don’t get it: Take David Brooks who wrote on January 9 in the NY Times that the movie Avatar is an “offensive antique” (and he is not alone). He writes about what I call the Tarzan syndrome. He deplores the fact that in this movie, as so often in the past, it takes a white man to save the natives. According to him, then, Avatar is still patronizing, Eurocentric and racist. People like Brooks remain unable to shake their white guilt, and they will go to the end of the earth to be PC. The problem with this movie is not that it is racist. It’s that it is a cliche.

Overall grade: B leave comment here Read more...

The Elephant and the Donkey

by Madeleine Kando

On an island in the sea there lived an elephant family and a donkey family. They were not exactly friends but since it was a great big island they usually kept out of each other’s way and lived their lives peacefully by pretty much ignoring each other. At times they had to interact because, as the donkey was trying to build something, he needed the elephant’s strength to haul stuff. And when the elephant was trying to figure out a repair job he needed the donkey’s brains to figure out how to fix it. But all in all, they spent their days avoiding each other as much as possible.

The elephant stomping about, making sure that nothing was disturbed in his domain. He liked things to be nice and tidy. His waterhole undisturbed by foreign creatures, the sandpit where he liked to roll around in nice and dry, and his little elephant babies all in a row, marching to his beat behind him. And noone dared to oppose his wishes, seeing that he was a great big elephant.

The donkey also liked things his way. He made up for what he lacked in bulk, by his wit and stubbornness. He was an adventurous little fellow. His brood showed him respect even as they wondered off to explore some foreign-looking object on the beach. He didn’t mind that much. He himself was endowed with a curious nature and instinctively realized that stunting his children’s sense of adventure wouldn’t serve them well in the long run. He was clever and because he was so small compared to the elephant, he often coveredd himself with a lionskin when he went foraging. Even the elephants ran off as they saw him approach, which made him chuckle. Read more...

What's the Matter with Kansas?

By Madeleine Kando

I am ill-equipped to write about politics. All I have in my arsenal is an instinct for the ‘right’ thing. But even that is failing me as I am struggling to make sense of the events of the past year: the economic crisis, the ruins left behind by the Bush administration, the unemployment rate.. above all this nation’s resistance to health care reform.

I don’t think that even the most knowledgeable academician could explain to me what is going on in America today. How did we get to a place where it is tacitly accepted that the poor have to bail out the super rich, or the whole country might sink into a depression (as we are told).

One source I found to cope with my confusion is in a book by Thomas Frank: ‘What’s the Matter with Kansas’. Frank tries to make sense of the transformation of his home state of Kansas, which has turned from a populist left-wing state to a state controlled by conservative, pro-business, right-wing evangelical Christians.

He asks the sensible question: how so many people can vote against their own economic interests? His explanation rings true in my opinion. Conservative politicians have managed to deny the ‘economic’ basis for the difference in social classes. They have replaced it with a ‘cultural’ basis. They have branded left-wing liberals as those latte drinking vegetarians who don’t like guns. It is clever. By removing the ‘economic factor’ as a source of discontent conservative leaders find no opposition to their free-market, laissez-faire, lower taxes for the rich policies. By keeping people angry about cultural issues such as family values, intelligent design or abortion and gay rights, they are masking their true motivation: keeping the system friendly to unregulated, run-away capitalism.

This might explain why so many poor people are against health care reform. Health care reform equals government intervention. It infringes on a person’s privacy and right to self-determination (the right to not get affordable health care when they are sick?)

But this phenomenon of polluting true politics with ‘cultural’ issues is also a disease of the liberal left. Rather than pushing for more equality and economic security they concentrate instead on gay rights, pro-choice and anti-school prayer. As important as those issues might be, I consider them far less important than the fact that 14% of families in america suffer from food insecurity. That on any given night there are a million homeless people on the streets.

How did we come to accept the inevitability of so much inequality? The liberals have long ago stopped talking to the ‘working class’ and in a sense they have what is coming to them: an opposition that is much better at manipulating politics.

Sometimes it seems that the word 'liberal' is becoming a dirty word and that its true meaning is becoming so tarnished that before long there may only be different shades of conservatism. We have a Democratically dominated House and Senate and a Democratic Presidency, and yet the government is unable to pass a health care bill, which is clearly the wish of a majority of Americans. leave comment here Read more...