The Case of American Unexceptionalism and the forces of American politics
The former Alaska governor, speaking on Fox News Sunday, questioned whether there’s “any connection” between Obama’s campaign donations from oil companies and him “taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in there, and grasp the complexity and the potential tragedy that we are seeing here in the Gulf of Mexico,” the Los Angeles Times reports.
This is demagogery from Mrs. “Drill Baby Drill”. We are getting it now from the Republican Party at large. A thought comes in, though, that it might be better, by way of forcing policy even from a hypocritical stance, than the ideological strait-jacket of her King Making Senate candidate from Kentucky, Mr. Rand Paul or the “Stand by My Donors” Mary Landrieu set. Sometimes pure, cynical politics is all right. It’s just that…
“There’s one thing they could do, under the law. They could fire BP and Take it over.” — Lamar Alaxender, with some explanation that they might not have the capacity to do so.
No. Seriously. You’re killing me. Government Take over?
But thinking through on this, I do believe I have a clarifying answer to the defense of such things as, say, moving into nuclear energy — the decent enough defense of pointing out European countries that make good use of nuclear power. It’s the “American Unexceptionalism” argument. They’ve maintained a better Regulatory system then the good ol’ US of A. Our regulatory system has broken down, corrupted by a political force that believes in its illegitimacy, and by broad swarths of Corporate short-sightedness.  From any appearance, BP lied and presented public relations for their oversight. And It is this.
Gary Quarles said during a hearing before the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee that Massey routinely sends out radio alerts that a “man” is on the property when inspectors arrive. Quarles urged stiff penalties for such warnings.
I keep hearing from Democrats, and see from a report on Democratic Party strategy memos, a message that the nomination of tea partiers is “good”. I dread this thought. Even if they go on to lose, they do havoc to the “Overton Window” as politicians do what politicians do — finding that rhetorical point of a broadest common denominator in a world where chicken bartering can be acceptable Health Care policy. And speaking of that —
Voters wearing chicken costumes will be barred from polling stations in Nevada, election officers have decided.
Democrats have mocked Republican Senate hopeful Sue Lowden, accusing her of suggesting that people barter for medical care using chickens.
Activists in chicken costumes started appearing at Ms Lowden’s rallies.
Sue Lowden is quite the chicken. Note that she is not the tea-party candidate, and has fallen in the polls. Sharron Angle is the Joe the Plumber Endorsed candidate. Sure, Harry Reid might win this election yet, but really —
Lowden is regarded as the favorite of the Republican establishment, which considers her more moderate than Angle, as well as a better fund-raiser.
No. Seriously.
I’m thinking about Bob Bennett and his loss in the Republican nominating convention in Utah (a system I don’t think is democratic):
Like those who voted for Carter because they were fed up with Nixon, the Tea Party is made up of people who are fed up with Washington profligacy. The combination of the Obama stimulus package, a bloated budget, stubbornly high unemployment and an expensive new health-care entitlement program has fueled their anger, convincing them that the federal government is out of touch and not listening. To a large extent, they’re right.
Their two strongest slogans are “Send a message to Washington” and “Take back America.” I know both very well because they were the main tools used to defeat me in Utah’s Republican convention two weeks ago. They also worked in Kentucky on Tuesday. They are more powerful than most pundits inside the Beltway realize.
Yet when the new members of Congress whom these slogans elect in November take office, the question becomes: Will they be Carter or Reagan?
Will they stand firmly on partisan sidelines continuing to shout slogans? Or will they reach across the aisle in the interest of the country? Will they offer constructive proposals to help solve our problems?
Sure. And Carter took a swipe at our Oil Addiction. Had he managed to succeed at marking a lasting contribution on that front instead of failing, I actually would stick Carter as one of our ten greatest presidents instead of one of our ten worst, even as he left the office in one term in deep unpopularity. But how he went about that, in a rather self-defeating manner, did not make any sense. Reagan, of course, with sunny optimism, racked us into red ink, and… I don’t really want to track the records of Carter or Reagan.
Ahem, Obama — ahem Thomas Friedman.
But I wonder about Bob Bennett. I would be for the Democratic Party nominating him for the Senate seat, with him pledging that if elected he would remain a Republican, vote for their leadeship — the General election then becoming essentially a Republican primary with an increased electorate than the party convention. He’d ride the party’s “Obama Derangement Syndrome” out and do those things they object to — making his mark in legislation he winds up opposing.
Hell. Do the same thing with g’damned Walt Minnick in Idaho.
Palin to Campaign for Candidate Who Thinks Puerto Rico is a Country
Sometimes the headline takes you where it takes you. Later Friday, Sarah Palin will hit the trail in Idaho, where she spent some of her youth, for congressional candidate Vaughn Ward, trying to take back the typically Republican 1st District from Rep. Walt Minnick (D). Ward has done some work for Democrats in the past — that hasn’t become much of an issue yet, as Minnick is a former Republican and has been endorsed by the Tea Party Express, scrambling the party lineup in the district.
What do I care? I think I spy another token Democrat the Tea Party (or one organization under the umbrella title of “Tea Party”) can throw their support toward. The thing about Sarah Palin is… once why’s she campaigning for the Republican in the district that the Tea Party has supported the Democrat? Palin, in the hub-ub as she resigned from office, said she would be campaigning “not just for Republicans, but Democrats as well”. If I don’t see her coming out for the most right-wing Democrat in the House and the one a Tea Party organization threw their support toward, or the most right-wing Congressional Democratic candidate — Mike Oliverio — since Larry McDonald, who would she support?