Wednesday, November 23, 2011


As in almost every attempt at a bipartisan solution to almost every problem our country faces, the intransigence of the right squelches almost all possibilities.

That was the case for the "super committee" where—as in the past—Democrats made concessions that went way beyond what their base wants while the rightwing Republicans refused to budge on letting the "Bush tax cuts" for the wealthy expire (even though when they were introduced Republicans said they'd only be temporary, which was how they got some Democrats to go along, one more instance of the right being better at misleading and manipulating anyone whose nature it is to have faith in their fellow human beings, a big mistake when it comes to the right).

As an example of how the right marches to orders from on high, until a day or so ago many rightwing Republicans were for letting the Obama payroll tax cuts that benefit those who aren't wealthy expire, even while resisting any attempt to let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire.

But the Koch brothers have stepped in (their propagandists probably figuring this wasn't a smart move) to say the payroll taxcuts should be extended, and all of a sudden the rightwing Republican political leaders are changing their minds too. Surprise surprise.

This, to me, is a victory for the Occupy Wall Street protestors, whether they know it or not. The pressure their demonstrations have put on the media to at least pay some attention to the economic realities (i.e. inequities) has raised the awareness of the general populace about the economic disparities in our system.

The right still influences the media to skew toward criticism of the protesters and unfounded reports of individuals among them causing problems or committing crimes (almost uniformly proven to be untrue) as well as incorrect assumptions that there's no "focus" to the protests.

But when shots of protesters carrying signs that accuse Wall Street of destroying the economy and thereby jobs and having too much control over the government are shown, even on rightwing biased media, most of the population, according to polls, agrees.

The reality is that those who agree with the perspective and positions and policies of the right constitute a small minority of our citizens. Most of us have more centrist and liberal views and beliefs. Therefore the right cannot win elections if everyone votes.

But they can if they convince enough voters that there's no difference between the parties and that "Congress" and the presidency are dysfunctional (instead of the reality that the rightwing dominated Republican Party only agrees to measures that protect the wealthy and call for more sacrifice from the rest of us, a highly unpopular position if seen for what it is, which is why the rightwing propaganda machine and media mislead and misinform and lie about that reality to keep it hidden).

But after the last election where enough people came out to vote to overturn or resist rightwing policies in various state and municipal elections, the right realized it had "overreached" (their leaders and media immediately parroted that exact term, though it wasn't overreaching, it was doing exactly what they intended to) and so too with this latest concession to popular opinion the right is merely avoiding being the victims of the unpopularity of most of their ideology.

But the right will always return to its default position of doing and saying anything they need to gain and/or maintain power to be wielded in defense of the interests of the most powerful among us—corporations and those who derive the most wealth from them.


Harryn Studios said...

"doing and saying anything" ...
You're absolutely correct.
Yesterday I tuned into "HardBall" where Michael Steele and Chris were debating this recent issue of the Romney Campaign's use of sound bytes to string together lies for an ad.
When pressed, Steele didn't see anything wrong with it and that 'attack ads' and lies were okay and part of the political big league. But at the same time Steele got upset over a racial inference by Limbaugh referring to Mrs. Obama at a NasCar event as 'Upidy'.
What I gleaned from that is when it got personal to Michael Steele it became offensive - otherwise the lies, slurs, and derogatory tactics are fair game.
By that standard, anyone can say anything about whomever and its up to the accused to defend after the damage is done.
If that's how low the leadership of this country - particularly the right wing republicans - are setting the bar for ethics, our national deficit isn't the biggest problem we have. We have a moral deficit that even money from the 1% will not fix.
Not only that, they unashamedly advertise and promote this behavior which in turn has an enormous impact on children.
Then there's Grover Norquest - and that smirking little segment on "60 Minutes". Someone needs to vilify that guy before its too late. He, like Limbaugh, (ad nauseum) have found a recipe of manipulation and lies that contort simple facts into an alternate reality that is easy for even the most ignorant to digest - and they rely on it.
Also, heard the Faux News viewership is significantly dumber than the people watching other news. Any wonder ... ?

Lally said...

Good points Paul. As for your final statement, check out the link in the PS post above this one.

JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.