Planet Rodin

Ezra Klein:

After watching Gephardt and Edwards' 2004 runs, did anyone expect that their former staffers could execute something like Obama's campaign? Seemed unlikely. But the idea was that they had incredible technical competence that just needed to be matched by moment, candidate, and money. And that turned out to be correct.

The transition argument seems to be something similar: The longtime Democratic operatives and wonks are really quite good.

Over at the Corner they're stewing about Kathleen Parker's WaPo column, which boils down to: 'Religious conservatives are destroying the Republican Party.'

Of course there are few facts in the column to back up this assertion; Parker's not a terribly interesting pundit, and her heterodoxy on Obama this go-round doesn't suddenly make her interesting any more than it makes her Adlai Stevenson. She mentions some demographic numbers but mostly complains about how Bible-thumpers are mongoloids:

the evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party [...] Armband religion is killing the Republican Party. [...] [The GOP] has become increasingly beholden to an element that used to be relegated to wooden crates on street corners. [...] the GOP has surrendered its high ground to its lowest brows. [...] [The 2008 GOP convention] felt like an annual Depends sales meeting.

All of which is run-of-the-mill condescending big-media-market bitch-slapping and not impressive at all. But her concern isn't that evangelicals are stupid jerks ruining the fun for everyone (though she clearly feels this); it's that Republicans can't run the country without their permission. In other words: the Republicans have sound ideas, a strong identity, and are being hijacked by fundamentalists - can we assume she means 'just like the Democrats and their Dean/Kos wing'?

Well, if you take away the evangelical-fueled domestic policy interests of today's Republicans, what's left?

Nationalism.

Corporatism.

Imperialism.

And a strain of libertarianism, tinged with standard 'populist' anti-intellectual resentment, that is less philosophical (i.e. principled friendly-anarchism, interest in rule by the nongovernmental collective, willingness to provide for local welfare as cost, etc.) than aesthetic (guns as symbol of masculine strength, the countryside as fantasy-staging ground, SUV's as symbols of freedom, etc.).

It's one thing to go down a list of proposed policies and haggle details, but let's stay abstract for a second: 'libertarian nationalism' is an oxymoron; 'nationalist corporatist imperialism' went by another name during the 20th century; corporatism and nationalism are increasingly at odds (nationalists' impulse toward protectionism comes to be anti-business even in a country of 300 million, 3,000 miles across - you'd think there'd be room...). 'Free' markets assembled at the barrel of a gun are a threat to everyone - and come back to haunt the pistol-packing marketeer. The national-defense types basically call for an American Empire - the least libertarian thing imaginable, and incidentally a bad deal for most of the world's businesses.

Parker isn't unjustified in pointing out the growing rift between evangelical voters and the rest of the tenuous Republican coalition (please, please read Thomas Frank on this); 'culture war' is a pretty easy sell but it's hard to maintain (e.g. as scientific advances make anti-abortion arguments, which are really anti-sex arguments, increasingly irrelevant) and requires pulling resources from other efforts (e.g. check out Big Bobby Jindal putting out a health care reform package!). The current Republican strategy seems to be to yoke the modern-day Democrats to something called 'socialism' that in no way resembles Actual Existing Socialism; but as long as the evangelicals want to legislate bedroom morality, roll back scientific understanding in schools, and keep investing ungodly amounts in defense, that argument isn't gonna fly.

Just look at McCain: a genuine Republican reformer, once upon a time. And what happened this time out? He tried to run for, and in the manner of, his 'base' - meaning god/guns/gays Christian right-wingers. A young black Senator with four years of experience in national politics beat the living hell out of him. He embodies Kathleen Parker's argument. And yet...what if he'd won? Leave aside the anti-Roe stuff, the gay-marriage stuff; what else did he have in his platform this time out? 'Small-government' boilerplate that would expand our largest budget items (de-fense! de-fense!), 'low-taxes' faux-libertarianism that would have deepened the gap between rich and poor (which may well be a goal of American libertarians, who knows)...there wasn't much of a there there, with or without the sad concessions to the Moral Majority types.

Here's how Parker ends her column:

The young will get older, of course. Most eventually will marry, and some will become their parents. But nonwhites won't get whiter. And the nonreligious won't get religion through external conversion. It doesn't work that way.

Given those facts, the future of the GOP looks dim and dimmer if it stays the present course. Either the Republican Party needs a new base -- or the nation may need a new party.

This, from the intelligent but really-really-imperfect Daniel Larison, is simply false:

Doesn’t it seem obvious that foreign and economic policies, in which the GOP is widely viewed as having failed, have much more to do with the woes of the party than pro-life views? These would be the policies that the administration put into action, as opposed to its pro-life rhetoric, which has more or less changed nothing.

The answer's no.

It's possible that Larison doesn't actually live in the world and interact with people, but not likely. So how does he manage to misunderstand this simple point? 'Pro-life' fundamentalism, like institutional and individual 'homophobia' (i.e. 'hatred of faggotry and distrust/hatred of those who practice it'), colours all discussions of domestic cultural policy, just as ridiculous anti-tax/'small-government' rhetoric (read: calls to cut social services for the poor, nonwhites, et al.) colours economic policy. The policies we get from Washington might not be 'conservative' in any pure sense, but they reflect the disproportionate influence of those politically active right-wingers who hold these views. The window of acceptable conversation is narrow, and that narrowness is one important measure of the influence of various political organizations.

Which leads us back to Kathleen Parker. Larison's criticism of Parker amounts to, 'It's the war that fucked the Republicans up, and our policies don't actually reflect evangelical beliefs.' Half of which is half-true (the war is a rallying point but this wasn't ultimately an election about the war, nor about George Bush, as polls overwhelmingly show), and half of which is totally irrelevant. Christianists (to borrow an increasingly-popular term) might not determine the final outcomes of social debates, but they dictate their terms to a remarkable degree. The idea that 'life' begins at conception, that a 3-day-old fetus has the same rights as a 3-day-old neonate, is absolute insane bullshit. Yet we have to take into account the feelings - purely religious beliefs, in other words - of the people who hold onto such notions, when setting domestic cultural policy. That's a direct result (and not the only one) of the disproportionate power Christianists have over domestic policy debates.

Proposition 8 was a blow to the civil rights of all Americans. At a moment when the state could be altering the legal definition of marriage to remove religious considerations, we remain shackled to a conception of marriage that no longer has procreation as its main goal, no matter what lies the pro-Prop 8 types spread around. That's a function of the influence of largely right-wing (culturally/socially conservative) religious organizations - though not of 'religious beliefs' or even 'Christian beliefs,' obviously, as those are up for very public debate and e.g. Barack Obama's 'heterodox' Christianity has the same claim as the laughable James Dobson's on the public's attention. Again: Larison wants us to believe that Christianists have no power because they always vote Republican. He's choosing to misunderstand this point (he's far from stupid). The Republican Party doesn't ever deliver the cultural counterrevolution the Christianists want - but it's doing its best to arrest any social progressivism that rears its head. Which is in part - to whatever degree - a function of Christianist (politicized Christian) loyalty to the GOP.

Which is why they won't have a place in the Republican Party forever. Political parties are compromises; soon the Christianists may well realize they needn't compromise with the likes of Cheney, Gingrich, and Rove any longer.

'Wellllll...that'll be an interesting day.'

[Doc - I'll get to your comment tomorrow, probably.]

I don't understand.

Yes, there is rot on both sides. But social conservatives are not rotten and it's rotten to suggest they (we, in my case) are.

And, dear God, it's not God who is the problem.

Doesn't this idiot know the President-Elect is one of them?

In the video, Ayman al-Zawahiri, al Qaeda's No. 2, castigated Obama's foreign policy stances on Afghanistan and Israel and ridiculed the president-elect's worldview. Al-Zawahiri compared Obama unfavorably to the late Malcolm X, an African-American militant who adopted Islam.

On the other hand, does this mean it's OK for these idiots to like Obama now?

If the Democrats took away Lieberman's beloved DHS committee chairmanship, why wouldn't he just leave the party entirely and start to caucus with the Republicans?

Well that's my guess as to why the Dems are letting him keep his spot in the party. He proved himself a rat during the 2008 campaign, but the Dems want as big a majority as possible. He's not gonna sit on the back bench, not at his age. For whatever reason they think they need him on their side. (Here's a reason: they've got a real shot at 60 Senate seats.)

Of course all these people are bastards: thoughtless warmongers, special-interest prostitutes, and power-hungry narcissists. ALL OF THEM!! I make no distinctions between people who make more money than me.

[Update: All this said, the goddamn Senate Democrats are a pitiful bunch: J-Lieb kept his DHS chairmanship. Could a more serious Democratic candidate than Ned LaMont run against this schmuck Lieberman in 2012? Please?]

Spend your free time making things you can be proud of.

Watch what people do, and really try to understand why.

Your mind and body are connected; take care of them both.

Be honest about everything you can; be understanding about the rest.

Gifts do not embody affection; they commemorate it. Find other ways to show affection.

You're not entitled to sex; you're not entitled to anything. Give generously.

There's no such thing as destiny, nor The One True Love. But love is real and you should honour it.

Talk about something other than yourself. Ask about everything. Don't fear answers.

Stand up for yourself, but don't be possessive; ideas are cheap. Principles aren't.

When you die, that's it. Revel in the time.

No one knows anything. Be understanding and forthright and work with your lover.

You're not as good at sex as you think you are; keep studying. Practice often.

Don't be afraid to be alone.

Don't be afraid to be together.

When you lift weights you tear your muscles; they grow back bigger and stronger. No other way to do it. Which is to say: breakups are good for you. Pay close attention.

Listen to your friends.

If it feels wrong it probably is. If it feels right, keep your eyes peeled.

Learn your weaknesses and address them directly.

When you're in love you can't see straight. Breathe. Take people's advice. Trust your instincts - but verify.

Love is a renewable resource.

Joss Whedon's law firm: Ziffren, Brittenham, Branca, Fischer, Gilbert-Lurie, Stiffelman, Cook, Johnson, Lande & Wolf.

All I know is, if I were (ahem) blessed with the name Stiffelman, I'd definitely seek employment in a field where I can destroy people's finances and reputations while earning a salary. Then I'd go back and visit my high school...

I couldn't find correct transcription/chords of Phish's 'Billy Breathes' - most amateur guitarists aren't trained musicians so no surprise there - so here's my own. I didn't listen for inversions so you'll have to invent your own bassline, you lazy swine.

Billy Breathes (approximately)
Trey Anastasio

verse

D Am F G Bb C Bb F

D Am F G Bb C Eb Bb



chorus

F C Bb etc.

F Eb Bb

F C Bb Am Gm

C Bb

'horn' solo

passing into solo: Eb Bb 

F Cm Ab Bb C# Eb F# C#

Ab Cm Ab Bb C# Eb

another chorus (begin on F)

Eb F

quiet part (same as verse up to turnaround)

D Am (F) G Bb C

Eb Bb

then guitar solo (first half of guitar solo same as 'horn' solo, with new turn)

F Cm Ab Bb C# Eb F# C#

Ab Cm Ab Bb C# Eb F# Ab

Bb Fm C# Eb F# Ab B

C# Fm C# Eb F# Ab B C#

climactic hold: Eb Eb7 Eb6 Eb/Bb

final cadence: C# Ab F

[From elsewhere.]

A single low-information voter can rest assured that his vote boils down to inherited preference and mere caprice (peer pressure, whim, etc.); ten million voters obeying their whims make nuance and strategy impossible. They change the game to (Russian) roulette.

Now, a million low-information daters will eventually fall together in more-or-less appropriate pairings and sort out as they have for millennia; each iteration of the system-state, each timestep, sees them console one another with genuine empathy of the 'Oh, I've made those same mistakes' variety, disingenuous sympathy in the 'Next time will be different, I'm sure of it' mould. But to wander into a relationship on your own, not knowing what you're in for, yet treat the situation with the seriousness that love deserves (indeed insists upon), and to do so without necessarily knowing that everyone else will fall flat in the same way and that you'll be able to join the party later...it can be absolutely crushing. Every first 'I love you' is a huge risk for the lover, an everyday gesture of association at the societal level. The complex dynamic system of American love doesn't need to accommodate the low-information lover; he's the ideal participant. Love is supremely undemocratic, even antidemocratic in that way.

Well it gets going and I go with it, or try. Working on something, this is in it:

As a form of outreach - think globally, act locally and globally, as the Trilateral Commission would say - Obama had offered the newly-reelected Republican Senator from Georgia Saxby Chambliss the position of Ambassador to the nation of Georgia, which had triggered an immediate surprising-but-not-that-surprising domino effect: the Russians, well aware that there was a new sherriff with the unbelievably testicular name of 'Saxby' in town, offered an immediate apology to the Georgian people (both Georgian peoples!), which Chambliss accepted on everyone's behalf. African leaders of every colour and machete-wielding gangland affiliation put down their weapons and overly starchy military uniforms to journey to the U.N. for a summit, at which event Obama's magical elf children Sasha and Malia were allowed to pelt the leaders with grapes and play immensely complicated mutable-rule-system card games with their children, which fostered an environment of comfort, comradeship, and confession, in which President-for-(apparently-though-unconstitutionally)-life Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe talked movingly about his hardworking and kind mom, and how his two older brothers had died and his father had left young Robert in charge of his younger brother Donato, a charge Robert had taken seriously, but how could you make up for the lack of a father? And though he'd grown both mature and more importantly old before his time, how could little Rob be expected to develop a healthy relationship to the world that way, to power, to his own desires? Who could possibly fault him his selfishness or his perverse need to touch so many lives, to replicate the shape of his own broken family, his own truncated past, in the homes and lives of his countrymen - to make his own story the root of his nation's story, at gunpoint if need be, if they couldn't grow quickly enough, couldn't hear the rising music of time whistling and roaring past...

Michelle Obama, America's new First Lady and a mother in her own right, had looked over at her husband, whose mahogany cheeks were stained with honest tears. For one man to lose a father to the mystery of Africa, for that father to leave his son to be raised alone by a woman who would become by her very proximity and intimacy with her son a kind of stranger, less a person than the curve of the landscape itself: Barack Obama knew that pain all too well, and his gift and curse were the too-bright mirror image of his Democratic forerunner Bill Clinton's grotesque capacity for instant sympathy. Obama's core was an inborn empathy supplemented by unflagging curiosity he had learned to unfetter and indulge, the length of his vision and the breadth of his heart measuring the shape of a man's name, his name, or perhaps his father's...And so the old murderer and the young teacher embraced in the middle of the Assembly floor, world leaders applauding wildly in a ring, calling out hallelujahs in tongues familiar and foreign, guttural and sibilant, the voice of every instrument in some god's orchestra. They embraced, and across the world petitioners, aspirants, acolytes, begettors, usurers, connoisseurs, pretenders, and beaming grandparents mirrored the outpouring of televised affection. The world seemed to laugh with one voice, if only for a day.

That evening Obama had Mugabe arrested on a variety of charges from corruption and vote-rigging to genocide; the Assembly cheered his judiciousness no less enthusiastically than they'd cheered his understanding.

It's the fourth anniversary of the naaaastiest podcast on the web. Maybe you've heard of 'Rubber Souled'? Go now, go.

[All links save the last are to mp3 DJ mixes guaranteed to spice up your music collection, your dinner, and your goddamn sex life. Hat tip to Walter for reminding me about the Corners - along with a stern reminder, in turn, that Obama's electoral victory doesn't mean he gets to go around stealing all our fine white women! Happy belated birthday, W.]