the really critical thing isn’t who’s sitting in the White House, but who is sitting in

[Karmadillo]

http://www.zcommunications.org/the-empires-new-clothes-2-2-by-paul-street

The Empire's New Clothes 2/2
By Paul Street

<edit>

“Don’t be fooled by plaintive hype about ‘progress if not perfect,’ or the passive-aggressive line ‘the perfect is the enemy of the good.’ No part of the progressive agenda moved forward over the past two years despite the fact that Obama won a significant electoral victory in 2008 both in terms of the popular vote and especially the electoral college by asking people to ‘Vote for Change.’ The Presidential election of 2008 was no ‘cliff hanger’ like George Bush’s stolen elections in 2000 and 2004. And unlike Bill Clinton’s victory in 1992, which was a gift from Ross Perot, and his re-election in 1996, which was due to an unprecedented (albeit unsustainable) economic boom, Obama’s margin of victory was truly a mandate for progressive change and whatever proved necessary to address the biggest economic crisis in over four generations. Moreover, from 2008-2010 the Democrats had larger majorities than the Republican Party enjoyed at any point over the past 80 years in the House of Representatives and the US Senate, all whining about Republican filibuster threats in the Senate notwithstanding. Lesson for progressives: If a progressive agenda could not move forward in the last two years, if effective responses to the highest unemployment rates in 80 years were ‘off the table,’ if the White House refused to get behind any climate bill, and the Senate would not even bring a single piece of climate legislation up for a vote, then only a fool would expect any better results in a Washington awash with triumphant Republicans and cowed Democrats.”

Today, as in the past serious progressives would do well to heed the genuinely populist and grassroots words of the late radical historian Howard Zinn: “the really critical thing isn’t who’s sitting in the White House, but who is sitting in – in the streets, in the cafeterias, in the halls of government, in the factories. Who is protesting, who is occupying offices and demonstrating – those are the things that determine what happens.” Who indeed? There are some good examples of Americans doing what Zinn called for and they are part of what he called “the unreported resistance.” But there’s just not enough of that. The left has to come back to life before it’s too late

The fake- and rancid-populist, business-funded, paranoid-authoritarian and arch-Republican Tea Party pseudo-movement has thrown down a gauntlet of sorts, I think, to those who would be true populist builders of genuinely social, democratic, and progressive movements. . As the liberal columnist E.J. Dionne wrote in September of 2010, anticipating in his own milquetoast way the deadly consequences of the pacification and depression of what passes for a left in the U.S.: “where are the progressives? Sulking is not an alternative…the Tea Party may be pulling a fast one on the country…But if it has more audacity than everyone else, it will, I am sorry to say, get away with it.” Of course, “the Tea Party” is largely a corporate media concoction and it is largely a front for corporate interests and elite Republicans, the real party “the Tea Party” is designed to re-brand.

As Tony Dimaggio and I argue in our forthcoming book Crashing the Tea Party, the mass media’s recurrent and often favorable treatment of the supposedly great and popular-grassroots Tea Party “movement” and the media’s self-fulfilling inflation of the phenomenon helped “the Tea Party” become something of what New York Times reporter Kate Zernike recently called “a blank screen on which they have projected all kinds of hopes and frustrations — not always compatible or realistic. “ Many Americans voicing “sympathy” and “approval” for “the Tea Party” had little or no understanding of its actual, hard-right policy agenda and do not support that agenda. Dominant corporate media’s role has been central here, with the leading national print and electronic outlets generally failing to provide an accurate picture of the “populist” Tea Party’s deeply reactionary and elite-directed, top-down and manipulative and partisan (“super-Republican”) essence. The media-generated “blank screen” and related (false) novelty dividend – with vague and ephemeral branding trumping policy substance – is, it is worth noting something that the Tea Party’s bete noire Barack Obama benefited from to no small degree from late 2006 (some might even say from late July of 2004) through the presidential election of 2008.

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Howard Zinn............ ...............

"There are some good examples of Americans doing what Zinn called for and they are part of what he called “the unreported resistance.” But there’s just not enough of that. The left has to come back to life before it’s too late"

[CrispyQ]

5. Mr. Fish honors Zinn:

Howard Zinn 1922 – 2010

[ZombieHorde]

2. Unrec wall of text with unclear subject line. nt

[Karmadillo]

4. LOL

nt

[bobbolink]

7. For the love of Pete... REC, and thanks for reminding me the silliness that goes on here.

After all, its only our COUNTRY that is in danger.... nothing major... like an "unclear" subject line, for crying in a bucket.

[ZombieHorde]

9. How dare you use my love for Pete against me! nt

[bobbolink]

10. Whatever is most important to ya.....

:shrug:

[tavalon]

22. I don't think that's Pete.........

[gristy]

8. 2nd!

[LWolf]

11. Can't read whole paragraphs? nt

[ZombieHorde]

12. Without a thesis sentence? I have more self respect than that. nt

[LWolf]

13. A thread title is a thesis statement?

:rofl:

Rarely. You won't have much to read if you're waiting for every thread title to be a thesis statement.

This thread title is simply a <snip> quoted, and it's easy to find in the text, since it's in the bolded portion.

[gristy]

14. The OP title is intentionally written as a hook that by itself provides no information

I'm not impressed.

[LWolf]

16. This has to be the most fascinating conversation I've been briefly engaged in

during the last year. A DU discussion about the mechanics of writing a post.

I don't often get beyond the deplorable errors in writing conventions.

Can we also critique every post with spelling and grammar errors? Should they be allowed, or should posts with errors be suspended pending repair?

Where, oh where, do we begin?

Shall we continue on with evaluating the structure of various posts? Are "hooks" appropriate in thesis statements? If so, when? If not, when ARE "hooks" appropriately used?

Should posts on an anonymous message board be considered formal communications that require a thesis statement? It's true that substantive posts are going to be analytical, argumentative, or expository, so perhaps they SHOULD have thesis statements.

Should we hold posters accountable for well-written posts? If so, traffic will die down significantly and there won't be many threads to read through in any forum on any given day.

Or should we assume that posts on a message board by anonymous posters are more akin to emails; informal, casual, and off-the-cuff?

What do you think?

Please notice that I'm not asking what impresses, or doesn't, impress you or any particular DUer. I'm asking about what standards are appropriate for ALL at DU.

[ZombieHorde]

20. Use whatever standards you wish. nt

[gristy]

21. This is the most fascinating conversation you've been briefly engaged in during the last year?

That seems rather disingenuous. Regarding your purported interest starting a dialog about how to write posts, lots of luck with that one.

[LWolf]

30. Perhaps fascinating isn't the best word. Perhaps "bizarre," or "curious"

would be better. Of course, if you read correctly, you'll note that I didn't start a dialog about how to write posts. That was the poster who judges posts by their purported "thesis statements." I merely responded.

You, apparently, found it interesting, fascinating, bizarre, or curious enough to dive in.

[tavalon]

24. I think we might start with a poll

For instance, I know that there are DUers here who are in middle school, high school, never been to college, have a BS or a BA, MS or MA, PhD. Based on that, some might not even know what a thesis statement is.

This is actually quite hilarious. I've forgotten what the OP was but this tangent is a hoot. I guess it's just been too long since we've had a meta thread. Come to think of it, a meta thread around now could be just magnificent. Many people learn the rules around here while laughing at themselves in a nice long meta...........

[LWolf]

31. It is, isn't it?

Hilarious.

I've forgotten the OP myself. I should probably go back and read it again. I think it was an article posted with a snip as title, instead of the article title itself. Something critical of O., and the "thesis statement" critique was a fresh new way of countering that criticism.

:rofl:

[ZombieHorde]

15. Yes, most of them are an abridged, yet still informative, thesis statement.

When you read the subject line to most threads here on DU, you know what the thread is about.

[tavalon]

25. And when you don't, hopefully you pass them by without reading.

Certainly without reccing or unreccing it.

[tavalon]

23. You know, in my house, the plants almost always win

Yeah, the opening sentence sucked and the link was bad but the information was good. You might have been a better DU citizen by writing a note to the OP asking for those changes. But I do have to give you credit for explaining why you unrecced. It's usually a cowards game. Thanks for not being a coward.

[ZombieHorde]

33. Thanks, I guess. nt

[kentuck]

3. Rec

for stating what many folks thought about the necessity and the opportunity for change that was blown.

[bobbolink]

6. In order to "sit in", people have to come together... .literally TOGETHER.

We as the population of this nation have never done that really well.... look at other countries.

Some of us did that pretty well for Civil Rights and the Non-Violent Movement of the 60s, but it wasn't a real national movement, although it certainly had accomplishments.

Today, people are unable to *really* come together. Do a rally? Yeah, probably... but actually SAY something real at that rally to the rest of the population that will get their attention and get them to thinking, and convert them?

Nope.

Our Rugged Individualism comes between us.

Partly, maybe in large part, because of our affluence. We don't think we really need each other, when it comes right down to it.

[tavalon]

26. I completely agree with you

I've been to many a march in these last ten years and there is never a cohesive statement. End The Iraq War and Free Mumia (mind you, I think he should be freed, but we need a separate rally for that). When the May day protest around immigration happened, many, many people wore white t-shirts. It was a sea of white t-shirts and I think that rattled people as much as the brown people who wore them. I've often said, and been ignored, that we need to have one goal and one color shirt at our rallies. We're a ragtag bunch and therefore easily dismissed.

[bobbolink]

32. So, that makes two of us. It isn't a popular thought.

Thanks for your reply, and I will go one step further.

I think "rallies" themselves have out-lived their usefulness.

We have seen how immune the populace and the media is to rallies in general, and it is past time to reassess what it is we want to accomplish, and figure out different ways of getting to those goals.

We are smart people..we can figure this out.

As for me, I think its time we stop trying so hard to affect our congresscritters and concentrate on changing hearts and minds among the rest of the citizenry. To do that we could employ teachins, neighborhood video showings, street theater... there are lots of ideas, if we could just be able to come together.

But the coming together is the real issue. We don't want to see how we are locked into ourselves.

[tavalon]

34. I haven't written much in my journal as of yet, but I've been cogitating

on this quite a bit and I think you are right. I'm pretty done with Washington DC and starting to look at my own state.

[TheKentuckian]

17. So recced

[me b zola]

18. The link isn't working for me

Its possible that its just my computer, I keep getting "502 bad gateway" message.

[Karmadillo]

19. The site was down. It's working again.

nt

[bigtree]

27. "No part of the progressive agenda moved forward over the past two years"

That is easily debatable. I guess you can apply any standard depending on what part of the political spectrum you represent.

Quick Summary of 2009 Progressive Victories (more explanation here: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/30/progressives_and_obama_are_doing_better_than_we_th/

*
Three major health bills (SCHIP, tobacco regulation, and stimulus funds for Medicaid, COBRA subsidies, health information technology and the National Institutes of Health) enacted even before comprehensive reform
*
Stimulus contained myriad other individual policy victories, not only preventing a far worse depression but also:
o
Delivered key new funds for education
o
Expanded state energy conservation programs and new transit programs
o
Added new smart grid investments
o
Funded high-speed Internet broadband programs
o
Extended unemployment insurance for up to 99 weeks for the unemployed and modernizing state UI programs to cover more of the unemployed
o
Made large new investments in the safety net, from food stamps (SNAP) to affordable housing to child care
*
Clean cars victory to take gas mileage requirements to 35mpg
*
Protection of 2 million acres of land against oil and gas drilling and other development
*
Executive orders protecting labor rights, from project labor agreements to protecting rights of contractor employees on federal jobs
*
Stopping pay discrimination through Lilly Ledbetter and Equal Pay laws
*
Making it easier for airline and railway workers to unionize, while appointing NLRB and other labor officials who will strengthen freedom to form unions
*
Reversing Bush ban on funding overseas family planning clinics
*
Passing hate crimes protections for gays and lesbians
*
Protecting stem cell research research
*
Strengthening state authority and restricting federal preemption to protect state consumer, environmental and labor laws
*
Financial reforms to protect homeowners and credit card holders
*
Bailing out the auto industry and protecting unionized retirees and workers


Obama’s Regulatory Accomplishments: http://www.progressivefix.com/obamas-regulatory-accomplishments

he flow of expertise into the federal bureaucracy over the past year has been reminiscent of what took place at the start of the New Deal. For instance, as a replacement for Foulke at OSHA, Obama chose David Michaels, a professor of occupational and environmental health at George Washington University. In 2008, Michaels published a book, Doubt is Their Product: How Industry’s Assault on Science Threatens Your Health, detailing how businesses had delayed regulations by “manufacturing uncertainty” about scientific findings.

To manage the EPA, Obama appointed a slew of highly experienced state environmental officials. (As Bill Becker of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies explains, state officials are ideally suited for the EPA because they have firsthand experience in how regulations are enforced and how they work.) Obama’s choice to run the agency was Lisa Jackson, a chemical engineer who led the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Her deputies include the former secretary of the environment in Maryland, as well as the former heads of the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, the Massachusetts Bureau of Resource Protection, and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

Meanwhile, Obama chose as his Food and Drug Administration (FDA) chief Margaret Hamburg, who achieved renown during the 1990s as health commissioner of New York City, where she developed a program for controlling tuberculosis that led to a sharp decline in the disease. Her number two is a former Baltimore health commissioner who, in 2008, was named a public official of the year by Governing magazine.

Even in the face of the recession, he proposed and got funding increases for numerous regulatory agencies–some of them dramatic. He asked for $10.5 billion for the EPA for 2010–a 34 percent jump over 2009, and the first time in eight years that the budget had increased. He also requested a 19 percent increase in the FDA’s budget, the largest in its history; a 10 percent increase for OSHA, which will allow it to hire 130 new inspectors; and increases of 5 percent, 7 percent, and 9 percent for the Federal Trade Commission, the SEC, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Finally, Obama has ended the application by Republican administrations of a skewed approach to cost-benefit analysis of proposed regulations that makes short-term costs to businesses an overriding consideration. His most important step was probably appointing progressive law professor Cass Sunstein to head up the White House “super-agency” that reviews federal regulations, which under Bush became a major obstacle to the ability of regulatory agencies to do their work . . .

read more: http://www.progressivefix.com/obamas-regulatory-accomplishments

[marmar]

28. Always true....people put way too much energy and aspiration into getting candidate X elected.

NOTHING changes until people demand it through direct action. Civil rights didn't come about because JFK was a good person who did the right thing. He might very well may have been, but movements FORCED him to do the right thing.

[Starry Messenger]

29. k&r