Fearful? Check. Xenophobic? Check. Aggressive? Check.

Conservatives love to "otherize," or identify demons they can then project their moral clarity all over. First the communists, now the terrorists.... The existence of our republic is at stake! It's black and white, good and evil, us or them, every waking minute. And the hell with sissy diplomacy and liberal due process.

J. Peter Scoblic's U.S. Vs. Them (out last April) examines fifty years of crusading conservatives and the foreign policy wreckage they've left in their wake. It's reviewed today by Sara Robinson over at Alternet:

Whenever you hear a conservative go on about "moral clarity," this is precisely what they're saying. There is always an enemy. They are always out to get us. They will stop at nothing. You cannot coddle them or negotiate with them; you can only survive by annihilating them. And people who see the moral world clearly will not waste time or breath questioning these essential truths.

It's pretty stunning stuff when you read it that way. It really makes you realize that conservatives live in a world of paranoia, xenophobia and seething aggression that most progressives can't even fathom. And their entire moral universe has been twisted to serve their externalized fears; to take that will to project their own demons onto someone else and then destroy them and elevate it as the highest possible moral good.

It's a definition of "morality" that renders the rule of law meaningless but readily justifies genocide and torture as moral acts of self-preservation.

Bush, in other words, wasn't so much guided by neo-conservatives as by straightforward conservative fearfulness.

Robinson exhorts us to call out conservatives on their peculiarly narrow view of "morality" and to remember the Enlightenment values that informed our forebears:

We believe moral clarity is defined by the Constitution, embodied in the rule of law and on display wherever the dignity of other people -- including those whose interests oppose ours -- is upheld. And, in case there's any question about where the real moral clarity lies here: Ours is the morality America was founded on. Theirs is one that almost put that light out forever.

Amen.

Friends of the Earth hearts Obama

From Friends of the Earth Action:

Obama shows early leadership on climate, acts on states’ request to move forward with clean cars standards

WASHINGTON, D.C.—President Barack Obama today directed his administration to take action on a waiver that will allow California and 13 other states to limit global warming pollution from cars and trucks. Friends of the Earth President Brent Blackwelder had the following response:

“Transportation causes a third of America’s greenhouse gas emissions, which is why President Obama’s action today is so important. President Obama’s action marks a clear change of course from Bush administration policies that kept cleaner cars and trucks off the road. We commend the President for this early leadership on the climate front, and look forward to working with him to implement the many other steps that are necessary to strengthen our economy and dramatically reduce our country’s greenhouse gas emissions.”

Friends of the Earth has for years been a leader in the fight to put cleaner cars on the road. Friends of the Earth board member Russell Long conceived of California’s clean cars bill and was a major force in passing the bill, which was authored by then-State Senator Fran Pavley. Friends of the Earth has also won victories in court that paved the way for clean cars standards to be put in place.

So the "world’s largest grassroots environmental network" - with members in 77 countries - likes Obama's first major action on the environment. I'd have to say this bodes well.

Disclosure: Mr. Alna Dem is chairman of FOE US.

They weren't inept. They did it on purpose.

It was class warfare, government for the few, a kleptocracy, the crime of the century:

Its purpose was never to make America a better place. Indeed, if we define America as a country belonging to its 300 million inhabitants, then the purpose was actually precisely the opposite. The mission of this ideology was in fact to diminish, if not impoverish, the vast bulk of these citizens so that the already massively wealthy among them could become obscenely wealthy.

Where you or I might have looked at the middle of the 20th century and seen the moment when America finally did justice to its national promise by introducing a measure of serious economic equality for the first time, and thus vastly expanding the middle class, the plutocrats behind Reaganism-Bushism saw a filthy aberration to the natural order of master and slave that had long existed in human history. They therefore set about to overturn that aberration and return to "better times" through a process of class warfare. That meant that labor unions had to go, along with workplace protections, good wages, decent benefits, government protections and a far-too-moderate average CEO-to-lowest-paid-worker salary ratio on the order of 50-to-1, replaced instead by something closer to 500-to-1.

Emphasis added. And yes, they were evil.

If you don't believe me, here’s another take from Philip Agre at UCLA. He asks two simple questions:

Q: What is conservatism?
A: Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy.

Q: What is wrong with conservatism?
A: Conservatism is incompatible with democracy, prosperity, and civilization in general. It is a destructive system of inequality and prejudice that is founded on deception and has no place in the modern world.

“Conservatism is the antithesis of democracy. This has been true for thousands of years,” says Agre.

P.S. In the "prose too delicious to lose" category, here's a Bush/Cheney sendoff from Meteor Blades:

Good-bye to your rip-offs, your malice, your arrogance, your ignorance, your outlawry, your denial, your deceit, your cronyism and your stubborn refusal to cease pushing the envelope in the department of shameless villainy. Goodbye to the administration you constructed of turdiness and explained with truthiness. To your smirk and your snarl. To your conscienceless cruelty. Good-bye to your corruption, your vanity, your world without grays. Good-bye, good-bye, good-bye, you insufferable despots, and good riddance.

The year in blogging

...via Wonkette, via conservative blogger Jon Swift, the year's best posts on both sides of the aisle as nominated by the bloggers themselves. And here's my favorite:

TBogg: Your Mumia sweatshirt won’t get you into heaven anymore. TBogg explains reality to Ralph Nader voters.

I could really have used this post the day Snoozetska and I tried to explain presidential politics to a food co-op manager who would rather stay home and make peace flags than vote any day. "I just imagine peace, and that's my contribution," she said proudly.

"Third Culture Kids"

This piece hit the Daily Beast awhile back but didn't seem to get a lot of play. I think it's fascinating: According to sociologists, Obama is a classic "Third Culture Kid" sharing the traits of many people with expat childhoods. These TCKs often grow into adults who are socially adaptable, intellectually flexible, and have a global perspective. They think outside the box and are good at reconciling opposing points of view. At the same time, they sometimes feel rootless and detached and are criticized for seeming aloof.

Sound familiar?

The great challenge for maturing Third Culture Kids is to forge a sense of personal and cultural identity from the various environments to which they been exposed. Barack Obama’s memoir, Dreams of My Father, could serve as a textbook in the TCK syllabus, a classic search for self-definition, described in living color. Obama’s colleagues on the Harvard Law Review were among the first to note both his exceptional skill at mediating among competing arguments and the aloofness that made his own views hard to discern. That cool manner of seeming “above it all” is also a classic feature of the Third Culture Kid.

The TCKs’ identity struggles can be painful and difficult. The literature documents addictive behaviors, troubled marriages and fitful careers. But meeting this challenge can become a TCK’s greatest strength. Learning to take the positive pieces from a variety of experiences and create a strong sense of “This is who I am, no matter where I am” gives a steadiness when the world around is in flux or chaos”—which helps explain “no-drama Obama.”

Obama is stocking his inner circle with other TCKs: advisor Valerie Jarrett (a childhood in Tehran and London), Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner (East Africa, India, Thailand, China, Japan), National Security Advisor James L. Jones (Paris), and Commerce Secretary Bill Richardson (Mexico City).

Sociologist Ted Ward calls TCKs the "prototype citizens of the future." I think starting the future now is a great idea.

McCarthy to Nixon to Bush to Palin

Oh, interesting. The father of the modern Republican party isn't Goldwater. leading on to Reagan and then to G.W. Bush. The bloodlines run straight from Joseph McCarthy.

Political facts you NEVER imagined

According to a new study of personality and politics:

• Right-wingers hoard cleaning supplies, calendars, postage stamps, and laundry products.
• Liberals have cluttered offices, colorful bedrooms, lots of CDs, and eclectic taste in music and movies.

These differences map out regionally just like our red-blue voting map. Also:

• Conservatives are traditional, self-disciplined, rule-following, organized, dependable, and responsible. They're religious, indifferent to inequality, and happy.
• Liberals are creative, curious, intellectual, and tolerant. They think too much, worry about other people, and their happiness consequently plunges during hard times.
  

I almost hate to say it, but it sounds like we need both kinds.

UPDATE: But not until we get way past this election.

Protecting yer yard sign

I've been hearing reports of yard-sign theft from the good Democratic front lawns and highway triangles of Lincoln County, so I was pleased to see this handy advice from our friends at the Hancock County Democratic Committee:

Sign theft and vandalism continues to be a problem in some areas. District Attorney Michael Povich has issued a statement regarding this, which you can download from the HCDC homepage, or use this link.

The statute:

23 MRSA §1917-A. Unlawful removal of political signs

1. A person who takes, defaces or disturbs a lawfully placed sign bearing political messages relating to a general election, primary election or referendum commits a civil violation for which a forfeiture of up to $250 may be adjudged.

Hope that's helpful.

UPDATE: Then there's this solution, from New Mexico.

Democrats, please write 100 times: People do not vote on issues.

I've said this before, haven't I? Dems keep nominating cortex candidates while Republicans go all lizard-brain. Except that this time we didn't, even if it was by the skin of our teeth. And by choosing Obama over Clinton, we finally have a candidate who communicates emotion, not policy. Obama is our Reagan, according to George Lakoff.

And here's why it matters so much. Democrats, can we please learn this lesson once and for all and not backslide next time with a Hillary or Kerry or Gore or Dukakis?

First of all, 98 percent of our reason is unconscious; it's what our brain is doing when we're busy being conscious.

Second, it turns out that you can't be rational without being emotional; emotional is necessary for rationality.

In politics, this means that people don't vote on issues. Lakoff again:

Ronald Reagan learned from all of this that people vote not on the basis of positions on issues and on programs but on five things. Namely, values, communication and connection, trust, authenticity (do you tell the truth), and identity (do you identify with the candidate). Obama understood that, and ran his campaign that way. Clinton ran on the basis of positions on issues, and bored people, basically. She didn't run on those five things. Now, Obama had the positions on issues and all the experts, but that's not how he ran his operation against Clinton.

Note please: Obama had the policies; he just didn't run on them.

Lakoff mentions other interesting things like "mirror neurons," and why we feel comfortable when we see Obama and why McCain makes us tense. But the take-home message is, thank God we nominated Obama.

Conservatism has been meth-head for 50 years

...if not longer. Ilyka cures us of any latent William F. Buckley nostalgia. Conservatism as ushered in with the founding of the National Review is little more than a euphemism for white supremacy:

I am telling you, leftybeans, you have all had amnesia. Every single piece of drivel you find in The Corner, every lulzy post at Bacon o’Playdough, every Goldsteinian meltdown and Instapunditious I-just-link, I-don’t-endorse oily oozy blob of propaganda, every Confederate Yankee conspiracy theory, every Patterician investigation of IP addresses and other ridiculous internet minutiae, springs from this half-a-century-ago source.

And that source is based upon one single, easily attacked premise: That white men in America are losing out on the American dream, and “those people”–be they queer, black, women, transgendered, latin@, disabled, or OMG all six at the same time!–are to blame for it. Thus must we stand athwart their lives and their bodies and yell, or beat into them, our message to STOP. Because what is history but the story of people?

And conservatism won't be dead with this election, she writes, "it's resting."

h/t Atrios.

Fake Americans head McCain's donor list

Check out the top ten zip codes of his donors:

1. 10021 - New York, N.Y.
2. 85253 - Paradise Valley, Ariz.
3. 10022 - New York, N.Y.
4. 06830 - Greenwich, Conn.
5. 92660 - Newport Beach, Calif.
6. 22101 - McLean, Va.
7. 75205 - Dallas, Texas
8. 77024 - Houston, Texas
9. 78209 - San Antonio, Texas
10. 63124 - St. Louis, Mo.

Can the netroots save democracy?

Huffpo on the netroots and the end of Rovian politics:

• Traditional media might call out a lie once and then move on to the next shiny thing. Bloggers are obsessive and, being everywhere, will follow a story into every last corner, forever.
• The internet makes easier to disseminate character smears but harder to make them stick.
• Instead of relying on 30-second campaign ads and TV sound bites, voters now - by the millions - watch full-length speeches and YouTube videos posted by a wide range of people. They're getting much fuller, rounder pictures of their candidates, and it's harder to scare them.
  

Let's hope.

Matt Taibbi does not suffer fools gladly

And therefore, when National Review's Byron York tries to pin the credit crisis on Democrats, minorities, and the Community Reinvestment Act, Taibbi hands him his head:

Tell me you're not ashamed to put this gigantic international financial Krakatoa at the feet of a bunch of poor black people who missed their mortgage payments. The CDS market, this market for credit default swaps that was created in 2000 by Phil Gramm's Commodities Future Modernization Act, this is now a $62 trillion market, up from $900 billion in 2000. That's like five times the size of the holdings in the NYSE. And it's all speculation by Wall Street traders. It's a classic bubble/Ponzi scheme. The effort of people like you to pin this whole thing on minorities, when in fact this whole thing has been caused by greedy traders dealing in unregulated markets, is despicable.

h/t Washington Monthly.

Next time you hear "liberal media"

...you can point out that we're down to five and they all want those McCain tax cuts:

The multinational corporations that run the mainstream media — GE (NBC), Time Warner (CNN), Walt Disney (ABC), News Corporation (FOX), and Viacom (CBS) — stand to benefit hugely under a McCain presidency. The centerpiece of Sen. McCain’s economic plan — actually, the whole plan — is large tax cuts for corporations. It would deliver $1.44 billion in tax cuts to the five largest media companies, according to an analysis by the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Friends of the Earth Action Endorses Tom Allen for Senate

From FoE Action's press release:

Allen called a consistent supporter of clean air, clean water and clean energy; Collins has frequently sided with Bush and special interests

Friends of the Earth Action today endorsed Congressman Tom Allen for Senate, saying there is a significant difference between his consistent support for environmental protection and fair trade and incumbent Senator Susan Collins’ frequent votes against these principles.

“Maine residents deserve an A voter in the Senate, not someone who scores a C- through her career but then gets green the year before an election,” said Dr. Brent Blackwelder, President of Friends of the Earth Action. “Far too often, Susan Collins has sided with special interests and George Bush—and against the health of the planet. Tom Allen is a strong supporter of clean air, clean water, clean energy and fair trade. He has earned our endorsement.”

According to the League of Conservation Voters, Allen has a 92 percent pro-environment lifetime voting record, but Collins has a lifetime record of only 69 percent, Blackwelder said.

Allen’s track record includes opposition to the Bush-Cheney Energy Bill of 2005 with its billions for Big Oil, which Collins supported. Allen has been a leader on clean energy and is an original cosponsor of the Safe Climate Act (H.R. 1590), one of the best bills yet offered on climate change in the House of Representatives. Allen is also a recognized leader on ocean pollution issues, writing successful legislation to create a comprehensive ocean observing system and to monitor ocean acidification.

Allen is also a strong supporter of fair trade, Blackwelder said:

“There are big differences between Allen and Collins on a central issue for Friends of the Earth Action—global trade agreements. Unjust agreements have led to a race to the bottom in environmental and workplace standards, causing outsourcing to businesses that tolerate sweatshops, and facilitating natural resource exploitation. Allen has consistently opposed these bad trade deals. Collins has not.”

Collins supported the Peru free trade agreement as well as “fast-track” negotiating authority for the president, which Friends of the Earth Action opposed. She has been ambiguous about how she will vote on the deeply flawed Colombia Free Trade Agreement. Allen on the other hand has pledged to “put a stop to trade deals that benefit the multinational corporations at the expense of Maine workers” and has consistently voted against bad agreements.

Collins and Allen also differ on strongly on judicial nominations, with Collins voting to confirm all of President Bush’s Supreme Court nominees.

“The future of the Supreme Court is one of the most crucial issues for those of us focused on clean air, clean water and the climate crisis,” said Friends of the Earth Action board member and Maine resident Michael Herz. “Unfortunately Susan Collins voted to confirm both of George Bush’s right-wing Supreme Court nominees, jeopardizing numerous environmental protections.”

Justices John Roberts and Sam Alito, both of whom Collins voted to confirm, have already sided against the environment in major decisions including Mass v. EPA, Rapanos v. United States and Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker.

Collins also voted to confirm Gale Norton as Bush’s Secretary of Interior. Norton has turned out to be one of the most anti-environment secretaries in our nation’s history.

Finally, Collins and Allen differ significantly on the Iraq war, which Friends of the Earth Action strongly opposed. Collins voted for the war and has supported the disastrous Iraq policies of President Bush and Vice President Cheney. Allen was one of only 133 House members to oppose using military force in Iraq.

“In all of these areas, Tom Allen has been an advocate for the health of Maine’s people and the planet,” Herz said. “We are proud to support his candidacy for the U.S. Senate.”