The Beck and Palin haters

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-11-23/glenn-beck-community-organizer/

Forget about the government's tax and spend policies - that's small potatoes compared to the problem Conor Friedersdorf has uncovered which is bankrupting people across the nation -- Glenn Beck's book sales!

It appears Beck is conning people into buying his books, which is draining the victims' bank accounts -- how many books are people buying at a time? Conor doesn't say, but they must be filling up their car trunks.

It's known as the "bait and switch", and Beck, according to Friedersdorf, is a master at this con game. Beck lures innocent victims into his trap by convincing them that if they don't buy his books, obviously dozens of books, that the government will control their minds and do all sorts of horrible things to them and their family. Once the victims are terrified, they rush to Barnes and Nobles and deplete their bank accounts buying Beck's books.

It's a good thing that people like Friedersdorf and Andrew Sullivan are looking out for the gullible people of this nation, because, otherwise, between Beck's book sales and Palin's female organs, the nation could be in serious danger. It's all about priorities, folks. 

He might even win an Oscar

I will be writing a lot about independents in the coming days, because I believe the independent movement is being marginalized through misrepresentation of what it stands for -- at least moderates and progressives are attempting to marginalize the movement. One of the reasons I like Glenn Beck is because he understands the independent movement and doesn't waver or lean toward a wink-and-nod to Republicans. Once Beck realized the emptiness of the Republican Party, he grasped what the Tea Party is about.

 

But before I get into the subject of the independent movement too far, it's useful to explain why I think Obama is still fairly popular, yet congress is viewed less favorably than a box of rattlesnakes -- at least there's anti-venom for a snake bite. Obama will likely remain popular and, also, likely win a second term -- but progressivism will be punished. As Obama sees that his progressive agenda is becoming more and more unpopular, he will separate himself from it the best he can, while still hoping surrogates can get changes through which don't stick directly to Obama. There is no mistake that Obama is a progressive, but he's also a man who wants leave a great legacy.

 

Obama, as titular head of the U.S., will be given a pass, because he's the first African-American President, and because he's a personable guy, but the independent movement will not allow him to become an Emperor. That's okay -- there will be no widespread movment to destroy Obama, and there shouldn't be, because he can't make changes alone -- his progressive agenda will be stopped, and he will have his legacy.

 

If someone like John Kerry had been elected to president and it turned out he has all these socialist-leaning connections and his agenda was full-bore progressive, he would be destroyed -- but Obama will be a star. He'll be rendered politically impotent, but he'll be a star, nonetheless. We love our celebrities. Oh, there will be small groups who try to destroy him, but he will rise above it, and the majority will let the movie play out.

How stupid can the White House be? Anita Dunn?

I watched the video played on Glenn Beck's Fox show today of Anita Dunn saying one of her favorites philosophers is Mao while she was speaking to high schoolers.

Holy crap, and just as I am reading Paul Johnson's book Modern Times. Mao? I can understand a sophomore at Berkeley saying this, but a White House employee in charge of communications? As Beck said, she might as well have claimed "Hitler" as a favorite philosopher.

This is becoming a nightmare. Also, she seemed freaky -- I don't know what it was about her, but as she was speaking on this video, with her tongue darting out like a snake, it gave me a weird feeling -- I'm just saying.

What is David Brooks whining about?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/opinion/02brooks.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

The anti-Bush sentiment and the fact that many voters were sick of the Republican Party are to the two main factors leading to McCain's candidacy - not many cared. 2008 was an anomaly and Brooks is misreading the changing political scene. Beck is actually more influential with voters right now than Limbaugh. Limbaugh is still a Republican and believes a strong conservative candidate is needed to win the next election.

Beck understands that it's not about the Republicans winning the next election, if all they are going to do is follow the progressives down the road of statism. A growing number of independents are demanding a change in government not a change in party power.

Brooks is still playing the game of intellectual, moderate, high brow conservatism vs talk-show hosts and the southern, social conservative mob. That game is a media invention -- the ground is shifting beneath Brooks' feet and he has no idea what's happening. Brooks is no leader, just a whiner -- but he should at least be whining about reality rather than a trumped up Republican division. 

The power of ordinary people

When you talk about the power of ordinary people, especially on a blog that's political in nature, you run the risk of being accused of populism. However, those who know me, know that I have no facile idea of ordinary people, no tendency to idealize the "little people", nor any patronizing attitude toward common folk. I am an ordinary person and have been all my life -- I grew up in a mixture of poverty/lower middle class, have always been somewhere in the middle class, although for periods of time I've held responsible, profitable positions and I've started three very small businesses.

I think I've earned the right to speak honestly about ordinary people. By "ordinary" I don't place any value judgement on things like intelligence or importance as a human being -- individual effort and achievement mean more than economic group designations. What is meant by "ordinary" relates simply to the distinction between status as measured by popularity, media exposure, society's ideas about celebrity or elite status. An ordinary person is someone who lives a life, which in it's own right might be exceptional, that's relatively common, the type of life that many of us live -- we don't hob-nob with jet-setters, have no Hollywood connections, are not in a political position of importance, have no great sums of wealth, power or national influence, aren't best-selling authors or famous atheletes or artists -- just ordinary people in all the diversity that represents.

Ordinary people could be said to be more locally focused, more attuned to community within small or large towns or cities, and less cosmopolitan -- although many ordinary people are well-educated and have traveled quite extensively. It's almost impossible to talk about ordinary people as if they they are all alike, or think alike, but there are many similarities which anyone who is an ordinary person will recognize. being on ordinary person cuts across racial divisions -- there are man, many common concerns which affect all races.

Because of the local nature of ordinary people, the immediate community has been more important than national politics, although many ordinary people vote according to party affiliations or for candidates they think will support their interests. However, it appears, as I've written about lately, that ordinary people are now becoming more nationally, and even internationally, conscious. I think a lot of this has to do with the information age and the technological advances in communication, so that now, through social groups and blogs and such, we're all connected, or can be easily connected. As Glenn Beck has shown lately with his "moms" series, people who were once isolated are now connected and they are forming social groups with members from around the country or around the world. 

As localism and community-focus are transcended by social networking, political consciousness is growing. One reason why political consciousness is expanding is not necessarily because ordinary people are interested in politics, but because the government has grown its tenacles to reach into every area of our lives so that we are forced to confront it and acknowledge its effects on our lives, our communites, our families.

This is an amazing paradigm shift which our nation, and the world, is undergoing, and it's just now beginning to unfold and change the way we think about government, among other concerns. I might have been hasty to refer to this growth of political consciousness as "libertarian" in nature, but I do beleive it has a lot to do with liberty, personal responsibility and a desire to limit the power of government. Politically activists, who are also ordinary people, started the social/political networking process long before the less politically active, local-focused others who have been more concerned with basic, apolitical matters, but now these ordinary others are catching up and this will change the political process.

The political party which can understand the needs and wants of the ordinary people who make up most of society in our country will be the political party in power in the future. I think, for the most part, ordinary people want more power over their lives, especially as it relates to family, education, community and their income and occupations. In other words, they want a more limited government and more private sector/personal empowerment. Ordinary people want to be involved in helping to solve societal problems, but they are disgusted with the political games being played, the waste and corruption in government and the power that controls or thwarts their actions.

People now have a means by which to express their ideas, their criticisms, their opposition, and it creates a learning process by which they can make better sense of what's outside the local community, what once seemed foreign and untouchable. It will be a huge mistake for the political class to misread or ignore this expansion of political consciousness -- it will become powerful beyond their stunted imaginations.