Political Cortex: Brain Food for the Body Politic

They pissed me off so much they turned me into an activist. I used to be satisfied reading The Nation, grumbling, writing LTEs, grumbling more, and volunteering occasionally. Now I go around talking about how we have to save the world before it's too late. Not just save the country, though in most ways we've got to do that first. We can't do much about global warming until we kick BushCo out and give their followers a collective dope-slap or two.

I'm trying to figure out how I can change professions, from college lecturer to doing something for a non-profit. Not really sure where to start or what field, or where I would do the most good, (or where I would be most likely to land a job). Union organizer? Environmental work? Civil Rights? Still figuring this out. Right now I only know that I'd rather be doing something to save the world.

by astraea on 11/26/2005 04:17:51 PM EST

...the GOP has polarized the nation. Once upon a time, Americans of differing beliefs and parties could have relatively reasoned discussions about political issues, but not anymore. Right-wing moderates have turned into extremists.

For example, my own parents and brother buy into the Faux News Channel's nightly propaganda, lapping it up like mother's milk. Seeing the effect that disinfo has had on them, I truly understand how good people supported the Nazi Party Germany during the 1930's and 1940's, and it's frightening, horrifying, and disgusting.

At least it made me realize how fragile a democratic government is. The polarization has also made me realize that we're targets in a war of ideological extermination, and given the way history has played out in similar situations, the Radical Right won't just stop at murdering our right to exercise our beliefs, it'll extend its genocide to the "logical" conclusion.

by S M Dixon on 11/26/2005 05:04:45 PM EST

Sorry to inject local politics into a national debate, but there was no way New York was going to avoid another politically correct but oh-so-ineffectual Democratic machine politician such as Freddie Ferrar or Mark Green without a Republican alternative who was wealthy enough to buy the election.  And--surprise, surprise--having no strings attached because he could buy just about any small nation on the planet if he chose, Mike Bloomberg has been able to do breathtaking but necessary things such as hiking the property tax 18% in one year to cover the budget shortfall (as well as to propose breathtaking and completely unnecessary things such as the West Side Stadium).  The brilliance and political guts of this move have been inadequately appreciated, it seems to me.  Democratic politicians love to talk social service programs, but obfuscate about how to fund them. Ferrar said he would have met the $4 billion gap in the budget by "tightening our belts." What, half portions at Gracie Mansion? No, that's a code phrase for sorry, but programs will have to be cut.
      It seems as if Dems are so afraid of ruffling some mythical middle-class voter that they themselves are the ones who won't say "tax increase," never mind "creative tax increase." Ferrar decried that tax increase, but it's the most progressive way of raising taxes I can imagine.  If your property was valued at $100,000, you paid an extra $1800. If it was valued at $10 million, the way some New York townhouses such as the mayor's are, your taxes increased $180,000--that's real money, enough to hire 4 teachers, or cops, or firemen.  
    I think Bloomberg's devotion to trying to improve city services, funding 311 (a phone service information program), programs for the homeless, affordable housing, a$7,000 raise for teachers in his first year, major increases in education spending etc has made me more aware of the tax side of things, and how the creation of golden revenue streams can be a plus for the city.  I hated the stadium idea, because I hate traffic and professional sports.  But do I think the $300 million the city would have put into the construction could have been earned back the next year in increased revenue (direct taxes, payroll taxes on new employees, food taxes from fans eating at local restaurants, parking tickets, the 18% tax on parking the City charges)? Yes, or shortly thereafter. Quality of life has to enter into these discussions, but the poor don't live on Manhattan's West Side anymore--it's the upper middle class and the wealthy in Trump Towers.  It's their quality of life (and mine, as someone who uses the West Side Highway) that would have been impacted. There is now apparently some skullduggery about construction on another site that involved decreasing the amount of affordable housing and increasing the high end condos.  When I hear that, I think: Keep luring those high rollers to the city, Mr Mayor. Keep that revenue stream alive 'n kicking so the people I care about can be taken care of with rent subsidies, intensive summer school for those who need it etc etc and affordable housing built on less tax-generating real estate.
   This has been a rambling disquisition, but I'd like to close by saying I was ashamed of the Dem candidate for President last year, someone who has actively done so little for the so-called little people; who has said all the right things but never actually achieved very much or worked very hard for workers and the disadvantaged, it seems.  I think what I like about Mike Bloomberg is that he has taken a word that I always thought of as dirty and GOP-associated--"business"- -and made me understand its value in achieving socialist ideals (though he'd never call them that). Gross mismangement and cronyism wastes as much potential as underfunding of needed programs. My new political gods are those who use the tools of business (Eliot Spitzer and Alan Hevesi as super accounting sleuths; Bloomberg as an efficiency nut) to generate resources for the underserved (Spitzer getting Hess to pay a $340,000 fine for price-gouging which will go to fund heating subsidies for the elderly poor).  They are Dem politicians, but they aren't afraid to roll up their sleeves and go where the money action is, instead of standing atop a pile of rubble decrying the pile of rubble without figuring out a way to attack the problem, which is what sometimes makes me sigh about Dems.  Do I hate the Bush administration and everything it stands for? Absolutely. Will I ever forget that my Democratic Senators Clinton and Schumar voted for the Iraq War and (I believe) the Bush cuts while Link Chaffee, a Republican, voted against them? No. Or that MCCain's voice against US-sponsored torture and Chuck Hagel's concerns about Iraq seem louder than any of our party's Congressional leadership? A Democrat without guts or conscience is as bad as a Republican without guts or conscience.

by MmeVoltaire on 11/26/2005 06:39:19 PM EST

I think the Republicans are extremely close to breaking an implicit contract of government that has survived war, economic disaster, and internal revolution.

by Devilstower on 11/26/2005 11:07:48 PM EST

The modern GOP has embraced the theocratic outlook on life and is determined to codify Christianity into law. More than anything else -- although the slavering at corporations is a big deal for me too -- this right-wing Christian fundamentalist hooey is something I never will forgive them for.

Traditional conservatives I can live with (low taxes, less government regulation, fiscal responsibility, privacy advocates), even if I don't necessarily agree with their views on funding social programs and lessening regulation. At least there's a valid point of discussion with these folks.

But how do you even begin to talk about community responsibility with a group of theocrats who think God has commanded them to put their views into the law of secular nations? There is no rational reasoning going on here, and thus the secular political debate is utterly stymied.

by SusanG on 11/27/2005 11:49:04 AM EST