KEVIN DRUM: Laura Rozen on what a truly aggressive press can accomplish: . . . In other words, there's hope for us yet.

Kevin - the NSA program addressed Al Queda and Al Queda associates. Not Bush's political enemies.

I'm sorry, Kevin, to say the NSA program spied on Bush's political enemies is reckless and irresponsible. And another sign you must be wearing your tinfoil hat again.

But the key question that needs to be asked: What will finally spark the timid, enabling press into actually being aggressive against the corrupt current state of Washington?

]

TWO STOOGES: you must be wearing your tinfoil hat again.

But we have to watch pirates of the carribean.

the NSA program addressed Al Queda and Al Queda associates

prove it. show us detailed, verifiable records of what the NSA gathered, who they delievered it to, and what was done with it.

A batcave?

Holy Roman, Batman!

It's actually pretty amazing when you consider the amount of major Italian media bought and paid for by Berlusconi. He owns something like 5 TV channels and three major papers.

It's like Rupert Murdoch with personal electoral ambitions.

Italy is extremely divided, and a lot of the public *is* cowed and apathetic (I have a very good Italian friend I speak to daily), and the center-left coalition is an unholy alliance of radical secularists and ex-Commies with Catholics and neoliberals.

To the extent the press is making hay of the spying scandal and getting traction with the public is a testament to resillient and resourceful character of the Italian people.

They should by all rights be as FOXified as we in the US. But thank gods for the European tradition of to-the-death partisanship.

Bob

All will be forgiven. Italy won the world cup.

What, the Italian media and judges are coming to help us out?

Speaking of what smells...did zidane just throw the world cup? i'm flabbergasted.

What ever happened to that tool Hewitt?

sorry wrong thread

to say the NSA program spied on Bush's political enemies is reckless and irresponsible.

Kevin said this where? You see words that no one else can and that means Kevin is wearing a tin foil hat?

Oh joy, we might find out the details of how our government is violating us and abusing us in 2009. I can't wait.

Tell us more about your hopes and dreams. Better than Calgon. It's almost like I'm there.

Italy won the World Cup today ???

Oh my gods, my friend is going to be delirious ...

Bob

Stooge doesn't snap to the fact that these programs "could" be used against political enemies, if they haven't already.

I wonder what people like Stooge would say if a Dem was doing the same thing.

Wingnut Hypocrite.

Yes, but while it might be true that this investigation had been percolating while Berlusconi was Prime Minister, the case seems to have really heated up since he lost the election. (And I believe the arrest of the head of the Mafia in Sicily happened right after that as well.)

Restoring integrity, honor, and dignity in our government lies in our hands this November.

In other words, there's hope for us yet.

What, is the Italian press moving here, or something?

Perhaps Cheney's 'undiscosed location' bunker is our counterpart to the Roman Batcave.

Why, its the domino theory in action.

First Berlusconi falls, next will be Blair, and then finally Bush/Cheney. This of course depends on whether or not they can replace Stephenson before they get out of office.

Sismi discovery will show the English Iraq findings to be rubbish, strengthening the call to oust Blair. A Blair purge means the goods on Bush/Cheney get a full court press.

Not to change the subject or break up the troll busting fun or anything, but Italian prosocuters have also been unraveling a time honored criminal enterprise concerning the looting and selling of priceless cultural heritage.

Former curator of antiquities at the Getty Museum in Los Angeles, Marion True, was indicted for "knowingly trafficking in artifacts looted from archaeological sites."

NY Review of Books had a great review by Cecilia Todeschini, Peter Watson. In reviewing 'The Medici Conspiracy': An Exchange they manage to get a handle on an very sophisticated subject, while pulling the rug out from under the authors at the same time. Great read.

Plus didn't the Italian media help expose the current Serie A scandal? (I really hope their government doesn't have a change of heart after the World Cup victory--I was really looking forward to Juventus being busted down to Serie C.)

Oooops, mea culpa. I Ancoultered the title from the link and messed up the attribution. Hugh Eakin wrote the review, Peter Watson and Cecilia Todeschini wrote the book.

The link is Hugh's reply to the authors response on his review, btw.

Hey Moe! Hey Larry!

... the cheese!

Elton Beard: What, the Italian media and judges are coming to help us out?

F'in Librul: What, is the Italian press moving here, or something?

Y'all beat me to it, and eloquently.

France was robbed.

机票~北京机票~北京飞机票~北京打折机票~北京特价机票~北京航班查询~北京学生机票~北京国际机票~航空公司

Just think, if the American media took it's job seriously, someone might actually ask George W. Bush how many times he has been arrested - a pretty basic question to ask someone running for the highest office in the land.

Yet, Bush has gotten elected twice (well, sort of), without ever having had to answer that question. Unbelievable.

Yeah, but what does Italy think about Gay Marriage and Flag Burning! And Tax Cuts!

CUT AND PASTE THIS ENTRY OF KEVIN'S SOMEWHERE, FOLKS ALONG WITH THIS CAVEAT: "BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR."

Be careful what you wish for. The "left" in America already has a highLY paid and agenda driven press on it's side, i.e., the major daily newspapers, the major networks, and public broadcasting, television and radio. Deny it and thus leave at full speed the "reality-based community".

The gist of Kevin's post is that they can do more to foward their agenda; sure, they could. But I'll tell you what I forsee, being as objective as I can, taking history and extrapolating forward. Fox News is just the beginning and a relatively objective beginning. The reactionaries in the United States, who have some justice on their side, too, by the way, are just realizing what has been holding them back all these years. And with agenda driven think tanks, the internet, cable television, and the radio, along with eager "reporters", they are realizing they can "end run" around academia and mainstream journalism by creating a privately funded "academy" and a privately funded "news network". All this being quite legal and effective whether surreptitious or forthright in it's implementation.

Mark my words; rather than wish you had more of a press aparatus as this post so wishes, the "left" will one day long for these days of relative agenda driven press effectiveness, as much as you long for the relative press monopoly the you had in the 60s, 70s, and 80s (you remember when Reaganomics and SDI were ridiculed in the press without objection; er, uh, is SDI not now our first line of defense against the 10,000 mile N. Korea missle or two; and have not Reagan's tax cuts been 100% in effect, with perhaps minimal overall rate adjustments, by Bush I (1% OVERALL tax RATE increase), Clinton (1% OVERALL tax RATE increase), and Bush II (5% OVERALL tax RATE decrease) since 1982? 24 years of Reaganomics; some jellybean head.)

But, I digress; the point: the "left's" media power is on the way down, not up; and the cliff approaches. That is my prediction.

TOH

TOH: that was a wonderfully obtuse mishmash of ill conceived gobbledygook, masquerading as deep thought.

Well done.

Oh, and bonus points for giving yourself extra gravitas through a such a meaningless yet pretentious name - no historian is objective (as any intellectually honest historian would admit)

TOH is great comedian.

Yeah SDI is the first line of defense against all evil.

TOH:

Since it's apparent to all and sundry on this site that you're a right-wing tool, and the "objective" in your handle is Orwellian doublespeak -- we duly note your opinion and quickly file it where the sun don't shine.

What you're "predicting" is an emergence of an American style of fascism -- which is state corporatism with all appurtenences of culture in private, profitmaking and deeply reactionary hands.

It's nice rhetoric, bro. As a *cough* "historian," I'm sure you're familiar with what Hitler and Mussolini had to say about those weak-minded academics like Max Weber who helped to write the Weimar constitution.

Bob

But, I digress; the point: the "left's" media power is on the way down, not up; and the cliff approaches. That is my prediction.

Oh man - such a turgid and pretentious style suggests the blowhard Tactitus.

Maybe he's syndicating his blog?

R.L.:

Italy, like America, is deeply divided on cultural issues. The Catholic Church (which, as you'd imagine, is still pretty influential in Italian domestic politics) is adamantly opposed to gay marriage and the center-right opposition has taken a position against it. Strong support for it exists in certain areas, especially in the north and the more cosmopolitan cities.

As for tax cuts -- Berlusconi has done much in his effort to Americanize the Italian political system, and he's made taxes a central issue. His last-ditch attack on Prodi was a distorted accustion that the center-left would boost the Italian equivalent of property taxes. The Italian government is, though, infamously riddled with bureaucratic hurdles, and Prodi's coalition just passed a law to reduce the paperwork and taxes levied to certain independent contractors, notably urban taxi drivers.

Italians of any political stripe (save for the very rich) aren't giving up on nationalized healthcare anytime soon. Nor are they keen on hanging out in Iraq -- Berlusconi had to pledge to withdraw troops, and he's probably Bush's biggest cheerleader among European leaders.

Bob

R.L.:

As far as I know, flag-burning has never been a big issue in Italian politics.

Bob

MP3铃声
手机铃声下载
MP3手机铃声下载
手机铃声免费下载
手机铃声
手机铃声
免费手机铃声
免费手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声
手机铃声
铃声下载
免费手机铃声
手机铃声
铃声下载
免费手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声
铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
免费手机铃声
手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
免费手机铃声下载
和弦特效铃声下载
文秘写作
竞聘演讲稿
个人工作总结
八荣八耻演讲稿
中国文秘网
治疗牛皮癣,阴虱特效药
免费歌曲铃声下载
免费手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
免费手机铃声
手机铃声
免费手机铃声
免费手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
免费手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声免费下载
手机铃声下载
MP3铃声
免费手机铃声
手机铃声
手机铃声
mp3
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声下载
手机铃声
手机铃声下载

i haven't had much chance to comment here at kevin's place lately, and there i was, with a few extra minutes and a short enough thread, scrolling down in a pefectly peaceful way.

and then i came across the objective historian, but before i could call what he wrote wonderfully obtuse and suchlike, floopmeister beat me to it! it is truly amazing the extent of derangement that exists in this great land.

back to reality: i bet, without knowing, that there is a much smaller pundit culture in italy to entice journalists away from their real work....

The one problem with SDI, oh great Objective Historian, is that it doesn't work, and probably won't for several decades. We might as well be sticking pins in voodoo dolls of Kim Jong-Il. Must be that right-wing, faith-based defense policy again.

Oh, by the way, I don't disagree that right-wing propaganda might be ascendant. After all, they have been building the right-wing lie machine for decades. Click here and here for more on that point. However, that certainly doesn't make you better human beings.

My perception is that a huge number of Americans “know” how unethical and illegal the Bushies are. The information is out there, provided by our Press and Media. But a large number of Americans either approve, or, they think all politicians are the same.

The Press could be much better, sure. But we know. And we have a hard time doing anything about it.

Rmck1 Sorry! My Snark key isn't working! It was just a drive-by! Ignore my feeble attemps!

Hugh Hewitt has been blogging about the treachery of the New York Times - the most pompous and over-rated newspaper of our generation.

And readers are getting tired of the New York Times, too, evidenced by their big drop in subscriptions. Same goes for the LA Times.

Thank fucking god.......and I think when they find 'the goods' in good old USA it will shock us to the center...........

Hugh Hewitt has been blogging about the treachery of the New York Times - the most pompous and over-rated newspaper of our generation.

Since he's the most pompous and over-rated blogger of our generation, how fitting.

mp3铃音 mp3手机铃声 mp3铃声下载 诺基亚铃音 搞笑图片 诺基亚免费铃声 诺基亚下载铃声 下载铃声 诺基亚手机铃声 诺基亚铃声下载 三星乐园手机铃声 三星mp3铃声下载 三星论坛 三星手机 三星铃声下载 三星铃声 铃声下载 手机铃声下载 手机铃声 铃声下载 手机铃声下载 手机铃声 手机铃声免费下载 免费铃声 江苏移动铃声 下载铃声 浙江移动铃声 北京移动铃声 深圳移动铃声 移动铃声 移动免费铃声 移动下载铃声 下载铃声 搞笑铃声下载 搞笑手机铃声 搞笑图片 搞笑动画铃声 搞笑歌曲铃声 搞笑图片铃声 搞笑免费铃声 搞笑下载铃声 有情人终成眷属铃声 手机铃声下载 移动彩铃下载 小灵通铃声下载 酸酸甜甜就是我铃声 免费铃声下载 手机铃声下载 手机铃声 小灵通铃声下载 MP3铃声下载 免费铃声下载 三星铃声下载 手机铃声 手机铃声下载 手机铃声 手机铃声下载 免费铃声下载 牛皮癣治疗 脂溢性皮炎 斑秃脱发炎 白癜风,外阴白斑 鱼鳞病 脂溢性脱发 阴虱病 治疗疱疹 各类皮癣 湿疹,皮炎 青春痘,痤疮 螨虫性皮炎,酒渣鼻 烧伤烫伤 中国文秘网 治疗牛皮癣,阴虱特效药 癌症肿瘤新药 工作总结 工作汇报 八荣八耻 开业开幕讲话 竞聘演讲稿 就职演讲 心得体会 工作汇报 2006年入党申请书 思想汇报 鼻咽癌治疗 乳腺癌治疗 肺癌治疗 肝癌治疗 结肠癌治疗 直肠癌治疗 胃癌治疗 食管癌治疗 恶性黑色素瘤治疗 皮肤癌治疗 恶性淋巴瘤治疗 胆管癌治疗 胆囊癌治疗 甲状腺癌治疗 脑瘤治疗 白血病治疗 宫颈癌治疗 肝复乐 天蟾胶囊 健脾益肾颗粒 破壁灵芝孢子粉 复方斑蝥胶囊 慈丹胶囊 参丹散结胶囊 珍香胶囊 抗癌平丸 金复康口服液 清肺散结丸 手机铃声下载

Objective Historian,

We're objectively the reality-based community since we were called that by an outside observer, some maverick fantasist in the Bush White House, dreaming of empire.

Was anything in history ever more embarassing than these louts prating on about 'empire' the moment they took office?

Stats on readership of political weblogs,

http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2006/07/sound-of-one-tide-turning_03.html

In other words, there's hope for us yet. Kevin, such an optimist!

Stooge: What's "Al Queda"?

And yet more inane sophistry from Frequent Bedwetter. The combination of banality, outright lies and childish prose is stupefying. How on earth does he even get up in the morning? (Answer; he puts on his blinkers one eye at a time.)

Let's save you the trouble of ever wasting our time again: Republicans are heroes, Liberals are the enemy and are always going to lose against the likes of you. Thank you and good night. Zzzzzzzzzzz........

Thank fucking god... Posted by: Leslie A.

You are welcome tho I feel duty bound to tell you I do not participate in that fleshy behavior much anymore

Well, maybe the Italian press has taken time out from international affairs to find time for investigating internal corruption.

The Italian politic is doing exactly what is predicted by repression. Berlusconi put them under the heel. Reacting and rebelling. Ukraine, Poland, Russia, Iran, Iraq. You name it. Look at the reaction to alleviating repression. And the complications that follow.

Unlike our own press, who doesn't report on international news or internal or external (Iraqi and Afghani, prticularly) corruption.

Not only do we have a non-functioning news media -- that is such a sad statement to make and one I never thought I would be making about the US 25 years ago -- but the bloggosphere is disfuntional, too!

How about that. Corruption in the US? In the national voting system? In the state and local government system? Corporate governance? Only $billions in the federal system? $billions in the military budget, energy taxation, the war against "TERROR".

God. We are SOooo disfunctional and corrupt ourselves!

That's left and right wing. None of it is justifiable.

But WE don't have the measures to ensure legal compunction.

How about that? But we don't care about much. Corruption. Healthcare. Poverty. Katrina or other destruction for the poor. Unjustified war. How deep do you want to go?

We don't even care about violence in Palestine-Israel, an area we are tied to in world/foreign affairs, economics, and our own internal pollitics, and the billions of dollars we pour in.

Oh! Sorry, Kevin. Not a subject you even acknowledge!

我向大家推荐:上海 租车 公司专业生产租车产品，欢迎选择租车。要想寻找上海租车信息请访问 上海租车 网，各种上海租车应有尽有。北京 租车 厂向广大客户提供租车产品及租车服务。租车 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的租车,丰富租车行业资讯助您成交。您想要了解 上海租车 吗？请到中国上海租车网来寻找上海租车。您想要了解 汽车租赁 吗？请到中国汽车租赁网来寻找汽车租赁。中国 上海租车 网，打造上海租车领域专业搜索平台，提供全球上海租车品牌公司及产品展示。上海 上海租车 公司专业生产上海租车产品，欢迎选择上海租车。北京 上海租车 厂向广大客户提供上海租车产品及上海租车服务。

TOH: But, I digress . . .

No, you lie, rdw.

Is it possible that an aggressive covert Italian intelligence operation unearthed what to say to Zidane to make him lose his temper and draw a red card ?

机票~北京机票~北京飞机票~北京打折机票~北京特价机票~北京航班查询~北京学生机票~北京国际机票~航空公司

Kevin,

I was on vacation for a while and may have missed something: has the United States Government been engaged in spying on its domestic opponents? If not, what's the parallel with Italy?

Bob,

Do you know if the Italians are at all FOX-ified? Do they have the same kind of right-wing blowhardery shoveled at them daily on TV and radio?

If not, that may explain why they're more open to the truth than a lot of Americans are. A lot of people in this country are not only cowed, lazy and uninformed--they also get rewarded for it daily by the likes of Limp-baugh and Faux News. Their ignorance is reinforced, and they're even made to feel good about it.

Talk about a recipe for fascism.

Sincerely,

Wife of an Actual Historian (who, by virtue of being honest and human, does not claim to be Objective)

DBL: . . . has the United States Government been engaged in spying on its domestic opponents?

Yes.

Just ask John Bolton.

Or better yet, just ask his enemies that he spied on.

I was on vacation for a while and may have missed something . . .

You miss things even when you aren't on vacation, so this introductory phrase is meaningless.

. . . what's the parallel with Italy?

Better question: what's the parallel between the American Revolution and Bush's Invasion of Iraq?

In other words, there's hope for us yet.

Well, in the alternate universe where the US has a "truly aggressive press", rather than one that is more passive than the "do nothing" legislature, sure.

Seriously, AFG, has the Bush Administration been spying on Democratic politicians?

DBL, you missed something all right. You are not entitled to know, to ask or to question whether this administration is engaged in domestic spying. Who this administration spies on and how is nobody's business but their own.

What do you think this is, a democracy or something? (and after all have they ever deceived us about anything before?)

Chrissy,

I take it, then, that so far as you know, the Administration is not engaged in spying on Democratic politicians or other domestic political opponents? Am I missing something?

Kevin wrote, "In other words, there's hope for us yet."

There would be if we had a truly aggressive press.

DBL, what exactly do you think the DoD was doing spying on Quakers and war critics? That's pretty good evidence of domestic spying. Since this administration has an extensive record of lying, (for example Bushie telling us he obtains a warrant for wiretapping) when they tell you they only spy on foreigners with ties to terrorists, an intelligent person would be skeptical. The fact that they cover up and operate in secret like some communist dictatorship and will not allow oversight is fairly good evidence that they are spying on Americans who oppose them. In other words, you have no evidence that they are not spying on domestic political opponents. Yet you believe bushie hasn't spied because he tells you so? What kind of an idiot are you?

I was on vacation for a while and may have missed something: has the United States Government been engaged in spying on its domestic opponents? If not, what's the parallel with Italy?

Bush Is Spying on His Political Opponents
by Matt Stoller, Mon Feb 06, 2006 at 01:06:28 AM EST

To say that Bush spies on Democrats and dissidents is not hyperbole, it is a fact. Here are six examples of overt spying on political opponents or cases where there is clear evasion on questions about whether his government is doing so:

Bush Administration uses U.S. Army to spy on war critics. The Bush Administration used top-secret U.S. Army spying capabilities to spy on domestic war critics such as Quakers, Students Against the War, People For the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and Greenpeace. An internal review forced the Pentagon to admit it had "improperly stored" information on potentially thousands of people because there was no "reasonable belief" they had any link to terrorism. (Newsweek, 1/30/06)

Bush Administration uses FBI to spy on war critics. The Bush administration is using the FBI to "collect extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators," causing the California Attorney General to declare that Bush Administration policy violates the state constitution prohibition on spying on political and religious groups without evidence of criminal activity. (San Francisco Chronicle, 11/23/03)

Bush Administration forced to turn over records revealing FBI is spying on Bush critics. A Freedom of Information Act request revealed the FBI "collected at least 3,500 pages of internal documents in the last several years on a handful of civil rights and antiwar protest groups" that are leading Bush critics "in what the groups charge is an attempt to stifle political opposition to the Bush administration." (New York Times, 7/18/05)

Bush Administration uses Pentagon to spy on Bush critics. NBC obtained a 400-page Pentagon document outlining the Bush administration's surveillance of war critics.1,500 different events (aka. anti-war protests) in just a 10-month period. "I think Americans should be concerned that the military, in fact, has reached too far," says NBC News military analyst Bill Arkin. "It means that they're actually collecting information about who's at those protests, the descriptions of vehicles at those protests.On the domestic level, this is unprecedented." (NBC News, 12/14/05)

The Bush Administration may have wiretapped a CNN reporter. In January, NBC published a transcript in which James Risen, the New York Times reporter who broke the NSA wiretap story, was asked if CNN reporter Christiane Amanpour's phone was wiretapped. After a surge of interest, NBC deleted that line - saying the transcript was "released prematurely." Amanpour is married to James Rubin, a top Clinton Administration foreign policy strategist and an advisor to John Kerry's presidential campaign. (CNN, 1/6/06)

Gen. Michael Hayden refused to answer question about spying on political enemies at National Press Club. At a public appearance, Bush's pointman in the Office of National Intelligence was asked if the NSA was wiretapping Bush's political enemies. When Hayden dodged the question, the questioner repeated, "No, I asked, are you targeting us and people who politically oppose the Bush government, the Bush administration? Not a fishing net, but are you targeting specifically political opponents of the Bush administration?" Hayden looked at the questioner, and after a silence called on a different questioner. (Hayden National Press Club remarks, 1/23/06) (video ) (audio )

http://mydd.com/story/2006/2/6/1628/90153

Here, in it's fully glory, is the transcript of Hadyen cutting and running from the question of whether the Bush regime spies on its domestic political opponents:

QUESTION: Will you openly and publicly debate us -- myself -- in a forum that's open to the public, not restricted, on the NSA spying scandal and defend what has been said, and respond to the numerous reports about the NSA spying on millions of people? That is one question. And the second question is: Are you spying on or intercepting our communications, e-mails and telephone conversations of those of us who are organizing The World Can't Wait to Drive Out the Bush Regime?

GEN. HAYDEN: You know, I tried to make this as clear as I could in prepared remarks. I said this isn't a drift net, all right? I said we're not there sucking up coms and then using some of these magically alleged keyword searches -- "Did he say 'jihad'? Let's get --" I mean, that is not -- do you know how much time Americans spend on the phone in international calls alone, okay? In 2003, our citizenry was on the phone in international calls alone for 200 billion minutes, okay? I mean, beyond the ethical considerations involved here, there are some practical considerations about being a drift net. This is targeted, this is focused. This is about al Qaeda.

The other request about a public debate -- as I mentioned at the beginning of my prepared remarks, this is a somewhat uncomfortable position for someone in my profession to be in, laying out details of the program. One way of describing what you have invited me to would be, "Why don't you come out and tell the world how you're catching al Qaeda?" And I can't do that. That would be professionally irresponsible.

QUESTION: No, I asked, are you targeting us and people who politically oppose the Bush government, the Bush administration? Not a fishing net, but are you targeting specifically political opponents of the Bush administration? Because as Vice President Gore recently said, "It is much worse than people realize."

[Pause. Hayden does not answer. He calls on another questioner].

QUESTION: Good morning, General Hayden. Katie Shrader with the Associated Press.

GEN. HAYDEN: Hi, Katie.

Spying? Bring it on! The political culture in the White House is nearly indistinguishable from the Nixonite ethos. The bunker mentality, the paranoia, the predation, the secrecy, the lies, the bullying and retribution are all hallmarks of Nixonland politics.

Jane Mayer’s article in the New Yorker about David Addington and Dick Cheney’s dream of a sovereign executive outlines yet another example of the authoritarian political culture inaugurated by Richard Nixon that is spreading its disease through the Republic. After all, old Nixonites like Dick Cheney have shown the Texans how to do elite politics in Washington.

DBL: Seriously, AFG, has the Bush Administration been spying on Democratic politicians?

Seriously, DBL, yes, even if that was the sole criteria by which to draw parallels with Italy.

Am I missing something?

Actually, several things: a brain, integrity, civic responsibility, humility.

Yet you are full of other things: ignorance, arrogance, mendacity, disingenuity, obsequiousness to Bush and his conservative agenda, and authoritarian fawning.

Hugh Hewitt has been blogging...Zzzzz

And readers are getting tired of the New York Times, too, evidenced by their big drop in subscriptions. Same goes for the LA Times.

Same goes for all newspapers as online and TV 24hr news takes away subscriber share.

sullijan:

Sadly, the Italian people are becoming more FOXified yearly. Berlusconi's media conglomerate owns the lion's share of the print and electronic media outlets. He's promoted a lot of the sort of cognitive dissonance which leads to apathy. His party, Forza Italia, has no real ideology save a dithering pseudo-populism which benefits Berlusconi. The name was formerly a football cheer, "Go, Italy!" But within his coalition are neofascists (Alliance -- Italian sp? -- Nazionale) and racist xenophobes (Northern League).

Somebody wondered earlier if there's less a pundit culture in Italy, and I don't think that's true, because the European press is generally more overtly and unashamedly partisan. Europeans generally are also more well-aware of history, culture and political science, so there's plenty of deep political analyses. What it is is that the Italian left-leaning media outlets are also extremely well-respected as news organizations (e.g. La Repubblica) despite being drowned out in sheer volume by the Berlusconi organs.

Bob

HO, HO, HO . . . I HAVE TO RE-READ SOME OF THIS, BUT . . .

First, those of you advocating government intrusion, interference, and control of people's lives, like intrusive IRS disclosure requirements, taxes for non-essential items, wage laws, gun control, rent control, discrimination constraints, etc. are absurd to call anyone fascist. Government is fascist and those advocating more government are . . . yes, more fascist.

Second, so, SDI . . . is anyone, I mean anyone with a chance in Hades of winning public support advocating we scrap it? Maybe it will be effective, maybe not; if not now, soon. But it has to be more effective than gazing upward at that object that's getting bigger and bigger and headed for the Bank of America building. That's right, moonbats, S.F. (or L.A.) is in the crosshairs. So if Reagan is so "stupid", why is there NO OPPOSITION TO SPEAK OF TO SDI IN 2006.

Third, under Carter, tax rates overall were about 25% higher than they are now; the top marginal rate was 70%. Since Carter, including the Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, that 25% tax cut has still been in effect with only very slight relative flucuations (Clinton's rate increase, geared toward "triangulating" you moonbats into silence was especially relatively minor) and the top marginal rate has fluctuated between 35% and 39.5% - er, uh, not quite 70%, right? So, VIABLE NATIONAL POLITICIAN IN AMERICA ADVOCATING WE GO BACK TO 70% AND AN OVERALL 25% TAX INCREASE FROM THE CURRENT STATUS QUO? "Stupid" Reagan? His tax policies are now the conventional wisdom for smaller minds to bicker over marginally in 2006.

BUT IMPORTANTLY: substantively, some of your comments are correct; I do anticipate a truly agenda driven corporate media machine that will make you long for the days of Rupert Murdoch who really is about catering to whatever market niche increases his bottom line. I'm talking about a corporate media machine that does not care about it's bottom line (like, if you look at the NY Times stock price and circulation numbers, the NY Times). THE ENTITY/ENTITIES I FORESEE ARE COMING TO A TELEVISION NETWORK, INTERNET SITE, NEWSPAPER CHAIN, RADIO NETWORK, AND VOUCHER-FUNDED SCHOOL "CHAIN" NEAR YOU!

TOH

Voiceover:

"We replaced The Objective Historian's crystal meth with Folger's crystals. Let's watch ... "

Bob

TOH:

Freedom is Slavery

War is Peace

Rent Control is Fascist

:)

Bob

rdw: I HAVE TO RE-READ SOME OF THIS, BUT . . .

Why, since you still will not understand it.

Not to worry, though, because you don't require knowledge or understanding to lie, just arrogance, self-centeredness, hatred for your fellow man (and woman), and a loathing of morality, freedom, liberty and the rule of law - something you've demonstrated over and over and over and . . .

AfG:

TOH and rdw have rather markedly different rhetorical styles.

Wooten also wouldn't be caught dead using some of the "intellectual" concepts and pretentious verbiage that drips from Grandiose One's fingers ...

Bob

TOH and rdw have rather markedly different rhetorical styles.

TOH, prolific use of caps and all, has always seemed to be keiser/Alice while his/her/its meds are functioning.

rmck1: TOH and rdw have rather markedly different rhetorical styles.

The "points" raised in the post are virtually identical to those routinely raised by rdw, the attacks against Carter (virulent) and Clinton (an attempt at masked virulence) are virtually identical, and the rhetorical devices look pretty much the same to me also.

The differences look trivial to me and more like someone trying to mask their usual style, but whatever.

One lemming is indistiguishable from another.

Maybe they're simply operating from the same playbook, a couple of pimply teenage conservative wannabes playing grownup on the computer in their mommys' basements.

TOH (or whoever): So if Reagan is so "stupid", why is there NO OPPOSITION TO SPEAK OF TO SDI IN 2006.

Let's see . . .

1) a detailed and heavily funded PR program by the administration spreading lies about effectiveness, like they spread lies about the "massive stockpiles" of Iraqi WMDs, and the people sucking up American tax dollars to produce this boondoggle;

2) a relentless administration campaign of fearmongering;

3) sufficient real threats that provide something for American citizens to relate to the administration's security deceipts;

4) the White House, Senate, and House all controlled by a GOP intent on serving up tax dollars to their corporate donors (for laundering into campaign contributions, bribes, and earmarks) and creating an atmosphere of terror; and

5) a military that routinely lies about the success of the program by falsifying test data or rigging tests to provide results that are not consistent with real-world performance.

So, VIABLE NATIONAL POLITICIAN IN AMERICA ADVOCATING WE GO BACK TO 70% AND AN OVERALL 25% TAX INCREASE FROM THE CURRENT STATUS QUO?

Please provide a link to any national politician who has advocated this.

Can't?

Didn't think so.

Government is fascist and those advocating more government are . . . yes, more fascist.

That would be the GOP you are describing with this sentence.

ADVOCATE FOR GOD, DUH:

That is the point if you read carefully. They are called a rhetorical questions. No one wants to scrap SDI research. No one wants to go back to pre-Reaganomics tax rates; why - the Laffer Curve and Reaganomics were not "voodoo" but genius; theories proven in practice and proven again by Bush II since his cuts in '03. Putting current policy aside, no one in their right mind wants to go back to the way things were before a certain MAN rode in to Washington, D.C., in January of 1981 and showed you Regressive-Democrats the door, permanently. The Great Society has been stripped of the "framing" and it is an empty shell geared more as a thinly disguised Democratic Party payola scheme than an effective program for helping the poor.

You're done; you and your Regressive-Democrat twits who destroyed the U.S.A. between '65-'80. DONE! Reading the Kos Kids imagine otherwise is laughable. And the true laugher is that you sit around your little circles of fellow nitwits and consider yourselves falsely to be: 1) intellectual, and 2) advocates for policies that actually help the poor and promote world peace. Your the opposite to the point of poorly drawn caricature . . . except, it's not caricature. It's your self-deceptive "reality" upon which you proclaim to be "reality-based". Hah.

TOH

Good times; I'll check back in at 8 p.m. or thereabouts to "intervene" you Regressive-Democrats out of your self-induced narcolepsy.

TOH

Appetizer:

Secular Humanist Regressive Democrats are far less reality based than the Christian Right; Christians merely believe in Jesus Christ as Their Savior, which may or may not be a delusion separate from reality; but Secular Humanist Regressive Democrats are definitely divorced from reality . . . they believe in themselves.

[Bang!]

TOH

Until then:

The Christian Right is far more reality-based than Secular Humanist Regressive Democrats. Christians merely believe in Jesus Christ as Their Savior, which may or may not be a delusion; Secular Humanist Regressive Democrats are far more delusional . . . they believe in themselves.

[Boom!]

TOH

AfG:

Just for the sake of honoring my own values in debate, I do at least try to keep the members of the trolletariat separate in my head and to address them as individuals.

Sure, there's more than a broad similarity in the talking points. Nearly all our trolls make the same kinds of arguments -- because doubtless they all visit the same kinds of rightwing blogs and websites. But distinctions can still be drawn.

Jay and ex-liberal strike me as more similar to Wooten in terms of substance. And since shouting in caps is unhinged, I'd tend to link TOH more to Alice or PATTON. Wooten has a contempt for "book learnin'" that seems to separate him pretty far from The Objective One.

Wooten is a retired guy in his 50s and Jay -- scarily enough considering how immature he can act -- is of the Vietnam generation. Ex-liberal strikes me as much younger and a much more recent convert to the conservative cause, because he tries to "synthesize" liberal views with the con talking points by agreeing with your initial premises and then inverting the fact set, as if to say well we have the same goals, but ... I read that as a guy struggling with doubts who shouts them down with rigid talking point recitation.

I read Frequency Kenneth, Down Goes Frazier, havlicek stole the ball, Hey Moe! Hey Larry! and a number of others similarly handled as being sock puppets of the same rl person.

Al is an older red-state right-winger, a college bureaucrat in Texas, if memory serves. Lotta time at a desk with a PC.

None of these guys are a tenth as toxic as "karen" or "tj" though -- rabid anti-semities who Kevin really ought to ban.

Bob

Vote.

I thought I lost the first version; which is better? They are both great, I know.

TOH

Is it just me, or is The Objectionable Histrionic getting more, well, histrionic with every post?

Stefan:

The Objectionable Histrionic (nice :) is pretty grandiose, that's a big 10-4. Probably more a sincere believer than a chain-yanker like Jay or Birkel.

But then you'd have to need, a, umm, specialized personality attribute to call open-ended warfare with a country that didn't attack you and the worst income bifurcation since the Gilded Age "peace" and "prosperity."

And not have your head explode while doing it, that is.

Bob

TOH:

If believing in "Secular Human Regressionist Democrats" is extraordinarily delusional, than you must be the most deluded person here, since you are the only one who seems to believe in them.

INCOME BIFURCATION MINISCULE IN COMPARISON TO VIRTUE BIFURCATION:

Income bifurcation pales in comparison to the virtue bifurcation; put another way, I'm sorry folks that the going wage for narcoleptic, debauched deliquents and criminals is so much less than you'd like. How about if those who wish greater incomes would keep their pants on until they could afford children, both financially and matrimonially, cut out the alcohol abuse and drug use, and obeyed both the law and the rules, the latter being the rules of Victorian virtue, not the rules as conceptualized and articulated by Bill "Suck it like a promotion or career advancement depends on it, Bitch" Clinton and those who would vote for such a ape-like creature. In truth, anyone even reasonably virtuous in the Victorian sense, life-long, has no difficulty living the American dream and then some with only the rare exception; I include the blind, handicapped, etc. E.g., somehow the Down Syndrome and Cerebral Palsy adults in my neighborhood have jobs at movie theaters and supermarkets and live independent lives, but Regressive-Democrats seem unable to do so and/or excuse it when healthy people cannot. Well, the noblest creatures I refer to here, those so physically handicapped, don't have the sexual and drug predelictions of the hipster-doofus Regressive-Democrats, so one must factor in that.

Suggestion; collectively Regressive-Democrats, clean up your act, i.e., cut out the sex (irresponsible promiscuity and procreation), drugs (alcohol, a drug, and drugs per se), and rock and roll (meaning partying prioritized over homework and work-work) before you complain about the income distribution. Your not being out earned so much as your being out-virtued. In fact, the tax system and welfare system are more than progressive enough should poor and middle income people be interested in living productive, relatively sober and sexually responsible lives. The top 1% in terms of live long hard work (i.e., top income earners) are alreadying paying 33% of the taxes, i.e., carrying you hipster-doofuses and debauched deliquents and craven criminals on their backs as it is.

Peace and equality is all talk when you behave like pigs 24/7/365.25. Word.

TOH

TOH:

Can you say ... projective identification ... boys 'n' girls?

There. I just *knew* ya could. *wink*

Bob

TOH:

You call yourself a *cough* "historian."

Do you know *anything* about the Victorian era?

While the middle class were covering the legs of their parlor pianos, the child prostitution rates of London and NYC would rival Bankok's today ...

The Victorian era wasn't all about preachy middle class moralism. Oh, no, sir.

It was also about mind-numbing levels of hypocrisy by the very same class who did the preaching.

Bob

The Victorian era wasn't all about preachy middle class moralism. Oh, no, sir.

It was also about mind-numbing levels of hypocrisy by the very same class who did the preaching.

Bob,

While that is true, it seems to me that justifies rather than contradicts TOH's equation of conservatism with Victorianism, so you should be praising him on his historical insight, rather than challenging his credentials, based on that (the rest of what he says, now...)

cmdicely:

In honor of that very point, here's a post at the end of that wonderful Conservative Allance thread which speaks directly to it:

Heartland Knuckledregger (a less ironic handle than you had intended):

This is one of the great, mendaciously Orwellian canards of our
political discourse. In honor of his namesake, let's get the pliers
and leave parts of this strewn all over the front lawn like Linus did
once to Lucy's tricycle.

First, Linus -- if you actually read the guy -- ain't a conservative,
Tory or otherwise. Nor could a dude who mourns the loss of rave
culture exactly be considered a nose-plugger. His dad was a network
(I'm assuming TV) executive, and those guys aren't exactly poor. He's
a liberal member of the upper-middle class, and wingnuts have been
attempting to shame Democrats over this demographic in our coalition
since at least that other great "leftist blueblood" FDR.

Just because right wingers have made "class warfare" verboten doesn't
mean they don't practice it themselves. Obviously, the GOP has more
than its share of Old Guard rich who were aptly described by Wally
Ballou as neo-Victorians, and who make up a solid core of the cultural
elite. Oh but don't criticize *them*. That's just "the politics of
class resentment." In America, after all, everybody should try to get
rich, so how can you attack the wealthy if wealth is a worthy
ambition?

Flip this on its head and you have the Knuckledragger discourse: The
Democratic elite are rich snobs who are out-of-touch with American
values. Like the Republican elite aren't?

The great saliency of the neo-Victorian analysis is to show how
economically well-off and otherwise culturally conservative folks
partake of the same decadent, borderline nihilistic personal values
allegedly foisted on us by those self-indulgent boomer Democrats. If
Muffy gets pregnant or Toby gets hauled in front of a juvenile court
judge -- well, the old man will open his checkbook and set things
right. This has been the way of wealth since medieval times. Think the
Bush twins and their cousin Noelle. And, to be sure, think of Al
Gore's and Howard Dean's sons, too.

Another great saliency in Ballou's excellent post is the reason there
are so many more neo-Puritans among the "lower orders." They simply
don't have this kind of personal safety net when equivalent things
happen to Janey and Billy. The difference between conservatives and
liberals raised with neo-Victorian expectations is in how they explain
it to themselves. For conservatives, it's not merely the green stuff,
it's also "good breeding," "class" (in the broad, behavioral sense),
"discretion," "manners" -- all the things which our frantically crass,
latter-day Gilded Age is plowing under at the speed that McMansions
are being punched out of farmland and forest.

That's why Linus' self-aware irony was so delicious in his first post
of the thread, when he criticized the woefully underparented
milliennials who wrecked rave culture for him for acting ...
"classless." Because it wasn't like his cohort was any less
underparented, to be sure.

It's not that wealthy liberal Democrats don't share some of these
assumptions -- it's that they're more honest and critical about it.
They (we) also tend to feel quite guilty about the accrued and
unearned advantages -- not just of money, but of social status.

And the free-floating guilt of our liberal elites over this is the
great opening that the GOP drives its "out of touch with America"
discourse through.

Our reaction? We flinch and half-believe it.

It's time for that shit to stop. The conservative wealthy are FUCKING
HYPOCRITES.

YOU MISSED THE POINT; THE VICTORIAN ERA WAS FILLED WITH VICIOUS BEHAVIOR ACROSS THE ECONOMIC SPECTRUM.

BUT THE POINT IS THAT THERE WAS A MODEL CONSIDERED IDEAL INVOLVING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, TEMPERANCE, SEXUAL RESTRAINT, FRUGALITY, AND HARD WORK. FROM URBAN HOUSING PROJECTS, TO SUBURBAN 7-11s, TO RURAL WASTELANDS, THOSE IDEALS ARE NOW LAUGHED AT. FOR EXAMPLE, THE IDEAL OF BOTH MEN AND WOMEN REMAINING CHASTE UNTIL MARRIAGE; THE IDEAL OF TEMPERANCE; THE IDEAL OF SELF SUFFICIENCY; ALL DECIMATED. IF THE IDEAL IS NOW SO REDUCED, THE ASPIRATIONS AND RESULTING BEHAVIOR WILL BE THAT MUCH UNDERMINED. HENCE, YOU HAVE THE LOT OF AMERICA'S POOR DESPITE THE ABUNDANCE OF OPPORTUNITY AND THE LAVISH AND PROGRESSIVE TAX AND WELFARE STRUCTURE THAT EXISTS TO ASSIST THEM. THE POOR IN AMERICA ARE STATISTICALLY LAZY, DRUNKEN, DRUGGED, PROMISCUOUS, DEPENDENT, MORONS WHEN, WERE THEY TO ASPIRE TO THE VICTORIAN IDEAL AND LIVE ONLY INFREQUENTLY SHORT OF IT, THEY'D BE LIVING THE AMERICAN DREAM AND THEN SOME. WHAT IS THE CONVENTIONAL 21ST CENTURY IDEAL SOUGHT BY AMERICA'S POOR: SEX, DRUGS, AND THE SELF-DESTRUCTIVE PURSUIT OF PASSING PLEASURES, FROM MERE MINDLESS PROCRASTINATION TO CRIMES OF THE WORST KIND.

TOH

MORE:

Your pasted post makes the point clearly and mortally (to your viewpoint). The great complaint among "liberals" seems to be that you taxpayers are not providing you with the same opportunity to be drunken, drugged derelicts and deliquents that rich people have. Guess what? That should not be an added burden on the American taxpayer beyond the already generous helping hand given to a grateful and virtuously aspiring poor. If poor and middle class people, particularly the youth, are going to be so despiccable in their personal behavior, don't cry like babies if the American taxpayer doesn't want to pay for your next pot purchase or street corner hang-out session. Al Gore's children, George Bush's children, et al. can afford their debaucheries because they have jobs, income, and pay taxes, unlike, generally speaking, the poor and middle income strata of American society. Clean up your act; you cannot afford . . . unlike taxpayers actually pulling their weight and yours . . . you cannot afford your wantonness. So stop it with gratitude in your heart for what is provided gratis; stop your wanton behavior until you can pay your own way.

TOH

THINK OF THE ABSURDITY:

100 YEARS AGO, POOR PEOPLE WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT NO FOOD TO EAT, NO SHELTER, AND NO JOBS.

21ST CENTURY REGRESSIVE-DEMOCRATS ARE COMPLAINING THAT POOR PEOPLE CANNOT AFFORD TO DRINK AND DRIVE, BUY POT, SNIFF GLUE THROUGHOUT THE SCHOOL DAY AND HANG OUT ALL AFTERNOON AND EVENING AFTERWARD, AND HAVE 2-4 CHILDREN THEY CANNOT AFFORD, EITHER FINANCIALLY OR MATRIMONIALLY. IT'S SO SICKENING; WOE IS THE BURDEN OF THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER TO HAVE SUCH INGRATE SOCIETY-TRAITORS AS FELLOW CITIZENS.

TOH

I did mean that "they" have jobs, meaning Bush/Gore, not their children; but their parents having jobs, they can afford their bacchnalianism. Poor people cannot. Ohhhhhhh. How tragic. And how appropriate to blame the American taxpayer. HAH! Ingrates; how about, er, uh, just stop being bacchnalian on the taxpayers dime instead of envying what is the self-destructive behavior of junior Gores and Bushes in any case.

TOH

TOH:

> SNIFF GLUE THROUGHOUT THE SCHOOL DAY

As opposed to, you know, smoking crack and posting on PA :)

Do you have any idea, TOH, what an object of ridicule (not to mention pity) you come across as by preaching behavioral restraint while shouting in caps like some 13-year-old online gamer whose Ritalin scrip needed to be renewed? You think many well-socialized and decent people who contribute to our economy conduct themselves in that fashion -- or would you rather predict it's more common among the adult losers who post, game and drool over porn in Mom's basement?

My crosspost didn't directly address your point but was rather, as cmdicely likes to say, orthogonal to it. An elite is, by nature, out of touch with vast bulk of society regardless of ideology. And regardless of ideology, an elite tends to behave in decadent ways. The part of the elite that takes a great delight in moralizing to other people about their personal behavior comes off rather hypocritically.

Then I read your second response and realize that morality per se isn't the point for you -- as long as you've got the cake to cover your ass. Oh really? So it's perfectly okay, TOH, for gansta rap stars -- who are so influential in the inner cities -- to ambush each other outside of clubs and recording studios with Tec-9s? Not a problem that eight-figure ballplayers of America's National Pastime have careers steeped in steroid and amphetamine abuse? That Christian Slater can walk into a bodega near his movie shoot, pinch some strange woman on the ass in front of witnesses, *pay a fine*, and walk away? Michael Jackson can sexually abuse a series of vulnerable tween boys and hibernate in Dubai afterwards because he owns a controlling interest in The Beatles' catalogue? This is somehow not part off the problem?

There's a term for you, bro. You're a moral nihilist. Just like in the Victorian era, which you hold up to be such a paragon, the hypocrisy just rolls off your back. You preach moral restraint to the poor not because moral restraint is a good thing in itself for everybody -- but as a tool of social control. You don't give a shit if the well-off discard it like last season's Milan couture. You're a monstrosity.

Ths is, of course, off-the-shelf Gilded Age moral ideology -- that blessed time when the city streets were rife with cholera and typhus, children worked in virtual slavery 12 hours a day, six days a week, and the average life expectancy for the working poor -- virtuous and non-virtuous alike -- was in the low 40s. It wasn't those industrious middle-class men's fault for patronizing child prostitutes -- it was the damned immoral children's fault for selling themselves to them.

To be perfectly honest, though, it's not quite fair to accuse you of a fascist agenda. You don't really talk the eugenics or racialist talk. But it is quite clear that you are a stone-washed cultural reactionary.

The great irony, TOH, is that the Victorian era spurred forward all the cultural excesses of the 20th century. Nietsczhe and Bertrand Russell certainly reacted against it. The Roaring 20s was fueled by mockery of stodgy parental Victorianism. And in the 50s, after decades of war, economic crisis and the self-indulgences of the Jazz Age, when America finally settled down to renew its Victorian-inspired cultural vows of quiet, middle-class moral restraint, that generation gave birth to the baby boomers and the rest, as they say, is history.

Victorianism isn't odious because there's something inappropriate about moral behavior. It's odious when moralizing becomes a bootheel -- and the ideals of humility and self-restraint become a false front to hide the arrogant shitting on other people for not living up to ideals that were a false front to begin with.

Because children have an innate sense of fairness, raise them under this dispensation and they will rebel. All the shouting in caps about "VICTORIAN IDEALS" only contains the seeds of its own destruction.

Bob

TOH:

(I enjoy opportunities to write essays on culture.)

It's entirely possible, of course, to admire and find inspiration in
genuine moralists. A moralism that teaches that personal restraint is
its own reward (and not merely a means to an ends), that extends this
admonition not only across all sectors of our society but to the
fundamental values inherent in our economic system, is an admirable
and worthy thing. It's much easier to admire the Catholics in this
regard, who not only preach work to care for the poor but who have a

tradition of defending worker's rights against the perogatives of
their employers, than it is to admire Protestant fundamentalists, who
couple their moralizing with an uncritical support for free-market
capitalism -- not recognizing, as the Catholics seem to, how
consumerist values foster immoral behavior.

Capitalism, in certain moral mythologies, is supposed to promote
virtuous behavior. It promotes the opposite: self-indulgence,
self-aggrandizement and obsessive-compulsion. When Max Weber looked
to explain why Protestant and not Catholic societies had innovated
capitalism, his idea of the Protestant work ethic coupled capitalism
with a certain outmoded and extreme Calvinist view of salvation
through grace. A Puritan farmer or tradesman could never be certain if
he was among God's chosen, because Grace was ineffable and unknowable.
So he worked his butt off to be a successful and prominent member of
the community because this was an outward-and-visible sign of God's
approval. Success itself -- not the fruits of success -- was the sign
-- never confirmable -- that God was smiling on one's endeavors.

In the parts of American settled by Calvinists (New England and New
Amsterdam), this was the seed corn of American capitalism: Hard work
and shrewd business dealings without revelling in the wealth created.
Prominent bankers and traders wore black and lived modestly -- as
idle hands and vain ostentation were the Devil's handiwork. It was
a society of producers, not consumers -- the very best cultural
orientation that a capitalist society can have, which guaranteed both
broad-based prosperity and a natural check on the acqisitiveness for
its own sake that capitalism without a moral foundation promotes.

Postwar America is a radically different world than the New England
Puritan colonies, however. Our economy is so amazingly superabundant
that in the aftermath of a war which destroyed the industrial
production of most of the rest of the world, we faced a crisis of
what Marx would've called overproduction -- not a bad problem to
have considering the alternative. How do we keep the economy moving
in the midst of such plenty? 20th-century full-color advertising
combined with certain ideas of Freud and sociology to produce
motivation research -- to sell the sizzle instead of the steak,
sex appeal instead of toothpaste, to conflate products with inner
desires which cannot, by their nature, ever be fully satisfied.
President Ike stepped to the podium and called buying on the
installment plan a patriotic act -- and consumerism was born.

This, needless to say, began the decay of the Protestant work ethic.
When consumption replaces production as the driver of a capitalist
economy, it inevitably hollows out the deferred gratification that
served as its moral foundation and natural check against excess.

Capitalism without this foundation is consumerist nihilism.

Bob