Cave Shadows

None Dare Call It Idolatry

Yesterday, yet another activist judge ruled that compelling children to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is unconstitutional.  We can only imagine the fury this event will unleash, even in the wake of Hurricane Katrina’s deadly aftermath and the realization to many that they do not live in the country they thought they did.

There are many ways that we could address this ruling, and its inevitable backlash.

We could remind people that not everyone in this country believes in a god, gods, providence, intelligent design, destiny, or any other supernatural phenomenon.  We could say that yes, these people do represent a minority opinion in this country, but that even a minority objection should be enough to broker some kind of neutrality on the subject, especially in a country born of compromise to minority interests.

We could point to the First Amendment and its establishment clause.  We could argue that compelling public schoolchildren to endorse the idea that their country exists at the mercy of a god is, at the very least, a kind of religious establishment.  We could say that the word “God” is not an ubiquitous non-denominational generality devoid of meaning.  Were it so, nobody would object to its deletion.

We could say that those who feel obliged to offer an acknowledgement to their god would not be affected by this ruling.  We could say that such people are perfectly able to celebrate the union of god and government, which they see as a divine gift.  Such people will forever be free to make offerings, public or private, to the god that has blessed them with such good governance.  This ruling applies only to public schools that compel all children to perform this ritual of loyalty.  The absence of enforcement, we might argue, does not constitute prohibition.

We could cite the history of the Pledge.  We could show that its original form apparently warranted no “under God” stipulations.  We could argue that the McCarthy Congress perverted Francis Bellamy’s 1892 original.  We could say that this 1954 Red-scared Congress very pointedly and deliberately added religious context as an inoculation against godless Communism.  We might also suggest that this particular Congress, so steeped in its segregationist madness, was less a moral authority than a monumental stain on our nation’s heritage.

We could show that Francis Bellamy was quite public in his racism, that he despised the oncoming wave of Southern European immigrants and their religious allegiance to papal supremacy.  We could suggest that his Pledge of Allegiance was Bellamy’s way of indoctrinating these masses to American loyalties and of diminishing the influence of a foreign church in his country.  We could revel in the irony that a ritual designed to limit religious influence is now a tool to prescribe religion.

We could repeat the story of how the original pledge ritual involved a kind of Sieg Heil! stance, which by World War II was embarrassing enough to be replaced with a hand over the heart.

We could say that the arguments in favor of “under God” are the arguments against it.  If “under God” is not an endorsement of religion, then why do the religious clergy demand that non-religious children be compelled to recite it?

We could expose the obvious: the ritualized declaration of loyalty to an inanimate object constitutes idolatry. We acknowledge human sentimentality and the need to romanticize the familiar, but pledging loyalty, in a ceremonial fashion, is the very definition of worship. 

Worshipping graven images, symbols of greater power, is, or at least was in the past, a serious sin to monotheists.  We couldn’t possibly explain the motivation of alleged monotheists in prompting schoolchildren to openly commit the most egregious sin in their canon.  We don’t understand how this could be pleasing to the god who exhaustively prohibited this activity. 

Of course, the inclusion of “under God” by mere mortals into this ritual would seem to be a way of insinuating their god’s consent to this whole practice: so long as he receives tribute, he will abide.  Perhaps this explains their devotion to the “under God” provision.  Without it, they risk the wrath and damnation of a jealous god.  Without “under God”, the Pledge must be an abomination.

Any one of these arguments could be persuasive enough.  And indeed, variations on these arguments will circulate and wind their way into the courts.  Rather than make these arguments, we would much rather state a bold maxim that circumvents argumentation on this subject.

Free people pledge allegiance to nothing.  Freedom defies allegiances, let alone necessitates their pledges.  One is not free in devotion to governments, one is free in defiance of governments.  Free people don’t worship an ideal; they live it. 

So then, why is it the business of an allegedly free country to enforce loyalty, with or without the veneration of gods?

Sabinus

Feingold for President, Graham for Sale

As the confirmation hearings on Judge Roberts proceed we must confess to being impressed by his quick intelligence.  Of course, having your rights curtailed by smart people is no less comforting than having your life destroyed by dumb people.

Immediate kudos to Russ Feingold's line of questioning.  Unlike Joe Biden, who let Roberts make him look a bit silly and pedantic, Feingold displayed an overwhelming command of the issues and specifics at hand and was slowly eating away at Roberts' reluctance to answer in a very smart and calculated way.  Is Feingold a Presidential candidate?  Why not?  Can anyone imagine our current commander-in-chief speaking knowledgeably about any aspect of the law?  Then again, can anyone imagine Bush conjugating his verbs?

But the most intriguing questioner we found was Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina.  Senator Graham is a former JAG attorney and, as Republicans go, not a total idiot.  However, he took whatever smarts he retains and tucked them deep into a dark hole where nobody could find them.  His folksy approach was a direct contrast to Feingold's educated and prosecutorial examination.  We suspect that his 'let's get rid of all this legal mumbo-jumbo and talk like real men' tactic had much to do with his re-election hopes.  Or, more specifically, his Republican primary hopes.  Graham has defined himself as a maverick Republican in the John McCain mold: joining McCain to block the "nuclear option", speaking out on global warming, and even expressing concern about torture.  Mind you, none of this is especially noble, but it does distinguish him outside the rigid toe-the-line Republican structure.  Being able to talk frankly, in a calculated way, about such absolutely non-important issues like flag-burning and prayer in school will enable Graham to return to South Carolina as the champion redneck his Republican faithful want him to be.  Then again, maybe he just isn't that bright.

Plausible Deniability and the Confirmation of Judge Roberts

Why are Republicans and their fellow travelers so a'scared of Bush's Supreme Court nominee opening his yapper?

For weeks they've been running ad campaigns to soften the public to the idea of a content-free confirmation and now Republican Senators are openly begging John Roberts to say as little as possible.

The bizarro ad campaign, and rhetoric from Republican talking points parrots, promotes the logic that since Republicans were so nice to give Ruth Bader Ginsburg a free pass, Roberts is entitled to the same rubber stamp. 

But Republicans own the Senate.  They have the votes to confirm anyone Bush desires.  And they know that the Democratic filibuster threat is easily dealt with, if in fact the Democrats ever decided to stand on principle.  So if they have an easy majority, why all the mum?

Republicans, unlike Democrats, can and do actually win state-wide elections in places where their party platform is hugely unpopular.  With all the talk of the Democrats' fortunes being lost with the South many Democrats don't see that the Republicans' success has been grounded in the North.  In fact, Republicans control the government agenda because of five New England Senators from some very blue states.  The defection of Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords reversed power in the Senate and New England could swing it again.

With only 13 states inclined to re-criminalize abortion, the so-called "pro-life" position won't win very many Republican Senate seats.  The Republican Senators from blue states, most of whom declare themselves pro-choice, have profited from never having to confront the abortion issue either on the Senate floor or even in a contested election.

The amoral voters, the ones who gladly take their tax breaks and pretend they needn't worry about the breach of privacy by their government, may actually start to worry.  And in a 51/49 political world, that worry doesn't bode well for Republicans.

Even the most degenerate of the anti-abortion Senators has to know that once abortion becomes a national political fight their power and agenda are gone.  Perhaps permanently.

So, as long as Roberts keeps his mouth shut, as long as he doesn't expose himself as the final nail in the coffin for Roe v. Wade, then blue state Republicans have their cover: they can vote for him with no repercussions.

However, should Roberts hint too strongly at a rightward activist bent then the easy vote becomes kryptonite to the careers of politicians who have benefitted from the abortion issue being off the table.

Roberts' silence can ensure plausible deniability to all Senators, even if he morphs into Darth Vader as Chief Justice.  Republican Senators don't want a fair hearing, they want ignorance.  This is not a fight they can win: not if they have to fight each other.

Tom Coburn, the Weepy Bigot

Watching the current Roberts hearings we couldn't help but dry heave at the sight of Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn. 

Coburn weepily pleaded for an end to "divisiveness", "partisanship", "polarization", and "finger-pointing".  We can only speculate that he is feeling the weight of the backlash against Republican incompetence and is shaken to his frail little core.

For those who have forgotten, Coburn won his Senate seat by being one the most divisive, partisan, polarizing, finger-pointing idiots to ever come out of Oklahoma.  In that campaign Coburn famously stated that there was such an epidemic of lesbianism in Oklahoma public schools that teachers would only let girls go to the bathroom one at a time.

Coburn is a nasty bastard who, throughout his political career, has stooped to anything to appeal to the very worst in his constituents.  To win his Senate seat he even declared to voters that it was a choice between good and evil.  Guess who was good?

And yes, he was the Congressman who had the distinction of being so morally vapid that he took to the floor of the House of Representatives and screamed about the obscenity of "Schindler's List" shown over the public airwaves.  He wasn't screaming over the obscenity of genocide, he was outraged by the nudity.  Such stalwart stupidity is rare, but not unknown, even in the Republican party.

So let the fucker cry.  But not before serving him up a healthy dose of the absolute evil that he has promoted in his public life. Finger-pointing is the least of our wrath, Senator.  The wars you support, the taxes you cut for the wealthy, the debt you leave our children, the families you undermine, the jobs you outsource, the lobbyists you appease, the freedoms you curb, the freedoms you want to curb, and the divisiveness you stir will not be forgotten.

Who to Blame? Whose Qualifications are in Question?

Democrats should do more than gloat over the rumblings that made their way into executive action, as FEMA director Michael Brown's resume has been exposed as the kind of background you'd expect of an executive who could cluster-fuck relief efforts for the most devastating natural disaster in American history.  Michael Brown returns to Washington to either A) hide under Bush's desk until his very own firestorm blows over (only to be rewarded at a later date), or B) sacrifice himself as the imposter who failed his President.

As Democrats rail against Brown and the President's incompetence will they also criticize their own, who also bear responsibility for their neglect of New Orleans' untouchables?  There are four prominent Louisiana Democrats who should be held accountable for the pre and post-Katrina catastrophe:  Governor Kathleen Blanco, Senator Mary Landrieu, Mayor Ray Nagin, and former Senator John Breaux.

Southern Democrats have won elections since the Civil Rights era in decreasing frequency.  Southern Democratic politicians who do win elections are rarely more than heirs to a previous generation of segregationist Democrats who haven't yet switched parties.  They're conservatives in the worst possible way.  While they rely on every black vote they can get, they won't risk their political necks promoting African-American issues.  They support every gun fetish imaginable.  They court the insanely religious with every conceivable violation of the First Amendment's establishment clause.  There is no war or military action they won't sign on to, regardless of rationale or dubiousness.   And worst of all, they can be bought and used by any corporate or trade entity willing to belly up. All told, they are virtually indistinguishable from their Republican counterparts.

The extent of Governor Blanco's responsibility will be uncovered in time, but her initial reaction said much about her.  None of it good.

Senator Mary Landrieu was quite capable of delivering pork projects to her state, why not proper levee construction?  The hurricane winds and flooding waters will pale in comparison to the very unnatural wrath of creditors who will descend upon the destitute of Louisiana.  What will their Senator say when they realize that she dismantled our bankruptcy laws, that they will have no protection from the greatest killer of all?  Has the South abandoned all its lynching habits?

Former Senator John Breaux was Landrieu's role model.  As a "moderate" Democrat he could ensure that "free trade" agreements would be passed without dissention.  As Louisiana stagnated in poverty, John Breaux would vote regressive tax cuts to those who would shut down their factories for wages even cheaper than non-union Louisiana.  Breaux did everything the Republican establishment could ever wish of him and precious little for his constituents.

And now to Mayor Ray Nagin.  What exactly were his qualifications to be mayor?  What were his qualifications to be a Democrat?  Oh yeah, and where the fuck is he? 

Before Democrats rush to defend this man, consider that he only joined the Democratic party when he ran for mayor.  Since Republicans aren't electable in a very African-American city like New Orleans, this was not exactly a principled position.  He was elected with the support of business interests and has worked tirelessly to protect them and only them.  He has not done anything for the third of his city who live in poverty except to try to push them out.  The Mayor presides over a rather cowardly police force, afraid of its own population.  The Mayor and his staff have been primarily responsible for spreading the rumors of armed gangs and raping thugs;  Such contempt for the poor is likely responsible for the deplorable Superdome and Convention Center quarantines: managing to both abandon and imprison the city's poorest residents in a central location.

There needs to be a blame game and there needs to be a severe reckoning.  Hopefully Democrats can get their own house in order and remove these scumbag politicians before they do any more damage.

Bush, the Crisis Manager?

Just catching the last bit of Chris Matthews Sunday show (not something I recommend), I heard the ever-vapid Norah O'Donnell say that Bush's performance in the wake of Katrina was out of character since he's such a "crisis manager".

Now, where did this notion come from?  Yes, we've heard it for the past four years from the parrotocracy and the commentarian elite, that Bush was a remarkable leader through the 9-11 crisis, but where's the evidence of that?

Bush did have a highly publicized and carefully orchestrated spontaneous moment amidst the rubble of the WTC.  But how did vowing to get the "folks" who perpetrated that crime ever add up to anything more than a welcome moment of solidarity?  Those "folks" are, after four years, still alive and, thanks to an unprovoked war in Iraq, growing in numbers and resources.

Bush did publicly read some stern scripts which his speech writers whipped up for such an occasion, but where was the crisis management?  The horrors of 9-11 had run their course in a matter of hours.  Where was the President at the greatest moment of crisis?  Michael Moore has been promoted to public enemy numero uno by white ringers for reminding us of exactly where this stellar crisis manager was.  In case you forgot, spend some time perusing the video and a fine analysis of the Presidential reaction.  And also consider what the President remembers from his infamous clutch moment.

Bush's reaction to Hurricane Katrina is not out of character, it is quintessential W.  President Bush is a crisis manager the way Bob Hope was a war veteran.

Sabinus

The Worst of Us: The Right is Ideologically Cornered and Dangerous

Last night, in what must have been a moment of rare masochistic curiosity, I happened to watch Bill O'Reilly's Spin Factor, or whatever he calls his monstrous entertainment.  I had been wondering how exactly these right-wing "extremist" media monopolists would twist the New Orleans catastrophe into a defense of the very ideology that has produced unprecedented chaos and death in this country.

I noticed that his "Talking Points Memo" segment which I witnessed was significantly different than the one Fox posted on their website.  I don't blame them.  It was far too hideous for even such an evil entity as Fox News to take credit for.

Bill emphasized over and over again how these victims in New Orleans "chose not to leave" in the face of Hurricane Katrina.  And in the most sickeningly faux paternalism ever performed on television he scolded his viewers with warnings to never trust in the government, you gotta take care of yourself.  Even as O'Reilly unwittingly voiced the moral rationale for looting he lapsed into his stern bully voice and called for the swift punishment of all thieves terrorizing the streets.

This seems to be the direction that these assholes are heading in.  Near as I can tell, their propaganda model seems to be following these guidelines:

1) Blame the victims.  They are responsible for their circumstances.

2) Any assistance is our generosity, given the victims inherent culpability in problems of their own making.

3) Our generosity is infinite: given the victims inherent culpability in problems of their own making they should be grateful for any assistance whatsoever.

4) Generosity can be withdrawn: victims should understand that assistance is conditional, it can be denied due to inappropriate behavior, perceived inappropriate behavior, or the actual or perceived inappropriate behavior of those associated in any way to the victim.

5) There are no victims.

I haven't had the intestinal fortitude to sit through much more of Fox News, but expect that last one to resonate.  These are not the ideological dogmas of Hurricane Katrina, these apply to every aspect of the agenda of these enemies of civilization.

Sabinus

Louisiana's Poor, America's Shame

Can there be any doubt to anyone that what is currently happening in New Orleans is only a continuation of attitudes and policies towards the ultra poor in our country?

Like so many big city politicians, New Orleans' Mayor Nagin has for years worked to push the poor out of the city.  Rather than find ways to employ them, educate them, and care for them as if he was their governmental representative, he bulldozed the projects to build Wal Marts: offering jobs which guarantee the working poor will forever remain poor.

We've been here before, and New Orleans high society is just doing what they've always done.

Revolution Time

As each day in New Orleans becomes more desperate, as each passing minute exposes the Federal government for its incompetence, as politicians scramble to bolster their public image rather than to save the public, we think its high time to call for revolution.

The State has failed us in every conceivable way.  And it didn't start with Hurricane Katrina.  Red State politics ensured this kind of disaster and will ensure others.  The Bush agenda and the Gingrich machine has fought an open war on the poor and working classes of this country, and the Democrats have abided and accommodated this open warfare. 

John Kerry, as the GOP repeatedly told us, is the most liberal member of the Senate.  Who would ever confuse him for a champion of the poor and working class?  Nobody.  Boston slums are as degenerate and abhorrent as any pocket of poverty which are far too prevalent in this country.  When was the last time you think Ted Kennedy visited his own ghettos outside of campaign season?  The great liberal establishment of Massachusetts cares as little for its poor constituents as the most degenerate of Republicans.

And lest we forget the Democrats of Louisiana.  With New Orleans' significant African-American population and their unearned devotion to all Democrats, Louisiana boasts a fair amount of Democratic representation in an otherwise very Red State.  But these Democrats are the absolute scum of the political world.  At least Tom Delay is upfront about his desire to rape the poor to pleasure the rich.  The Kathleen Blancos and Mary Landrieus of the world are much more coy, although they produce the same results.

So, have you had enough America?  Will you continue to support the machine that is destroying whatever remains of our social safety net while jailing us in record numbers and transferring the tax burden to those least able to bear it?  When will the corruption become intolerable?

We must advocate revolution.  No blood, no guns, no hate; a simple New Deal revolution might do.  Is there a politician willing to take the mantle of FDR?  Who will stand up to their corporate masters and decide to serve the people?

The political parties have failed us; New Orleans drowns in their neglect.  It is we, the people, who need to lead.  Don't wait for an election season, put the bastards on notice now.