The Perpetual Party Pendulum or Why I Wake Up Depressed in the Morning:

I wonder if people remember 2008? There was a total solar eclipse, we were introduced to Katy Perry, and Michael Phelps made Olympic history and ate massive quantities of food. 2008 was also the year that we supposedly figured out that conservatism, compassionate or otherwise, had failed. After the eight years of continuous disaster that was the Bush Administration, America voted for change.

The election of Barack Obama was supposed to signal a clean break from the policies of the previous regime, and to the more optimistic among us, a repudiation of a generation of American politics ushered in by the election of Ronald Reagan. Two short years later the Republicans are poised to take back Congress, sporting the largest polling leads the party has ever received. So what happened? To put it simply, the American political process happened. The structures of our institutions operate in a way to provide several veto points; the result is that the majority of reform measures are kneecapped and gutted before they ever see the light of day. Given the accomplishments of the Democratically-controlled Congress, financial and health insurance reform for example, it may seem as if the party had cracked the Progressive legislation code. Recent polling regarding the Democrats’ chances in this November’s midterm elections suggest otherwise. The reality is that this situation was entirely predictable, and probably inevitable.

Health-care is a fine example of this dynamic in action. The Senate filibuster rules coupled with outright Republican obstructionism, required as a practical matter, that the Democratic party march in lockstep and vote as a bloc. This allowed lobbyists and pressure groups time to target a handful of Senators in an effort to thwart the entire process—then after failing at that, to water it down. At the same time the corporate media swung into high gear, criticizing the Democrats for producing a partisan bill, when there was quite literally no bill that would have garnered Republican support. This isn’t a case of off-the-cuff analysis; it’s an assertion bolstered by the fact that the final bill signed into law with no Republican support was basically the Conservative think-tank’s response (read: The Heritage Foundation’s response) to the reform efforts proposed during the Clinton Administration. Therein lays the rub: if the only ideas Democrats are capable of turning into legislation are Republican-inspired, it’s hard to fault voters who question exactly why we need a Democratic party.

You might be saying to yourself, “Won’t the Republicans pay a political price for subverting efforts to benefit its constituents?” The truth is that they will, eventually; but not before they’ve stopped the momentum of the progressive movement, increased disillusionment in government, and ensured the continued suffering of countless American citizens. Unfortunately, from the Republican viewpoint, this isn’t a bug, it’s a feature. Remember this is the party of Reagan, who said, “Government is the problem.” This is the party of Newt Gingrich, who along with his congressional cohorts shut down the Federal government in the ‘90's. Besides those people suffering from unemployment, home foreclosure, ill health, or any number of other serious issues that Republicans don’t care about unless it provides the opportunity to demonize someone, don’t contribute to election campaigns.

Eventually the wheels will fall off. The GOP will heed the demands of its culturally conservative base and overreach. Or, the policies of endless tax cuts for the wealthy, and economic deregulation, will once again set the economy ablaze, at which point the voters of America will demand change, and the process begins anew.

Hello again

Hello again. I know that I re-launched this endeavor by promising to be more consistent with my posts, but I’m just now starting to recover from a pretty nasty bug. So, fortified with Gatorade, fresh fruit and peanut butter crackers let us forge ahead. I stumbled across a piece on WSJ.com by James Taranto entitled Oikophobia. I’m always interested in the lines of attack that media establishment types are directing at Progressives, so of course you know I’m going to subject myself to this disingenuous right-wing blather. He begins by quoting neo-conservative Sith Lord Charles Krauthammer’s response to recent left-right engagements over immigration, gay marriage and Cordoba House. “Now we know why the country has become “ungovernable,” last year’s excuse for the Democrats’ failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, Islamophobes?”

Taranto concludes that what motivates the “cognitive elite,” is “contempt” and “snobbery” for and toward the poor rubes they are destined to lead. He references a term, Oikophobia, as a way of providing a clinical diagnosis for some malignant psychosis infecting the liberal over-class. The term coined by British Philosopher Roger Scruton is outlined as the fear of the familiar, and can be thought of as basically the inverse of xenophobia. With this nifty rhetorical sleight of hand, Taranto has defined the entirety of the conservative world view as inherently American, and views to the contrary as not only alien, but clinically diagnosable. He points to the recent rise in Republican support as evidence of a backlash against a kind of cultural bigotry, rather than the entirely predictable response to a sharp economic downturn. He decries attempts to point out the correlation between the poor performance of the economy, and the rise in populist fervor as “Marxism Lite.” Color me shocked that the business friendly Wall Street Journal thinks that discussions of politics in terms of material deprivation during an economic downturn are illegitimate.

So while you’re out there looking for a job, trying to pay for college, or simply working to make the rent payment this month remember this one thing; conversations about economic inequality are a Marxist plot to destroy America and turn you Muslim, and the only legitimate political cause to champion is the protection of those, whose consistent defense of this country against so-called minority groups (immigrants, gays, African Americans, women, the poor) leads to their defamation as intolerant bigots. If you believe that, we are in bigger trouble than I thought.

Jersey Shore

I admit it, I watch MTV’s Jersey Shore. I’d like to pretend that I was watching PBS, or the game, but the truth is, at ten o’clock Thursday evening I’m glued to the TV. It is the only thing that I watch on that wretched network. MTV has been completely unwatchable since at least Singled Out (remember folks Jenny McCarthy and Carmen Electra used to be attractive before they were punch lines), and they haven’t played good music since Yo! MTV Raps and Headbangers Ball went off the air. The reason that I watch, is because it is simply the trashiest show on television. True, the kids from the Hills are more worthless, and the contestants on the Bachelor and Bachelorette are more pathetic, but I defy you to find a television program that captures the American Id as completely as this Real World knockoff does.

The fact that it is unoriginal is just further testament to its place in our completely recycled culture. The show boiled down to its essence is this; a group of 20 somethings, the guys so pumped like they look like they might float away, and the girls dressed like they are getting ready to dance with a pole, eat, drink, fight, dance, and mate. That’s it, that’s the whole show. Does anything capture the American obsession with gluttony, violence, warped body image, and voyeuristic sexuality so perfectly? I honestly think it perfectly encapsulates a moment in time; a collection of entitled “beautiful people”, earning outsized paychecks, living a corporate funded lifestyle, marauding across the landscape in search of immediate gratification.

This is what we’ve celebrated for a generation, correct? Recently one of the conceits built into a lot of reality programming was a glimpse behind the curtain of the upper crust. Not here though. The cast has worked in retail, selling gelato and t-shirts. Still yet here they are night after night club hopping, and running up a bar tab that would make David Hasselhoff blush. Isn’t that what we’ve been promoting, selling the idea that we were all going to live large, even if we were pinching pennies at the end of the month, and hoping for overtime that never came? I’d say those times are over for a lot of people. I’d say a lot of people out there are worried about next month, or next week, and trying to figure out where to put the twelve-man hot tub just sounds silly. So I say enjoy Jersey Shore, it captures a time that is hopefully already past us.

Recipe book

The weather lately has been rather Fall-like. In keeping with that mood, I thought I’d share a recipe that tastes like fall, my mashed sweet potatoes and butternut squash.

Ingredients:

3 sweet potatoes peeled and cubed
1 medium sized butter nut squash peeled and cubed
1 tablespoon of cinnamon
½ tablespoon of nutmeg
¼ cup brown sugar
¼ cup maple syrup

Directions:
Place cubed sweet potatoes and squash in a pot filled with water. Bring to a boil, cover, and reduce heat to med-high. Cook for about 20 minutes. Drain water and let rest for one minute. Mash potatoes and squash while mixing in cinnamon, nutmeg, brown sugar and maple syrup. Blend until smooth. You can add a few tablespoons of butter if you’re not counting calories.

I think it’s a pretty good secondary side dish if you have a sweet tooth. I think it goes particularly well with fried or barbeque chicken. After you’re done with the peeling, the rest of the dish is pretty much no fuss. Give it a try and tell me what you think.

Cordoba House

It’s late August, and in accordance with the carefully balanced cycle of the seasons we are treated to back to school shopping, meaningless NFL preseason games , and the annual manufactured media controversy meant to fill the news vacuum resulting from Congress’ August recess. This year’s ragefest is particularly contrived and insidious. I’m of course referring to the debate over the proposed construction of the Cordoba House Islamic Center in Lower Manhattan. The Cliffs Notes version of this dispute plays out as a contest between opportunistic right-wingers looking to gin up support of a increasingly nativist base of party voters, and a disjointed collection of interests-supporting religious tolerance and freedom. The approach of the radical right is as obvious as it is grotesque. Their first order of business has been in the area of labeling. By referring to the proposed Cordoba House project as the “ground-zero-mosque,” they seek to tap into negative feelings toward the Islamic community whose genesis goes back much earlier than that September morning. It’s a rhetorical sleight of hand, designed to create a guilt-by-association dynamic, and sentence the Islamic community to an ongoing sort of collective punishment. The deceit doesn’t stop there; the proposed center is not in fact on the site of the World Trade Center, but located two blocks away in the former location of a Burlington Coat Factory. This line of rebuttal, while necessary to correct the factual record, simply demonstrates how far our collective discourse has degenerated. In this context what we are essentially debating is the size of an Islamic-free zone. In a country that holds religious freedom to be among its bedrock principals, this development does not bode well for our chances to move toward mutual understanding and fulfilling our promise of a “more perfect union.”

Getting it on the record

With the college football season just around the corner, it’s time for me to get on the record about my predictions for the upcoming season. Hopefully by early January I’ll look like some spooky voodoo genius, but more than likely I’ll be getting emails in early October with links to this post, when my picks have already lost twice and are running out their third string quarterback to take snaps. I thought about breaking things down by conference, but to be honest, that is way more work than I felt like doing. So I decided to go with a pre-season top 5. I’ll save my Michigan football preview for later. So without further shenanigans, the picks. . .

5) Ohio State- It pains me to type these words, but the Buckeyes are loaded. 25 seniors return to last year’s Rose Bowl winner. Their non-conference schedule is a joke: three MAC schools, and Marshall from Conference USA. The light early season work should give Coach Tressel’s boys time to settle issues along the offensive line, leaving them undefeated going into a late November matchup at Iowa. Look for the Hawkeyes to defend their home turf and ruin Ohio State’s shot at a perfect season.

4) Virginia Tech- Tech is going to need to use a potentially explosive offense to overcome a tough schedule, bookended by a September 6 matchup with #5 ranked Boise State (read that again, doesn’t it just sound weird?) and a closing stretch that includes Georgia Tech and away games at Miami and North Carolina. I think that Tech drops one of those four (probably to Tech at home) which is why I have them at number 4.

3) Alabama- It didn’t take long for Nick Saban (A.K.A Satan Incarnate) to build a monster in the SEC. I suppose it’s easier to dominate and micro-manage the lives of 20-year-old indentured servants, than it is to dictate to grown men who can engage in collective bargaining. The talent is everywhere in Tuscaloosa, but it is mostly inexperienced on the defensive side of the ball. The offense returns Heisman Trophy winner Mark Ingram, and Quarterback Greg McElroy and his undefeated career record. The players are there, but inexperience trips up the Tide, in what every ESPN talking head will tell you (ad nauseam) is the best conference in America.

2) Iowa- Call me crazy, but I think the Hawkeyes’ combination of a tough defensive front, veteran quarterbacking and favorable schedule will allow them to run the table in the Big Ten. While they will have to solidify their offensive line play with three new starters, they aren’t particularly young and should gel quickly. Quarterback Ricky Stanzi is the key to Iowa’s hopes, some guys just possess some intangible quality that sets them apart at crunch time, and Stanzi is one of those guys.

1) Texas- The Longhorns looks to get back to the title game this year. Five-star talent all over the field, particularly at running back and in the secondary gives them a great shot at getting there. Like many teams Texas’ fortunes ride largely on their quarterback, Sophomore Garrett Gilbert, himself a top ranked high-school prospect, will have to be ready to step into the shoes of Colt McCoy. Gilbert gained experience in last year’s Nation Championship game, and although he struggled, he also showed flashes of brilliance. Texas has had success under Coach Mack Brown using young quarterbacks, with Chris Simms, Vince Young, and Colt McCoy all seeing significant playing time as freshmen. I expect Brown to lean on his running game early, and coax a stellar season from his young signal caller.

Well, those are my picks. Like I said, I’ll probably be wrong, which is one of the reasons college football is so exciting. Feel free to unload in the comments section that I left out Florida, or that Mack Brown is a terrible coach, or that the Pac-10 doesn’t get any respect. Check back this weekend for my Michigan preview.

Where are we going?

Like most college students staring down graduation, I was confronted with a choice: Now What? I’ll be honest, my answer to that question was to punt and enter grad school. Apparently though I’m not the only one interested in the fate of those still waiting for the big drop in their auto insurance rates. There have been several stories in the national press discussing the attitudes of and outlook for the 30-and-under set. I know that bashing the youth of America is a time-honored tradition in this country, so piling on seems a bit cliché. Having said that, a closer inspection of some of the numbers has me coming away with a feeling I can only describe as perplexed. The most striking thing I found was the amount of optimism displayed young people. Call me a pessimist if you want, but I don’t think any sober reading of our current situation instills confidence in our near term prospects. For instance, in the face of some pretty staggering unemployment figures (youth aged 16-24 unemployment hovers around 20%), coupled with low wages (only 31% of those in their 20’s report “earning enough”), young people today are overwhelmingly confident in their future success with 88% predicting they will “earn enough in the future.” Honestly, that is an almost shocking display of positivity, particularly since wages have fallen over the past decade and have stayed basically flat for the entire span of my lifetime. One consequence of this economic uncertainty has been, what some have derisively called, extended adolescence. A recent feature in the New York Times focusing on Americans in their 20’s refers to the “five milestones that define the transition to adulthood,” including completing school, moving out, gaining financial independence, marrying, and having children. Given the current climate I think that we should view the postponement of some of these life goals as something almost inevitable, and thank the stars above us that circumstances are not otherwise. Given the current rhetoric on the cost of our social safety net, can you imagine the demagoguery we would all be subject to if we were to experience a baby-boom by economically distressed young people? So what do you think? Are today’s young people a collection of entitled narcissists, texting away on their smart phones? Are their behaviors the inevitable outgrowth of a society that has not figured out to integrate this generation into the economy adequately? Or are the youth of today no more or less flakey than their predecessors? I have a feeling this is a topic I will be returning to often.

Trying this again

After a long hiatus I’ve decided to take up blogging again. You may be asking yourself, “Why would someone decide to start the world’s 37 trillionth blog, and why should I care?” The why is simple enough: I enjoy writing and sharing my opinion. Exchanging ideas and defending a point of view is just enjoyable to me. Finally, my Facebook friends are tired of reading 1300 word responses to the articles that they link to. The question of why you should care is trickier. I would love to be able to say that you should care because I have wonderfully insightful opinions about an incredibly diverse set of topics. If I said that however, you would probably think that I was a pompous prick, so I won’t go there. I will say that I’m a pretty regular guy that has a fairly unconventional take on the world around me. While I can’t promise to be right all of the time, I do promise to always be honest and give my authentic view of things. Plus, even if you completely disagree with me, you’re welcome to drop into the comments section to point out that I’m wrong about everything (just keep it clean—well, mostly clean). As far as content goes, like most people, I tend to write about the things that interest me. So, expect lots of posts on politics, sports, movies, cooking and exercise. Also, being a complete news junkie, I’ll try to post on any stories that happen to be dominating headlines. That all being said, I hope you check in from time to time. I hope to be posting as frequently as class and life allow.