A Contest, Administered by Thomasgeist

Whoever out there comes up with the biggest circulation media outlet to have someone suggest that Bill Clinton's "chest pains" were simply a ploy to take away from GWB's bounce will be the first to receive a restlessgeist T-Shirt (whenever we get around to producing them).

Yellow Dogs

Democrats across the country have been up in arms recently over Zell Miller's seeming defection to the GOP and his disgraceful unloyalty. Give me a goddamn break. 1) We didn't whine when Mr. Jeffords came over to the Democratic side. 2) Why the hell did we want Zell Miller anyway? Miller was one of the last of the Yellow Dog Democrats, a term that has had various meanings in different regions but for white southerners was this simple: "you can never vote for the Republicans because they took away our property back in the 1860s." Thankfully, with political realignment begun in 1932 and moved forward especially in 1948, 1964, 1968 and 1972, most of these Yellow Dog Dems had left the party (the only prominent one left, Senator Byrd of WV has been forthright in his renunciation of past beliefs) and have had in fact formed the core of the Republican Party. Good riddance. These race-baiting, anti-labor, god and wife loving but servant impregnating wolves in populist sheeps clothing have been a blight on American politics since the days of JC (John Calhoun). One of my favorite ahistoricism of American politics is when Republicans try to claim the legacy of America's "Second Reconstruction" (Republicans would never use this term of course, courtesy of the greatest of great historians, C Vann Woodward, as it would offend a large section of their base that could best be referred to as Dunning School, or for the non-historian readers, big (non-film student) fans of Birth of a Nation) as their own by arguing (truly) that more Republicans voted for the 3 Civil Rights Acts of the 60s than did Democrats. Of course, they always forget to mention that within ten years 1968, all but three Democrats who were still alive and voted against the bills had switched parties and had helped solidify the modern Republican base. Zell Miller is the last of a breed, thankfully, and his "disloyalty" is nothing more than one of the last gasps of the political realignment of teh mid-twentieth century. Applaud Mr. Miller for finally joining his breathren in the comfy confines of the GOP's "big tent" and get back to the important work of truly running a campaign and (re)building a party that should not be big tent, at least if that tent includes Yellow Dogs still bitter about the war of northern aggression and loss of the idyllic plantation way of life.

On Flip-Flopping

Regular readers will know that I am no fan of John Kerry. Yet I still fail to understand this "flip-flopping" charge (which, I might add, has been plagiarized from Sideshow Bob's campaign against Joseph Quimby for Springfield mayor). Kerry's biggest flip-flop is Vietnam, no question. Let's remember though, that in '65 support for the war ran at around 90%. Ten years later support sat around 25%. Hmm, so like 65% of Americans over the course of the War he changed his mind...how does this shit stick. Secondly, Kerry's flip-flopping on Vietnam is incredibly admirable when you look at it objectively. Like most Americans he supported the war at first (more so in fact, as unlike most, he volunteered to go). Like most Americans he came to not support the war, and more so than most, he actually tried to exercise his constitutional right to stop it. Kerry's other flip-flopping can probably be charged against 90% of the Senate.
Now Bush and Cheney's flip-floppin' on the other hand (to repeat the long) list-Iraq has WMD, Iraq doesn't have WMD, we don't need a homeland security dept., we do need a homeland security dept., we don't need a 9-11 comission, we do need a 9-11 commission, I support the government of apartheid era South Africa, I don't support the apartheid government (Cheney only), we don't support steel tariffs, we do support steel tariffs, we don't support steel tariffs, we don't support stem cell, we do support stem cell, we kinda support stem cell, we don't support a missile shield, we do support a missile shield, we don't support a missile shield, I won't testify before the 9-11 comm., I will testify before the 9-11 comm., did I mention it won't be under oath? We don't support putting nuclear waste in Yucca Mt., we do support putting nuclear wast in Yucca Mt., oh wait, Nevada's a swing state? We don't support putting nuclear waste in Yucca Mt (one of my favorites, Nevadans aren't buying, more on that later). Iraq gave support for 9-11, Iraq didn't give support for 9-11. We support No Child Left Behind, We haven't funded No Child Left Behind to its minimum mandate, thus invalidating it, We did try to overthrow Hugo Chavez, we didn't try to overthrow Hugo Chavez (another of my favorites). There are at least ten more prominent ones, but you get the idea.

From St. Paul: The Rise of the Midwest Republican Apparatchik

(this post was largely written on Tuesday, August 24th)

Minnesota liberalism is a very strange thing. Here in St. Paul, most natives pride ourselves on a 70% DFL (in Minnesota we don't have the Democratic Party, but the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party) voting rate and classic midwestern social acceptance. Yet, for three successive elections now, St. Paulites have elected a man as mayor who started out as a Democrat and eventually became a Republican. The first two of those elections the man was Norm Coleman, the philandering (a VERY open secret here-everyone and their mom used to see Norm at Blockbuster pinching a woman's, who's not his wife, ass), business pandering Bush lacky whose two biggest claims to fame are his resurrection of hockey in Minnesota and the viciousness in which he exploited Paul Wellstone's death. Now, St. Paul seems to have added to this tradition as current mayor, Democrat Randy Kelly has endorsed Bush. Some might see this as evidence of Minnesota's continuing tilt rightward (though really, when one combines Gore and Nader's vote totals in 2000, this state still votes overwhelmingly liberal). I would beg to differ though. When one looks at both the Coleman and Kelly situations, there is a marked similarity, not in a rise of Republicanism, but in the rise of the Republican apparatchik. Both Coleman, and it looks like Kelly as well, switched to the GOP not out of any ideological desire (as far as I can tell neither has ever believed in anything but themselves and money) but because the GOP, especially its incarnation as the party of Bush, has done an excellent job at singling out prospective candidates and grooming them. For both Coleman and Kelly, the fact was that they had neither the labor nor social service (in MN, the strong feminist, gay rights, and middle-class left-Democrats are based around an incredibly well organized network of social service and non-profit agencies) connections to rise in DFL politics. What they did have though, was a reputation as pro-business and sufficiently unconcerned with such "social" issues as abortion, racial profiling etc. that they could easily fit in with the Republican Party.
For the last 40 years or so, Minnesota Republicanism has been based either on a relatively small radical right cabal centered in southern Minnesota or a Rockefeller Republican tradition exemplified by former governor Arnie Carlson. As should be obvious, these wings never got along too well, and over the course of the 80s and 90s (Minnesota's the only state never to have voted for Reagan) many of those former Rockefeller Republicans began to leave the party on account of its fiscal irresponsibility and rightward tilt on social issues. As late as 98, the Party seemed in disarray, unable to rally around the very uninteresting Coleman for Governor and unable to find a candidate other than the perenially recycled Rudy Boschwitz to take on Wellstone two years before. Fast forward though, to 2002. Coleman, who had little money in 98 and couldn't do a thing about Jessie Ventura's ability to cut into his base, ran the most expensive campaign in Minnesota history in order to unseat Wellstone (something that wouldn't have happened if Paul lived until election day). Now all this money came from Bush's vast network of donors-a little strange isn't it, when Texas oilmen are the biggest contributors to a Minnesota senate campaign. What did GWB get out fo the deal, besides the removal of that man his father once called a "fucking pipsqueek"- even more important, he got a politician who owed his existence and success to none other than GWB. This, is the essence of the current Republican strategy across the industrial and often quite liberal midwest. In Corleone fashion, build a base of politicians who owe their existence to one man, or more generally, a small group, and who can be molded into any image and vote completely according to the demands of their Godfather. Rove, etc. understands that as long as the McCain's of the world exist, it will never completely be there party. Instead of fighting with them, why not build a base in good looking, middle aged white men who will do anything you want. They won't offend moderate women (as long as you can keep their mistress's out of the newspaper) and their loyalty will run deep. While some have compared Bush to Hitler (wrongly; as the joke goes, Hitler got the popular vote twice) such a brand of cronyism is much more reminiscent of the kind invented by our other favorite twentieth century mass murderer-Josef Stalin. Don't believe me? I'll give you ten to one that in 2006, the race for Minnesota senate is DFLer Mark Dayton against GOPer Randy Kelly, funded largely by the same men who funded Bush and Coleman.

Back in Action

Thomasgeist has returned from a far flung foray into the heart of America with one simple message for Cityslicker, RG and all other friends in NYC:
Give'm Hell