THE ELECTION OF 2014

After the presidential election of 2012 I wrote an essay where I said, “The Republican Party could find itself wandering in the wilderness for quite some time”. With their victory in the mid-terms of 2014, this statement might be put into serious doubt. But the situation could be more nuanced than that. Mid-term elections are local battles shaped by each little fiefdom’s particular brand of politics. A presidential election, where the nation acts more as an integral whole than as splintered pieces, is a different animal, one where the Republican Party will have to confront the deep schism in its ranks between the social conservative-Tea Partiers and the traditional oligarchs of wealth protection. Some kind of excrement will have to hit the fan because this problem has still not been resolved. In fact, these mid-terms have strengthened the Party’s more radical right. This plays well in Peoria, but does it play well from coast to coast? But none of this lets the Democrats off the hook for the limp wristed form of politics they play and their inability to defend even their most obvious successes. As with all large organizations, the leadership sets the tone and the “Great Black Hope” must take much of the blame. Before getting into that, I’d like to launch off in another direction that will eventually lead us back to where we’ve just come.

Most of us are familiar with the ill-fated reign of Salvador Allende in Chile from 1970 to 1973. Allende was a far left politician who was legitimately elected. Obviously, nobody knows where Allende’s Chile would have gone if allowed to develop normally because the Gringos were never going to let that happen. Although Allende was ideologically much closer to Fidel Castro than to an Elizabeth Warren in today’s America, he did believe in the democratic process and the Constitutional rule of law. He was not, at least with regard to Chile, in favor of an armed struggle between social classes. He wanted to install his form of socialism within the framework of a democratic political process. (I’ve read extensively on this subject from many different sources and ideologies and defy anyone to deny this).

But for the imperial Big Kahuna to the north, these were very paranoiac times. The Cuban Revolution was still young, the Soviet Union was a super power, Allende and Fidel were good buddies, and the thought of another Cuba on “their” turf was too much for the “Yanqui” colossus to take. It was, quite simply, unacceptable.

By now, it is no secret the CIA played a fundamental role in the military coup that both killed Allende and his government. But most of us would still be surprised at the scope and breadth of the operation, which went far beyond the implementation of a military coup. From day 1 of Allende’s government, the CIA put into practice a laser focused plan with only one goal: to destroy the economy of the country and destabilize Chile as much as possible. It is not my mission in this essay to explain how this was done, but suffice it to say that by the time the coup occurred — ironically, for an American, on Sept 11^th, 1973 — even the most basic foodstuffs like flour and cooking oil were almost impossible to get. Chile was suffering. Allende found himself politically isolated, his left flank advocating for an armed struggle while the average Chilean longed for no more than a return to some form of normalcy. The Allende government was the only visible target for their desperation. After almost 3 years of preparation, the recourse of a military coup could now be justified by the great snake oil salesman of democracy, the United States of America.

In short, the Americans sabotaged Allende’s government. This is not conjecture or interpretation, it is hard core history.

Although the ideological terrain is very much narrower and the field of play is a much more stable socio-political entity, Barak Obama found himself in a similar situation. From day 1 of his administration, the opposition’s plan, regardless of its consequences for the American people, has been to sabotage the Obama government. But unlike Salvador Allende, whose position was simply untenable before the powerful interests out to destroy him, Barak Obama had more than a fighting chance to re-boot the course of a country that had been left in shambles by the same opposition now trying to tear him down. His tepid, timid leadership has not only squandered that sublime moment when he had the numbers and emotional backing of the American people, but seems to have infected the whole Democratic Party as well.

The boxing community has an expression they use when a fighter is protecting himself to such an extent that he is taking less punishment, but losing the fight. At such a moment, someone will always say, “he’s got to start throwing his hands”. About the only time I’ve ever seen Barak Obama “throw his hands” was at this year’s annual meeting of the United Nation’s General Assembly, when he gave that ridiculous speech where he tried to establish the United States as some kind of moral leader against the world’s bad guys. Regardless of its message, it was delivered with power and conviction. And I thought — why can’t he be like that with the Republicans?

And yet, in spite of his Pee Wee Herman approach to politics, Obama and his administration have accomplished some important things in the face of the Republican saboteurs. Incredibly, if I were a Democrat running for Congress right now, for some inexplicable reason probably tied to a low testosterone level, I’d be afraid to say that Obamacare is one of those accomplishments. The most egregious example of this occurred in Kentucky, where one of the most important employees of the plutocrats who run America, Senator Mitch McConnell, was ripe to be taken — and the Democrats rolled out a candidate that seemed capable of doing it. What happened here is the most exemplary reason as to why the Democrats continue to struggle.

Allison Grimes is a raven haired beauty with a well bred blue grass political pedigree, in addition to being sprung from the Clinton political stable (this is Kentucky). She seemed formidable — but it didn’t take long to realize she was just another dumb brunette.

For the last 6 years, Mitch McConnell has been the CEO of Obama Bashing Inc. It was his job, every day, to tell us how wrong Obama is, how foolish Obama is, how stupid Obama is, how etc. etc Obama is. It was his job, every day, to call Obama a horse’s ass. And really, he was not winning any popularity contests doing it. In fact, he was beginning to look like the wicked little troll he is. And here comes the beautiful Allison Grimes — to back him up!! She seems to be running as much against President Obama as Mitch McConnell. It’s as if the President has Ebola and she doesn’t want to go near him. All this in one of the very few red states where Obamacare has been implemented without hindrance and is functioning beautifully (Kentucky has a Democratic governor, which makes this even more pathetic). It gets so bad that she won’t even admit, when asked by McConnell, that she voted for Obama in 2012!!! In a sense, she was validating McConnell’s role as the CEO of Obama Bashing Inc. It was as if McConnell was running against McConnell. And guess what? McConnell won. Did Grimes expect to win simply because she is better looking?

That one incident when Grimes could not admit she voted for Barak Obama seems to have been some kind of watershed moment. As a bridge to where I’d like to go with this essay, I will now set forth what should have been Grimes’ answer: “yes, I voted for Barak Obama, and I’d like to remind everyone that you voted for Bush-Cheney 2 times, the result of which being our nation mired in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, as well as some of the worst foreign policy blunders in the history of the Republic. I don’t always agree with the President, but considering what he inherited and considering your Party’s attempts to block everything he might do to fix such a mess, he’s done a good job”. (I remind the reader this is not my opinion, it is my version of the politically expedient thing to do and, regardless of my opinions, I’d still prefer Obama to anything the opposition has to offer.)

Did someone mention something about the economy?

One of the crosses I’ve had to bear in my life is a stubborn adherence to truth and honesty. In a culture where the truth is often a toxic substance (see essay “Industrial Size Lying”), this can be an anchor more than a wind filled sail. But alas, that is what I am hopelessly chained to. As a result — although I can say with reasonable certainty the economic policies of people like Mitch McConnell caused the financial earthquake of 2008 — I cannot say just how effective Barak Obama has been handling the economy. I was never fond of the Tim Geitner wing of advisors he relied on, nor his softball approach to Wall Street malfeasance. Perhaps this is mitigated by Republican obstructionism. I’m not sure. Has Obama tipped toed his way through all this economic Sanskrit in an optimal way? I’m not sure. Perhaps it is relevant to ask just what a president can do with regard to the economy, and especially an economic disaster like that of 2008. I’m not sure. But I am completely sure of this: whenever the economy improves, the president always takes credit for it. Whenever the economy does poorly, the opposition always blames it on the president.

When Barak Obama became president, the economy was in its Chernobyl mode. It was hemorrhaging jobs, the unemployment rate was up around 11-12% (or was it even more?), and there was economic shrinkage. Six years later, the economy is creating jobs, the unemployment rate is down to an almost normal 5.9%, and the economy grew at a healthy 3%+ the last time figures came out.

With regard to the electoral process in any so called democracy, the economy is usually the foremost element of success. Did anyone hear Allison Grimes or any other Democratic candidate trumpeting (or at least “spinning”) these accomplishments? Did we hear Barak Obama doing so? What are these people afraid of? Are they ever going to start “throwing their hands”?

Salvador Allende, in a fight where he was doomed from the beginning, died for his cause. Contrast this to today’s Democrats, who can hardly throw a punch in a fight they should be winning. Barak Obama must take much of the blame. He has failed to convince America of a vision that is fairly centrist to begin with. Now that there is nothing to lose, maybe he can define that vision in a way that becomes effective. This might help set the table for 2016.

Dude, throw your hands!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I began writing essays in the early 90’s, the collection “Because You Never Asked” being a fractional but representative cross section of an output that is still in progress today. I restrict their content to anything that may be relevant since the dawn of time to the end of eternity. They’ve given me a kind of therapeutical way to voice my objections to the paradigm of our culture and the negativity it is leading us into. All cultures attempt to inculcate their constituents into someone’s narrow minded, self serving version of reality and this book is an attempt to translate these subterfuges into the truth. Although a number of my earliest essays are included in this collection, the vast majority of them are more contemporary. Regardless of their chronology, they should all still be pertinent to whatever is happening at this moment.

To order you copy of “Because You Never Asked” by Jerome Grapel click here.