Sin In Eternal Hymn
Having ceased reading lib blogs, and most blogs overall, I lack any real sense of despair over Obama's regime. Some complaints trickle in, and I receive links to liberals concerned with Obama's "direction." But generally speaking, I have no clue just how deep lib dissatisfaction truly runs.
It would be gauche of me to remind you of what I was saying this time last year, or to have you flip through "Savage Mules" for nostalgia's sake. It would probably be pointless as well. Besides, I'm pretty much through with writing about American politics, at least in this format. As I was say---
Hey! Is that applause I hear? Man, are you people easily pleased.
I yield the floor to my pal Dwayne Monroe, who posted the below letter to liberals and progs at LBO-Talk. Dwayne gets right to the point without rancor. He's a much more peaceful man than me.
I know you're unhappy.
You tell me, via email, text messages, tweets, listserv posts and maybe even tachyon bursts I'm not yet equipped to receive.
You tell me -- and the world -- you're disheartened by Obama's velvet gloved treatment of ibanks, his failure to "take advantage of a good crisis." His inability to speak to any group of black people without yammering on about "personal responsibility" (a theme conspicuously absent from his speeches before mostly white audiences).
His escalation of the Afghan war. His supposedly groundbreaking national medical insurance plan which, once closely examined, looks an awful lot like a funds transfer program for the pharma and private insurance sectors.
His continuation of Bush era surveillance programs. His backtracking on same sex unions. His... by the gods, I could go on, but why?
Listen mates, I have some bad news for you and your ruined dreams...
You should have paid closer attention during the campaign. You should've spent a little less time shouting about new, "post-racial" politics, the excitement of "young people" and Obama's polished, upper management style of presentation and more time thinking through the totally predictable implications of the things he said.
What the hell did you think he meant when he said he was going to "step up" US efforts in Afghanistan? Air drop delicious snake cakes and DVDs? When a potential or sitting POTUS announces a "renewed effort" he (and one day soon, she) means only one thing: bombs, blood and blasting.
I know, that's three things.
Months ago, when you read stories about Obama's popularity among our well-fed hedge funders, what did you think that meant? Wall Street loves "diversity"? It meant those mercenaries were pointing their mojo wands towards the guy they felt would produce superior ROI.
And so on.
During the campaign months, many of you wankers (and yes, I love you but...) accused me of being cynical. Why didn't I open my heart and believe in change? Change! My black and tan amigos y amigas were dismayed I wasn't happy to see the ultimate example of a black face in a high place. Dreams, no longer deferred!
Well-intentioned pink skins scratched their heads, puzzled by my lack of glee at their non-racist action: voting for a black chief exec. Look at us!
To be cynical however, you have to be a disappointed romantic. Within each cynic's skull throbs a mind longing to believe with the fervency of a "Twilight" fan. My objections weren't cynical. I simply took Mr. Obama at his word and factored in the history of the office he sought.
So there you are, upset and worried. You're upset by how things have turned out. You're worried that unless Obama does this or does that -- zigs instead of zags, kerpluks instead of plukeriking -- his presidency will fail. Which is hella odd: what presidencies have succeeded and by whose criteria?
I recommend spending no more than five, maybe ten minutes being disappointed. And perhaps an extra half hour musing on the various things the President should do to save his historic legacy.
WATCH: Mark Fiore's take on the same theme. Thanks Fuzzy! (And Mike Alewtiz for the link.)