Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Funeral Rites of Spring

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 04:09 AM
Original message
The Funeral Rites of Spring
I. Crève salope or May is the Most Divisive Month

Spring fever is on us again. In the middle ages, Chaucer described it

Whan that Aprill, with his shoures soote
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote
And bathed every veyne in swich licour,
Of which vertu engendred is the flour…
(So priketh hem Nature in hir corages);
Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages


In the modern age, T.S. Eliot decided that “April is the cruelest month” instead. That’s what happens when you try to fool Mother Nature by living in a seasonless society. People have to cast out the old and bring in the new sometimes. Or else you get revolution as they did in 17th century England and 18th century France and 20th century Russia. In the United States, they figured out a way to pretend that we are getting a change of government every four years, by holding a ceremonial rite called a Presidential Election. As people have become more and more alienated and angry, the rite has become longer and longer. Under the current Bush/Cheney corporate fascist regime, with our do-nothing Democratic Congress that refuses to end the war or impeach, they had to extend the ritual to a full two years in order to sedate the masses. It is all a sham. We will get another corporate candidate, who will lull us with a different flavor of corporate friendly slogans that are all good for the bottom line of Microsoft and General Electric and the Rockefeller’s Standard Oil (which pretends that it is now several smaller companies) and The Phone Company which is currently AT&T and Verizon but which should be the behemoth of our youth once again within a few years if we continue on our present course.

It isn’t like that in other countries.

Mai 1968 was a historic month in France when the student body of that country and ten million workers went on strike, shutting down the government. The event had its own art form—graffiti and photographs—




—and it own music

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxVD7fftxSA
Crève salope by Renaud, which can be literally translated “Die Bitch”. Some things never change.

II. Thirty-six Years Later

The corporate masters in the United States are no fools. They know how to keep the socialist revolution from taking hold in this country. Keep the working class divided. Men from women, Black from White, immigrant from native born, English speaker from Spanish speaker, disabled from… Angela Davis spelled it out in Women, Race and Class . If more people here at Democratic Underground would turn off the Divide and Conquer the Democratic Party extravaganza of Countdown and read Ms. Davis’s book, we would be a more productive place.

Thirty-six years ago, Hunter S. Thompson chronicled a Democratic Party that was being torn apart by outside interference. Dick Nixon wanted a blow out victory. Donald Segretti, Pat Buchanan, Karl Rove, Roger Stone (the last three are still with us) and others hired moles to infiltrate Democratic presidential campaigns, burglarized offices, drugged candidates, planted phony news stories, spread lies about one candidate which were attributed to another. They anointed George McGovern the winner then began deconstructing him with the help of the press and more dirty tricks the minute he secured the nomination. Because of the extreme ill will that had developed within the Democratic Party during the primary, thanks in part to the gullibility of youthful McGovern supporters who could not recognize that they were being duped and who responded with Well fuck them! Who needs the tradition Democratic voters, we have the youth vote! attitude, the party base would not rally behind McGovern when he was attacked in the general election. His own supporters had been too rude to other candidates whose support within the Democratic Party was much stronger than any feelings of antipathy which people had towards the war or Dick Nixon. That fall Blacks broke their trend of increased participation in presidential elections, opting to stay home rather than vote for George McGovern who had treated Hubert Humphrey, a staunch liberal who had worked his butt off to gain passage of the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, with disrespect. The white working class went one step farther and voted for Nixon.

Karl Rove is a cowbird. He never builds his own nest. Instead his lays his eggs in a nest someone else has built. That is why I figured he would recycle Pat Buchanan’s ideas from 1972 when he needed a strategy to steal the election this time. He does not need a blowout, just a squeaker.

The passages in italics are from Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ’72 by Hunter S. Thompson, the chapter for the month of May. Keep in mind that Dr. Gonzo was writing this to publish at the time, but that he did not know that the Democrats were punked until the next year. Nor, did he know that he was serving a very important purpose in his good buddy Pat Buchanan’s plan. His ugly characterizations of people like Humphrey and Muskie would have divided the Democrats even farther, since he made his support for McGovern quite clear. Some may have felt that he was speaking for the McGovern camp. His was part of the media propaganda.

There is no way to grasp what a shallow, contemptible and hopelessly dishonest old hack Hubert Humphrey really is until you’ve followed him around…(he would) go crazy with rage if he ever saw in print what most reporters say about him during midnight conversations…”Humphrey has used the campaign slogans of John Kennedy (‘let’s get this country moving again’ ) and of Wallace (‘stand up for America ‘)

In May, 2008 we have our very own Keith Olbermann on national television every night telling us that Hillary Clinton is a national disgrace and comparing her to Madeline Khan in What’s Up Doc and asking when someone will take her in a closet and leave her there. Like Thompson, he seems obsessed.

“My next job---after getting brother elected President of the United States---will be the political destruction of Hubert Humphrey. “ Robert Kennedy; after the West Virginia primary in 1960…Remember me Hubert? I’m the one who got smacked in the stomach by a billy club at the corner of Michigan and Balboa on the evil Wednesday night four years ago in Chicago---while you looked dowm from your suite….

Thompson goes on to mention that Ted Kennedy’s family supported McGovern in the primary. Too bad that support dried up in the general election when McGovern desperately needed a VP to get him out of the Eagleton affair. Ted Kennedy would have done the trick I expect that in supporting McGovern in the primary Teddy was doing what Bobby would have done---getting even with Humphrey for having the audacity to run a campaign against their brother Jack in 1960. This calls to mind the reason that Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama—he got mad because Hillary Clinton reminded the world that JFK could not pass the Civil Rights or Voting Rights Acts. LBJ and Hubert Humphrey did. So much for the politics of hope. This year the primary has been the politics of payback.

With the possible exception of Nixon, Hubert Humphrey is the purest and most disgusting example of a Political Animal in American politics today. He has been going at it hammer and tong twenty-five hours a day since the end of World War II…

Thompson then goes on to imply that Humphrey’s anti-war stance is a lie, because he used to be anti-Communist years ago. He mocks his “late dovishness”.Remind you of anyone? Love the way that Thompson turns hard working into something suspect. Can’t trust people who show up for work everyday, year after year. No one could be that perfect. There must a catch. Must be that awful ambition .

Thompson also attempts to paint Humphrey as two-faced on civil rights issues by suggesting that he is trying to cozy up to George Wallace. This is an attempt to peel away Humphrey’s African-American support. However, his efforts are undone by a portion of the chapter in which he describes McGovern’s narrow defeat in Ohio after the votes from Cleveland’s twenty-first started coming in. The precincts were allowed to stay open late after a court order was obtained. This caused delays in counting the vote, which heavily favored Humphrey.

“Say, how many more votes do they have to count up there?”
“As many as they need,” Mankiewicz muttered.
Himmelmann glanced at him, grimaced, then hung up.
“What does that project to,” Frank asked Caddell. “About thirty thousand to six?”
The wizard shrugged. “Who cares? We got raped. We’ll never make that up—not even with Akron.”


In case the reader does not get this, Thompson rehashes this over and over again. For ten pages. With dialogue and details. Though no formal challenge was issued, he tells the world that a Black precinct in Cleveland, Ohio stole the state election from McGovern and gave it to Humphrey. Talk about divisive. The phrase put up or shut up comes to mind.

Another candidate has seen every victory denounced as a cheat this primary season. Starting with New Hampshire, there have been charges of e-vote fraud in Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania. Asians in California, Latinos in Nevada, Whites in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania have all been called racists by the MSM, Obama supporters and agent provocateurs. That other candidate has earned almost as many votes as her rival. That means that half the Democratic party has been labeled racist and a cheater .

Democratic Voters join this party and not the other one because they believe in equality and in fair play. When they are accused of being bigots and of being cheaters---especially if they have never had the advantages of higher education or extra income---they get royally pissed off.

That is how you lose an election before you ever enter the general election season. Obama supporters get a real laugh out of Clinton’s unity talk. However, people her age saw what happened back in 1972 when the Party broke into a bunch of little pieces.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well gee
Unlike Humpty, the Democrats somehow managed to put themselves back together again quickly enough and effectively enough to win the next presidential election, and to increase their majorities in the House and the Senate. You'd think that somewhere in your long-winded diatribe you'd have found room to mention that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reddconsole Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. But gee
Edited on Sat May-10-08 09:15 AM by reddconsole
Do we have to go through 1972 again to get to 1976?

Great stuff, McCamy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. The point is
that the OP's contention that it will somehow "destroy" the Democratic party if we don't run a "unity ticket" (i.e. if we don't bribe/appease the Clinton supporters by giving her a spot on the ticket even after she loses in the primary) isn't supported by the history she cites. Not remotely. We could lose this particular election, but as 72/74/76 prove, the one doesn't equate to the other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. You want to write off this election? Four more years of war and a full blown depression?
You must have health insurance, no kids of draft age and be financially well off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Are you saying it's impossible to win without a "unity ticket"?
There's an easy solution to that. If everyone who voted for any Democrat in the primaries votes for whoever the Democratic nominee is in November (as I intend to do), John McCain will stand absolutely no chance. If you think that too many Clinton (or Edwards or Kucinich) supporters won't do that without some sort of appeasement at the convention or on the ticket, they're the ones you should be talking to about writing off the election, not me. If they plan to put their own hurt feelings above the good of the country and the world, then they deserve all of the (completely forseeable) consequences of 8 more years of a Republican presidency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. "They would deserve" is not a winning GE strategy. Does not sound very Democratic either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. I never said it was a strategy
but if all you can do to make your argument is put words in my mouth, it doesn't surprise me.

And what is undemocratic or unjust about people accepting and deserving responsibility for the foreseeable results of actions taken in exercise of their rights?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doityourself Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #7
18. Wow,...you described me to a T..lol..not interested in a unity ticket even if you didn't though
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
27. Some of us reading your OP would think that you are the one
with the health insurance, no kids of draft age or financially well off.

I don't see Obama as a Hubert Humphrey.

In fact, what might well happen yet is that there will be enough rioting at this year's Dem convention that Hillary gets to be the new Humphrey.

I see Obama as having a very powerful message. And I think he is a lot more out of the box than he is saying he is.

Hopefully someone will educate him about the Federal Reserve. That is one arena that he needs to understand fully - that having a PRIVATE centralized bank that does nothing but award the inner circle of banking officials what they consider their due at tax payer expense - that institution needs to be eliminated yesterday.

But he is not a typical politician: he showed his true and brave colors when he first addressed the issue of race after the first flurry of attacks on him regarding Rev Wright.

I did enjoy and agree with your analysis of the "sham" election - how in an oligarchy elections are just a dog and pony show. But I think that Barack is turning the tables on them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
3. Clinton is 2008's version of Humpty. But, Obama's not McGovern.
And, today's students and workers certainly aren't revolutionaries.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. McGovern was not McGovern until CREEP and the press made him that way
and the alienated portion of the Democratic Party---which was just about one half of it (Humphrey's voting base was similar to Clinton's except that Humphrey had the African-American voting block in 1972) refused to rally behind McGovern. Keep up the divisive politics that KO typifies so well, and you will see some Dems hold their nose and vote for Obama and you will see some of them nod their heads in agreement when the RNC attacks him on character issues this fall, just like Humphrey's Dem supporters nodded their heads when Nixon's guys attacked McGovern on character issues in 1972. And these are the ones who will stay home---or, in a few cases, like for veterans, cross party lines to vote for the war hero. And there are a lot of Democrats who served in the military or who come from military families.

MSNBC's so called pundits attempt to alienate the Clinton base every single say with more splitter bs. It comes from Matthews, Russert, Fineman..the whole bunch. They never build up Obama. They just malign and tear down Clinton and her supporters. And in doing so they give the impression that they are doing it at the request of Barack Obama.

It is the crappiest show on earth, and I can not for the life of me figure out why the Obama camp has not cried bullshit on it long ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DWilliamsamh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
4. Do me a favor...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. It is a good post. My obection is to divisiveness. Obama/Clinton will be a good ticket.
However, if we do not stop the infighting, our party is doomed.

That you would see my critique of divisiveness as a critique of George McGovern or of Obama (or of Humphrey or of Clinton) is proof that DU has turned into a swamp of bitter name calling, where bickering in which characters are trashed replaces the discussion of the issues that matter to voters.

We have descended to the level of kindergarten.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Doomed? Oh please....
If you're still trying to sell '72 as proof of that, please tell everyone how the "doomed" Democratic party fared in the '72, '74 and '76 Congressional elections and in the '76 presidential election. Or should I embarrass you and post the numbers myself?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reddconsole Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Good point also
Edited on Sat May-10-08 05:24 PM by reddconsole
In '74 and '76 we were just coming off of Watergate and Ford's pardon of Nixon. We probably have a similar situation here after seven years of an illegal presidency where no republican stands a chance. I hope that's the case. I plan on voting for the nominee, regardless.

P. S. A lot of the devisivness on DU is probably the result of republican "agents" trying to tear us apart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. I have no doubt you're right
I'm sure the Clinton and Obama campaigns have paid shills on this site and many others, and I'm sure the Republicans do as well. Come in, lob stink bombs in both directions, then duck out of the way and let your opponents roll around in the mud fighting each other.

And since McCamy seems far too preoccupied to respond to my challenge, I'll help her out a bit..

Before Nixon won in '72, the Dems had 54 seats in the Senate and 255 in the House. Four years later, they had 61 seats in the Senate, 292 in the House and a Democratic president. If that's being doomed, maybe we need to be doomed again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DWilliamsamh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #6
24. And my point is
That your post, tearing Obama (who every one with even a shred of objectivity considers our nominee) a new one is precisely what Skinner was talking about. And yet you continue to rip him up and call him names. That you do it eloquently doesn't make it any less mean-spirited.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemGa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
5. Interesting parallels





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
10. Free association does not make for good political analysis.
Beats Hillary's powerpoint though, I'll give you that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. Rove repeats himself.
Edited on Sat May-10-08 02:53 PM by McCamy Taylor
Anyone who has studied Karl Rove's tactics knows that the man's greatest weakness is his lack of creativity. He is entirely predictable. You can always anticipate what he will do, because he will always do what worked the last time. It was inevitable that Dems would retake Congress in 2006, because Rove would use the Al-Terra-All the Time strategy that worked so well in 2002---even though he did not have a locked down on the MSM that he had in 2002. Lacking even a bachelor degree, Rove is unable to understand that context counts and that when circumstances change, tactics must be changed. His Terra tactics could not work when there was unfriendly press to deconstruct, analyze, mock at and eliminate the fear of the Terra warnings. Rove could not anticipate this. I could. The people in the unfriendly press could---places like NBC and NYT. The Dems could.

So, are Democrats going to beat him at his own game once again?

As for what makes political analysis, the reader makes meaning. The author makes suggestions.

http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/barthes06.htm

Studs Terkel's Hard Times which I am reading now, is an excellent book about the Depression which is almost entirely made up of stories. Only the editing--the selection and the grouping and ordering of these stories and the short introductions makes up the narration. However, no one would make the mistake of saying that the book does not have a thesis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JimGinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. LOL - I Still Don't Know Why I Bother Looking At This OP's Threads...
Always the same kind of tripe & a few seconds of my life wasted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
15. Divide and conquer RNC oppo from the McCain fawining WaPo today. 2 articles
First, to get the Obama supporters all riled up, from the association is not causality files http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/09/AR2008050901417.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 we get a political science professor from Emory broadly hinting that working class Dems will not vote for Obama because he is black. However, in the same article he admitted that they would not vote for Kerry, either. If you read closely, all he really does is cited some statistics about bias and talk about voting demographics and then hope that the reader will make a false assumption that association equals causality. For those who are not familiar with the term, it is like saying that because tall men wear big shoes everyone who wears big shoes is a tall man. This is false. Some women wear big shoes. Clowns wear big shoes. Some short men wear big shoes.

Then, for the other side, there is this, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/09/AR2008050902638.html?hpid=topnews

OMG! Who knew that there was a Black mafia whose only job was silencing anyone who criticizing Obama? Scary!

The Washington Post sucks. This is an attempt to inflame both sides of the Clinton and Obama feud and keep them from agreeing to form a unity ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DWilliamsamh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #15
25. The phrase you are looking for is
"correlation doesn't equal causation."

And I think it is clear in the article that Emory's intent exactly the opposite of what you say. THAT's why he points out that the same people didn't vote for Kerry. And yes WaPo sux usually, the only thing that would suck more would be a so called "unity" ticket. Having a Clinton on the ticket would be the exact opposite of breaking with the politics of the past. In addition, Hillary can't control Bill in her own campaign. How could Obama control him (his mouth more like) in the general. The Clinton's would, in my opinion, be a liability that is completely unnecessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doityourself Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
17. hmmmmmmm..
Humpty-Dumpty when you fall
There be no one here to call
Life is stil your mystery
You see, you see, you see

Humpty-Dumpty why'd you fall
You see there's no one here to call
Now we've solved this mystery
You see, you see, you see

(Earth, Wind & Fire)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 05:38 PM
Response to Original message
20. I've always suspected Humpty-Dumpty was set up.
Who in their right mind would send horses in to fix an egg? One can only imagine the results...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 10:34 PM
Response to Original message
23. I don't agree with everything you say, McCamy Taylor...
but I find your posts fascinating. K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
26. The NYT has an article on Mai 1968 today
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC