Conservatism is religion to these a$$holes

David Brooks finally gets it. Unfortunately, I expect to see his broken body hanging from every right wing burning cross in the days to come. These morons are too self-deluded to see anything but their own navels, which they swear is the eye of god egging them on.

The Mother of All No-Brainers - NYTimes.com:

“...the Republican Party may no longer be a normal party. Over the past few years, it has been infected by a faction that is more of a psychological protest than a practical, governing alternative.”

Conservatism has become a religion to these idiots. And you don't compromise your religious beliefs.

So we're all screwed because of a tiny minority of zealots.

And because no one in the Republican party is brave enough to stand up to them.

Thank god Frank Rich is back

To their shame, no one else writes the truth like Frank Rich.

I must admit that I no longer relish the NYTimes' Week in Review (now titled Sunday Review). They have lost too much and gained too little. Frank Rich is uppermost in the loss column.

The Annotated Frank Rich - The President’s Failure to Demand a Reckoning From the Moneyed Interests Who Brought the Economy Down -- New York Magazine

more new art

Seems to be a productive spring...

 

new art

Here are two new oil paintings and a fun little pastel piece.

Enjoy.

 

A Revolted Liberal

For the first time in my life, I cast a vote for the winning presidential candidate in 2008. I will be 51 this April.

I am a liberal. I knew Obama was more moderate than many thought he was, but I also thought that he had a strong commitment to some shared liberal ideals such as universal healthcare, an intelligent foreign policy that favors soft-power over militarism and that the foundation of this—and every—country are the middle and working classes, not the wealthy elites.

I now believe I was wrong about all of this.

I wish I had not voted for him.

I believe he is possibly the worst thing that could have happened to liberal ideals. He will forever be wrongly associated with socialism and liberalism and correctly associated with legislative putsches that will doom liberal policies in the United States for the remainder of my lifetime.

His legacy will be one of egregious failure and the ultimate repudiation of liberal philosophies. Republicans will run against him and his policies for decades.

And they will win. A lot.

And all he had to do was to show some strength of commitment; stand up in front of the American people and stand his ground; and be prepared to accept a partial defeat. Instead he has embraced Pyrrhic victories as his legacy.

The long, cold, hard conservative winter is upon us. And it could be that Spring may not come again for a long, long time.

Update: I wrote this piece over a year ago and sat on it. I didn't want this to be true. Now, I am certain that it is.

Obama is the Democrats George Bush, he will discredit the party for the next several elections.

Unlike the Republicans, Democrats can't get their stories straight so I don't expect any quick recoveries similar to what the Republicans have experienced. The only hope is that the Republicans so completely overstep their mandates that America wrenches itself away from their grasp and into…what?

There is no hope offered by any contemporary party. We need to be rid of both parties and replace them with at least three parties that more accurately represent the interests of Americans.

I hope we have the courage to once again strike out towards new frontiers, to begin building America again, instead of tearing it apart as we have since Nixon.

If we are to continue to lead, we must stop repeating the same old stupidities of the past.

And neither current party has any clue how to do that.

The Most Important Question Facing Liberal Democracies

 

Recently, multiculturalism, and its alleged failure, have caused some minor blips in the media.

Reference:

Cameron Criticizes ‘Multiculturalism’ in Britain - NYTimes.com

BBC News - Global debate on Cameron's multiculturalism speech

Club Britain: Access denied - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

While this has not gotten much attention while the world is focused on the will he/won't he drama of Mubarak and Egypt (he did while I was writing this), I assert that this is the most important question facing liberal democracies. And a potentially fatal one at that.

Where we set the limits on the tolerance of intolerance is at the heart of a liberal democracy's raison d'être. This is inherent in the protection of the minority from the majority (read: civil rights) as well as the freedoms of speech, assembly, the press and many other aspects of life in a modern liberal democracy.

Hence, dealing with groups that reject the tenants of liberal democracy within a liberal democracy is crucial. Their intolerance is corrosive in a liberal democracy because it seeks to elevate a particular group's rights over others.

So the question boils down to: "What can a liberal democracy do to protect itself from intolerance while remaining consistent with its basic tenants?"

And I do not think that anyone knows the answer to that question right now.

Down In Front Comix #001

 

The Surrenderer in Chief...