tweets loading...

If you’ve picked up a New York Times or Washington Post lately, you may have noted the disturbing consequences of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision that occurred a few months ago. As anticipated, corporate spending on the 2010 political campaigns is way the fuck up. What is disturbing about the numbers is not only how far up they are, but how lopsided they are in favor of the Republican Party (corporations are spending a 7 to 1 ratio on GOP campaigns over Democratic ones). What is also a difficult to consequence to swallow is how perplexing it has proven to track down the original source of this special interest money. Indeed, individual states posses the capability to introduce their own disclosure rights for such campaign donations in order to make this process more transparent. But, let’s be honest, the decision that was made at the Supreme Court level was overreaching, it was irresponsible, and it was seemingly partisan in nature. Now, I’m not going to go defending the Democrats in this blog posting because I think everything smells like shit in this country lately—from the horseshit bank regulation bill championed by Christopher-lame-duck-Dodd and our own Barney Frank who sold us all down the river for a watered-down compromise to the hypocrisy of these spending hawks who favor brining down the deficit, but are completely in support of the unpaid tax cuts for the rich. But, in my world, what is the most stench-worthy fart on America (or perhaps I should say biggest buildup of odorless gas) is the lack of a cohesive response from the left to counter against these political atrocities. It’s gotten so bad, in fact, that editorials are now deeming the existence of a new brand of “moderate radicals” (referring here to the Tea Party movement’s spawns of deficit hawks). The Tea Party movement along with the James O’Keefe’s of America may have momentarily hijacked the political tactics of the New Left movement of the 1960’s. But the simple fact of it is they have no idea how to properly execute such tactics. And that is plain and simply because even the Tea Party movement, made up of its conservative and moderate activists is deeply connected to corporate America both directly and in the spirit of their cause. The fact remains that there will be no legitimate revolution in the United States America until it is brought forth by the common citizens who band together in a unified revolt the same way that the New Left did during the true movements of the 1960’s. Until that happens, until you similar folks are ready to stand up and fight again, we can plan on having our politics and our elections hijacked by this band of middle-of-the-road “radicals” who stand for nothing more than the a continued state of the status quo (as long as it means their taxes won’t be raised). Now, does that sound like a revolution to you?

Of course it doesn’t. It’s a paper revolution.

So, if you want a real fight, stay tuned in to your pal Freemont. Because he actually has an idea of what are the true characteristics of a radical.

(In full disclosure) this blog was provided to you by:

General Freemont Barrington of the First Battalion for restoring the natural order of the United States of America    

A lot has been said of this man, Alvin Greene, in the past week. Many people believe that his winning of the Democratic primary in South Carolina was a conspiracy propagated by the Republican Party. It certainly does seem like a master scheme that could have been dreamed up by James O’Keefe or Andrew Breithart. If that was indeed the case, I commend these forward-thinking conservative fuckwads for playing brilliant politics. For the past year, the right has continually stayed one step ahead of the left and, in my opinion, are winning the political debate. They are winning because the left missed their opportunity to frame the nature of the discussion. They were caught sleeping while the conservatives were in disarray. And, now, Alvin Greene’s blank face hangs there, dumbfounded, as a good symbol of the left’s present identity.