Attacking the Belly of the Beast?

Late last night (though most people would call 8:30 early) my phone vibrated and I got an emailed response to yesterday's posting "Not the Time For Kumbaya" (you can read it at the bottom). 

Not only am I more than gracious for the time the responder, Rich Cutrona, took to read the post, and the well thought out, articulate point of view he chose to take, I'm equally grateful for the light-bulb that he seemed to turn on in my head, and hopefully yours. Rich concludes with the following: 

However, because we live in America, I still have the ability to make a choice. I choose to fight with and for those who would fight for me. I choose ethics, social justice, and environmental responsibility. I will do everything within my power to aid in the creation of a left of center, progressive political party free from the shackles of corporate plutocracy. I will choose and vote Green. Never again will I sit back and be complicit in the lethal status quo…………………………. never again.

I'm not going to rehash the eternal battle that takes place between my heart (Green) and my head (Democrat). I registered as a Democrat on November 4, 2004 - the day after George W Bush beat John Kerry - who basically wrote the antithesis of another Democratic Massachusetts Senator and Presidential Candidate and called it "Profiles in Cowardice". My line of thinking was if I'm going to vote for this party, I'm going to have a say in this party. 

I'd be extremely generous if I were to say the results were mixed at best.

Moving away from that debate though, what Rich said struck a nerve. Sure, most of us on the political left would love a thoughtful, respectful, intelligent, diverse and socially conscious answer to the Tea Party: a united national network and a platform to air our grievances as one voice. Many of us thought we had that in 2008 but those we empowered squandered their political capitol faster than a gutter drunk at a blackjack table.

Too fast too soon? Maybe. A true Green Grassroots effort has always seemed like it's been percolating near the surface of the political establishment but utterly incapable of breaking through into the mainstream. I'm starting to think that the ultimate failures are a result of misplaced ambition. Simply put: We're a bunch of Junior Varsity Quarterbacks attempting to make the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Be it Ned Lamont defeating - then losing to - Joe Lieberman in Connecticut, or the near upset of Blanche Lincoln in a useless attempt to retain the Arkansas Senate seat in a toxic environment (or even Ralph Nader's eternal quest for 3% of the presidential vote), we're bypassing the foundation: The House of Representatives.

Using the Tea Party as a top-of-the-head example: they carried the GOPricks to an overwhelming House Majority, yet in turn, thanks to batshit crazy lunatics like Christine O'Donnell and Sharon Angle, cost the Republicans what should have been a Senate Majority. (To say nothing of the scorn and unreliability they now face with Lisa Murkowski in Alaska).

I don't have the numbers in front of me, but a substantial number of Senators got their start in the House of Representatives. By design, a House seat is extremely easier to pick off from an incumbent than a Senate seat. The past few electoral cycles alone have seen double digit swings in seats for both parties. It's much more volatile.

Furthermore - and this is where Rich's words truly resonated - where better to launch the offensive than in conservative districts of blue states? I'll point directly to my home district: New Jersey's 5th. Represented by the uber right wing warrior Scott Garrett, who never misses the opportunity to provide verbal and financial fellatio to the banks, gun nuts, pro-lifers and the rest of the Republican establishment.  

Granted, the NJ-5 is tailor made for Republican control. The extreme wealth of Upper Bergen County meets the Hunters Guild and Bitter White Man brigade of Sussex County and throw in all of the Rapture-anticipating Warren County and it's pretty safe to say Barry Goldwater's urn could take this Seat with 60% of the vote. 

Except it can't. In his first four elections, Garrett teetered between 55% - 59% of the vote. Impressive indeed. He hit 65% of the vote in this past election, the overwhelming Republican wave. But look a little deeper. In midterm years, he recorded 118,881 (2002), 112,11242 (2006), and 119,478 this year, 2010. All while running against completely unqualified, rather conservative and absolutely unfunded Democratic competition. I voted against Garrett in the three elections that I lived in the district and still had to look up the names of the people I voted for.

Yet this collection of misfits and losers managed to crack 40% in all but 2002. It's a seat that the GOP takes for granted and with good reason: the Democrats have completely abandoned it. Would this not be the place to start? Would a seemingly comfortable congressman like Garrett be much more inclined to be caught off guard than a Republican in a 50/50 district that forces both he or she and the Democratic candidate to run to the middle to the point of being indistinguishable?  

It's extremely Pollyanna to believe somebody like Bernie Sanders could win in NJ's 5th. Until you compare the demographics of Vermont to those of Northwest NJ. 

I do NOT believe that this is a question of "How?" 

It's a matter of "Who?"

Imagine

Don't you ever wonder,
Maybe if things had been slightly different
You could be somebody else
Don't you wonder, maybe...
If you took a left turn instead of taking a right, You could be somebody different
-Dave Matthews Band

 Because I can be quite the downer, I just spent the better part of the last hour going through some emails I have filed away from nine years ago. Well, nine years and a day. There was nothing surprising in the folder. The messages basically cover all the necessary stages, from "What the hell is going on?" to "Are you OK?" to "Payback's gonna be a bitch?" to "Are they really canceling football this weekend?" 

What did strike me though, was some of the remarks at the time about The President. You all remember who was President on 9/11. The guy reading "My Pet Goat" with pee dribbling down his leg. Anyway, the people with whom I was exchanging mass-emails with that day, roughly 50-60 different folks on 3 or 4 different chains, they didn't vote for Bush. Didn't like him. Thought he stole it. Thought he was an idiot. Didn't trust him. Like me. And tens of millions others. 

However, on that day, when Bush was mentioned, it was along the lines of "Well, we have to stand behind President Bush now" or "Bush needs to be strong" or "Pray for the President". Generic platitudes. But positive nonetheless. 

Beyond that, I remember the conversations and the official statements. I remember the attitudes. Bush had a 92% approval rating that week (I wear my badge as a Proud Eight Percenter with honor - but not because I automatically distrusted him. No, he lost me with "Dead or Alive"). I remember how the Patriot Act passed the Senate by a 99-1 margin.

Then I started thinking about two separate, but very similar hypothetical situations. What if the Supreme Court had ruled to allow the votes to be counted, and Al Gore was President that day? Or, what if the attack happened in September 2009 instead, under Barack Obama. (Granted, that's a stretch because the events of 9/11 directly led to Obama's rise). But the point is - if the President during the attacks was a Democrat, would The Heartland, The Deep South, and The Republican Party stand so firmly behind the President in a time of such crisis? 

Sadly I believe -nay, I know - it wouldn't be the case. After 2 FAILED terrorist attacks last winter, Obama was accused of being soft on terrorism. Even though the towers fell on their watch, and even though they grossly and criminally mishandled the response to the attack, for some reason, these chicken-hawks think that they own the copyright on national security. They think they own it on the economy too, and they're track record is equally as disastrous there. So delusions of grandeur seem to be a necessary character trait for aspiring conservative leaders. 

Keep this in mind the next time some asshole like Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin talks about "Restoring" honor or dignity or patriotism - three qualities that they stand in direct opposition to. These people only care about their version of America. They stand behind the President only when it's the guy they voted for. They don't, have never, care about more than the bare minimum amount of Americans: however many it takes to get to 271 Electoral votes and/or House Districts.  

It's a well known, indisputable fact that Bush had a globe's worth of goodwill and unheard of levels of domestic support and he squandered it. But they don't care about that, because they don't care about you, or the globe, or the World Trade Center. Just their psychotic agenda, and nothing more. It's sad that 9 years later, on September 10th (or as it's known in the Giuliani household, "Christmas Eve") that this agenda, despite failing so obviously and in such a visible manner, is not only still breathing, but on the brink of a return. 

A mildly retarded man once said "fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again" 

Not the case.