…when the Wash. state Republicans tried to systematically disqualify voters in traditionally Demo-leaning districts? Turns out they might have been just borrowing a page from the Ohio Republicans’ playbook.

…“The Complete Failure of Bush’s Economic Policies;” while Paul Krugman notes that more education won’t necessarily mean more living wages.

My thoughts upon reading Francis Fukuyama’s NYT Mag essay on the end of neoconservatism: ‘Bout time, I say. Alas, the damage done by this unrepentant gang of imperialist plotters will take decades to heal, and some of the soldiers and overseas civilians injured and maimed and PTSD-damaged by this stupid, stupid war won’t ever be the same.

And sure enough, Fukuyama doesn’t have any specific answers for what should replace neocon ideology, besides something more realist, more multilateral, and less hubris-tainted.

Here’s my highly vague, formless attempt at an answer:

American industrial capital, the real source of power and money propping up our imperially-minded national political machine, is in its endgame, knows it, and is running scared, in aggressive-defense mode.

It wasn’t sex and hedonism that killed ancient Rome. It was the fact that the empire had finally reached further than its infrastructure could hold; while the pagan natives began to successfully fight back, the Roman establishment, which had been built upon the notion of eternal expansion, turned upon itself in corruption and intercene squabbles until the whole thing became progressively less manageable.

I’ve long held that politics is part of culture, not the other way around. Your typical Capitol Hill (Seattle, that is) leftist would interpret all of human affairs as the manipulating machinations of the owner class vs., not the valiant struggle of the workers (Seattle leftists are terrible square-bashers), but the cogent protests of We Who Know Better.

I see a more nonlinear (or at least more multilinear) world. A MISC world.

Our governmental situation is the result of multiple sources and influences. In the case of our current national governmental situation, our supposed “leaders,” for all their swagger and pomposity, are the sniveling whores to their backers.

Who are these backers? Follow the money and you’ll find a few old men with wealth from highly consolidated and/or “dinosaur” industries—oil, mining, drugs, entertainment/media, banking, discount retail, armaments, etc.

These guys don’t like the instability of competitive markets. They also don’t particularly like organized labor, environmentalism, consumer action, or any other impediment to their continued hold on the sources of their affluence.

Add some cold-war nostalgists, some grafters, and some religious authoritarians, and you have not a slick neo-Nazi spectacle but a gaggle of Bull Connors out to hold onto obsolete power through any means necessary.

As Wired magazine once said, power corrupts, obsolete poewr corrupts obsoletely.

Replacing a couple of this machine’s political stooges won’t change things enough.

More importantly, the very sociocultural presumptions of the Seattle left won’t change things; but then again they’re not meant to.

So what will?

A new way of thinking, or at least a different way of thinking.

For one thing, we don’t have to bash Christians anymore. Progressivism is more Christlike than the fear and bigotry propagated by the sleaze machine.

And we don’t even have to bash capitalism, either; at least we don’t have to confuse the current U.S. economic system with capitalism.

As some of my Libertarian friends (with whom I have other arguments that are outside the scope of this discussion) point out, the influence-peddling and palm-greasing that characterize today’s federal system aren’t the purist rule of business values but the mercantilist collusion of corporate and governmental power.

Real prosperity, for workers, managers, investors, and the rest of us, will return as our current economic and industrial infrastructure is replaced, piece by piece, with something saner.

This is big-big-big picture talk, at which I’m less comfortable than I am with very specific topics.

So bear with me.

But for now let me posit one thing: Politics, particularly oppositional politics, isn’t the answer. It isn’t even the problem. It’s a symptom.

…this year’s stars of stand-up-to-the-powers-that-be journalism, tells you what you’ve probably long expected about “how the White House is playing the media–“ i.e., by treating reporters like stooges.

Comment: What if the disintegration of the right-wing sleaze machine were finally begun, not by us lefties but by Congressional Republicans?

They’re politicians who, at least in theory, must answer to local voters more than to the Executive Branch, the neocon scheme-hatchers, the national lobbyists, or Bill O’Reilly.

It’s easy for me (perhaps less easy for you) to visualize a groundswell, starting small but steadily increasing in both numbers and passion. This groundswell would be of elected officials at every level of government backing out from the national GOP establishment’s unceasing march into corruption, graft, and brutal authoritarianism. I’m taking about politicians who might still, somewhere in the backs of their minds, hold a nostalgic longing for such former conservative ideals as “getting the government off our backs” and “strengthening the economy.” Politicians who get that what’s best for the oil and drug companies might not be what’s best for business as a whole.

I’m old enough to remember a time when sane Republicans roamed the earth, both locally (Dan Evans, Tom McCall) and nationally (Gerald Ford, Dwight Eisenhower). Could this species come back from the brink of extinction?

Longtime reader Richard B. Webb responds to yesterday’s entry, in which I asked for a proactive progressive political agenda:

Clark Humphrey wants to know what progressives should believe in, and what things that they should support, in lieu of just being “against things” that the ruling party is in favor of. This got me thinking of things I’d like to see instead of what I do see:

Environmental Responsibility: We don’t own the earth, we are merely stewards. True conservatives should conserve, don’t you think? So the rape and exploitation of the land and its resources shouldn’t be allowed only for the already rich short term thinkers. Until we can create an orca, a salmon, or a black footed ferret, then we shouldn’t be following policies that eliminate entire species.

Responsible Foreign Policy: No more support and subsidization of terror states. How many right wing despots have we supported through the years simply because of some bogeyman like “communism?” Castro may be a thoroughly despicable world leader, but we’ve supported others that have been worse. So no support for Israel as long as they are terrorizing their neighboring countries.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation: There’s been a treaty signed. If we don’t support it, then it’s meaningless. India and Pakistan have the bomb, in violation of this treaty. I believe that they’ve signed, but even if not, then we should still “encourage” them to renounce nukes. We can’t very well tell Iran and North Korea that they can’t have nukes as long as we pretend that Israel doesn’t. At present, there is too much incentive to develop nuclear weapons, if for nothing else than to deter the aggression of the United States. If we developed a more “sensitive” and enlightened foreign policy, then the deterrence of nuclear weapons would not be needed. Therefore:

Out of Iraq: We have no business there, and our presence only makes things worse. A truly international peace-keeping force to try to maintain some sort of order, but as long as it’s U.S. troops almost exclusively, then we’re perceived as a foreign occupier, and will be bogged down in their religious civil war.

Progressive Taxation: The idea that the wealthy enjoy many more perks of living in a wealthy country, and should therefore help pay for the privilege. Furthermore, there should be a line below which no individual should fall, a safety net from poverty if you will, to keep people from starving in the streets. As part of this, I ask for:

Universal Health Care: Basic medical needs taken out of the hands of employers and guaranteed for all. This would involve rationing, similar to what Oregon has done. Not everybody can get premium health care under this plan, as that would be very cost prohibitive. Broken bones set for free, but heart transplants cost extra. Free inoculations and better living education, instead of paying for the illnesses later.

Trade: Free and Fair. We shouldn’t be supporting military dictatorships simply because they can produce cheap clothing in sweatshops. We shouldn’t create trade zones that encourage jobs moving to foreign countries that do not have decent living wage structures. Encouraging companies to move manufacturing to places that have relaxed or non-existent environmental protections simply moves the pollution from “advanced” countries to places where there are no safeguards. Not acceptable.

A Return to a Government of Law: No more “free speech zones,” No more domestic spying. No more illegal detainees held in foreign prisons in our name. No torture. Ever. No revolving doors between Congress and Industry and Lobbyists. No back door political donations designed to buy influence. I want public financing of campaigns. No corporate lobbyists making the laws that regulate their industry. I want enforcement of existing environmental and financial laws, such as mine safety regulations and insider trading prohibitions.

Investment in Infrastructure: OK, not a mesmerizing topic, but important none the less. Bridges, roads, tunnels, and yes levees. A dollar spent today saves 10 tomorrow. How much will it cost to rebuild New Orleans? Versus how much did we save by leaving a half-assed job in the first place? Penny wise and pound foolish.

An End to Aggression as Official Foreign Policy: Mostly by U.S. forces, but in support of international peace keeping and humanitarian efforts instead. Now I don’t object to U.S. forces in Afghanistan, as I believe that to be a legitimate use of force. That government was harboring persons who had brought harm to our citizens. That kind of aggression must be fought. But again, there’s no rational excuse for the invasion of a sovereign state that presented no threat to the U.S.

I want my freedoms, as guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of this country, to be respected. That includes law made by precedent, such as a woman’s ability to control her reproductive rights. I seek an end to this country’s war on drug users. I want less money going to corporate welfare, and more money dedicated to helping people that can use it better. Things like student loans, and medical treatment.

I want balanced budgets, with smaller government, but I don’t want that smaller government to be made smaller by the elimination of programs that help the average citizen. One could make government smaller by eliminating things like the Environmental Protection Agency or the Department of Labor, but these parts of government exist to preserve our resources and health. Instead, I’d like to see a reduction of farm subsidies and a reduction in the defense department budget. I’d like to see the enforcement budget for the Internal Revenue Service increased, with a mandate to aggressively pursue the tax shelters and other tax withholding schemes of the wealthy instead of the poor and working classes.

And I want accountability in my government. If you’re taking bribes as a government official, you get to go to the same prison as a bank robber or rapist. If you’re incompetent at your job, then you should be fired, and never be able to entertain the idea of a job in government again. If you’re found to be responsible for violation of the laws of this nation, I want you out of the government. Period. Especially if you’re guilty of war crimes and violations of international law. Impeachment is demanded and expected in such cases.So this is what I believe in, and what I would support in elections with my vote and with my checkbook. This is how I believe things should be. The sad thing is that this list is TOO progressive, and downright scary to many Americans. (This is one reason that I’ve never considered running for public office. My ideas are too scary.)

The end result would be a better, more enlightened world, with more opportunity and prosperity for the entire planet, not just for Americans. And it truly is a world view, not just a “Me First” mentality. Consider that Americans make up a small percentage of the planet’s population, but use up a significant fraction of the resources. We can only afford this by the exploitation and enslavement of the rest of the planet and its citizens. This is untenable.

True progressives must take a global view, seeking the betterment of all, and not just the few.

Toward the end of last night’s Drinking Liberally meeting, I talked to two ’60s-generation defenders who said protesting could have results. I said protesting wasn’t enough, then eased into my next question: What are leftists today FOR? And I don’t just mean being in favor of being against things. What’s our agenda, beyond stopping the other guys’ agenda? They had no good answers.

With what would we replace the DC culture of corruption? Bush, as everyone who doesn’t watch Fox “News” knows, is merely the transparently incompetent figurehead atop a whole all-encompassing machine of bribery, influence-peddling, warmongering, and the crass exploitation of bigotry and fear. Impeaching Bush alone, or even Bush and Cheney as a team, would only bring new figureheads to deliver the sound bites.

The DLC “centrist” Democrats see no future for the Democratic Party as an organization without corporate money, so they willingly take a donor-chosen role of the all-too-loyal opposition.

The Northwest Democrats and the other progressives around the country? Protesting, marching, sporting angry T-shirts and bumper stickers, staging symbolic acts of dissent like the futile Alito filibuster.

And blogging. And talking at meetups.

At least the bloggers are constantly unearthing and disseminating new damning evidence of the Sleaze Machine’s nefarious actions, and occasionally get the bigtime media to acknowledge this evidence’s existence.

But there’s still damn little discussion on what we’d do instead, aside from not doing most of what the Republicans are doing.

So I ask all of you: Imagine progressive Dems (not just near-right Dems) stand a highly realistic chance of retaking Congress this fall and the White House two falls from now. (I happen to believe this is possible, especially if state-level progressives in certain “battleground states” push through some needed electoral reforms.)

Next, imagine you’re hard at work in some campaign strategy office, trying to make this dream come true. The opinion surveys keep coming back with one public demand: What’s your platform? The kind folk out there in swing-voter-land want to know what you’ll do. Not just what you won’t do, but what you will do.

Now tell us your answers.

…can be read at Think Progress and Washblog, among many others.

I’m at the lovely Montlake Ale House (formerly Jilly’s East), where the lower-case-m meetup known as Drinking Liberally has its weekly local gathering. Tonight’s topic A, of course: The State o’ The Union speech.

Several Drinking Liberally attendees with their own blogs are writing now, or have written in the past hour, about the speech via their own individual laptop ‘puters.

My own thoughts on it:

Bush’s content, natch, was the same-old same-old. Bush never admits mistakes, claims to have always been right and to be even right-er now. Stay the course. Keep doing what we’ve been doing, even more aggressively. More tax cuts. More domestic spying. More troops in Iraq. More unfunded interference in the local schools. More attempts to smash Social Security in the name of saving it. More paeans to the oil companies, the drug companies, the HMOs, and the employers of migrant laborers (though not necessarily to those laborers themselves).

It’s the tone that was different. That and the body language. For the first time since before the ’04 debates, Bush seemed like almost a real person. Nonverbally he was neither a noise-machine robot nor a deer in the proverbial headlights. Bush has again become a worthy opponent, someone I won’t feel guilty about as I do my part to send him into early retirement.

The Democratic response, given by Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine (who’ll never be mistaken for Charles Foster Kane) was, as many liberal bloggers predicted, a grave disappointment. Kaine came across as a less-polished Alan Colmes, an apologetic wuss who couldn’t even talk about the really big issues–the assaults on our freedoms by our own government at home and the disastrous Iraqi occupation.

I’m beginning to listen more strongly to those lefty bloggers who’ve accused the national Democrats of being co-conspirators in the Republican machine rule, deliberate paid-off dive takers.

At the National Review site, Michaek Novak suggests we root for the Steelers in the Super Bowl because their unnamed-by-Novak “opponents” “will be wearing the colors of — hard to comprehend this — Hamas!”

After a full year, the Sci-Fi Channel will finally debut the new Doctor Who in the US.

Oh, and Mrs. Alito crying in the gallery during hubby’s hearing? So freakin’ obviously pre-rehearsed…

…notes that Americans’ freedoms are being attacked from the inside, not the outside.

…big business and its wholly-owned politicians have so thoroughly and deliberately disassembled America’s social and economic infrastructure that we’re not a “superpower” anymore. That might actually be a positive thing. Let Time founder Henry Luce’s “American Century” pass into history, along with the “We’re Number One” chants, those expensive and bloody crusades on behalf of “democracy” (i.e., oil), the trashing of everything noble and hopeful about the human species in the name of shareholder value, and the glut of special-effects-leaden sequel movies in the world’s cinemas. Let’s go back to being one country among many.

…to find even one positive thing to say about GWB. This is that one thing: He likes strong women. Indeed, if you’re to believe the right-wing magazine Insight on the News, Bush, in his current Nixon-Last Days paranoia mode, only regularly talks to four people, all females.

Bush allegedly has a Rove-created database with updated info on “more than 10,000 ‘political enemies.'”