Dana Blankenhorn

Rage, Rage Against the Dying of the Light

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

What is true for mortal man is also true for ideas, for concepts, for myths and values, for political theses.

That's what we're dealing with in events like the supposed "bitter" contretemps and Barack Obama.

Forget for a moment whether Barack Obama is a black man or white. He is, first of all, a Hawaiian.

Hawaiians surf. They stand on a board above the waves and they ride the water the way Texans ride horses. Obama surfs history the way painters like Picasso surf artistic trends or the way a Tom Brady surfs through defenses seeking a receiver.

As do we all, once we realize it. But journalists are stuck in the eternal now, and have no concept of this idea of surfing.

Thus they see scandal where there is, in fact, the death rattle of their own assumptions of political myth, value, and power, and the alchemy in which both are created.

What Barack Obama said last week in Pennsylvania was the simple truth. It should surprise no one that people turn bitter when their jobs disappear, when politicians in both parties use that to gain power and then do nothing about it.

The Clintons promised to help, but instead took that power and endorsed free trade agreements which guaranteed the jobs would never come back. The Bushes blamed the blacks, the browns, all the "others," then continued the march away from production, towards consumption.

There is no lie there. There is no scandal.

Tribes of the GOP

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 15 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

Back in 1968 it was easy to identify the Democratic tribes splitting off from the party by the way they dressed and the way they looked.

White, black, brown, male, female, young, old -- each tribe had its own look and its own outlook.

It's tougher now. About the only black Republicans are on TV. Republicans are generally Euro-Americans, aged 30 and higher. They blend in. It's only when they start talking that you detect the tribal differences.

Anthropologists had two ways to discern the tribal identity of Nixon-era Republicans, by where they sat and by what they obsessed over. 

Where they were definitions include:

• Wall Street Republicans -- Urban only if they had an apartment in New York itself (maybe Philly), otherwise strictly suburban or exurban. Their first concern is money, getting it, keeping it, getting more of it, keeping other people from getting any.
• Church Street Republicans -- Usually found in megachurches or in front of their TV sets. Densest populations in the South and Southwest, but found in every state. Their first concern is morality, usually others, and using the power of the state to force that morality into a mold their preacher approves of.
• Easy Street Republicans -- Mostly found in Florida, Arizona, and California, these are Wall Street Republicans who made their pile. Often found in motor homes, on golf courses, or on condo balconies.
• Talk Show Republicans -- Often found in pick-up trucks on on job sites. They like them some Rush Limbaugh. Used to call themselves Reagan Democrats. Archie Bunker's real kids. The kind of people other Republicans like to rob.
• Professional Republicans -- Mostly found in Washington and its suburbs, or on TV.  Professional greasemen (and women),  sucking either at the government teat or those of other Republicans, mainly the Wall Street variety. Rush Limbaugh himself.
  

Wolf Blitzer Will You Please Go Now?

Let me say at the top I found protests over the Beijing Olympic torch in San Francisco to be silly.

The United States has no credibility in accusing anyone else of human rights abuses, or of ignoring democracy. After the last 8 years of suppression and war, our ability to tell the world what to do about itself is exhausted. It's a sick joke. And it will remain that way long after we change our ways -- assuming we ever do.

I had just finished work yesterday and was flipping around the TV when the protests arrived in Wolf Blitzer's Situation Room.

It was a disgusting display. Not the protests. Not the reaction by authorities. Not the irony of China glorying in an event first staged by Nazis. Not even the Chinese goons who have been part of the parade of continents. 

All that was to be expected.

What was unexpected was Blitzer's narration, which was so over-the-top in attacking the protesters and worrying about the feelings of the poor Chinese government that I was, once more, ashamed to be an American.

Housing Bailout, Dollar Bubble

Here's how it's all going down. (Picture from Rev2.org.)

The Federal Reserve prints enough money so that banks can write-off the Big Shitpile and acquire the liquidity they need to make new mortgage loans.

That's what is in fact happening. The Fed has opened its lending facilities to investment banks as well as commercial banks, and is taking whatever junk these guys have for collateral. That's a nice CDO based on Las Vegas sub-prime mortgages you have there, I'll loan you 100 cents on the dollar for it.

It's possible that J.P. Morgan is telling the truth, and the loans being passed to the Fed's hands in the Bear Stearns deal aren't the worst of the worst. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. The IMF estimates there's $1 trillion of dodgy paper about, most of it American (although some is British, which is why the Pound is under $2 while the Euro climbs to near $1.60.)

The consumer aim in all this? To keep nominal home values at a level such that millions more home loans won't go underwater. That is, say your $300,000 home should really be worth $150,000 in a real market, as it should. The Fed pumps enough new dollars into the system that it's still worth near $300,000, and you feel pretty good. Trouble is the $300,000 is really worth what $150,000 was worth before the bailout started. The market has done its job but you don't notice until you do the math.

Ending the Zero Sum Game

Perhaps the grossest myth of the last American generation is the Zero Sum Myth.

This myth was very much on display yesterday during the Iraq testimony. This is why it seemed at times that Gen. David Petraeus and the Democrats questioning him were speaking different languages, living on different planets.

To Petraeus, as to John McCain and the great majority of Republicans, there can only be two outcomes in Iraq. You win, you lose. The idea of some different, muddier, more real outcome is entirely foreign to them. Listen to any of them closely, listen to them tolerantly, and this comes through. You don't have to argue with it. It's simply their reality.

The point was brought home by Barack Obama's questioning (above). Is there an outcome other than a fully democratic (well Republican) Iraq, under American control, with no Al Qaeda and no influence from Iran, which you might define as victory, he asked? Petraeus reacted as though Obama were speaking his father's native Luo language. It was, to him, inconceivable.

This is in the nature of the Nixon Thesis of Conflict. It's at the heart of it, really. Life is a zero sum game. You either win or you lose. Peaceful coexistence is impossible. There can be no meeting of the minds, no agreeing to disagree. 

A Father's Worst Fear

Once you have a child your own death is no longer the worst fear you can imagine.

Every parent knows this. Risk and loss are the price we pay for love. The price is highest when it comes to our kids.

Yet people pay it every day. Babies die, and older children get cancer. Teenagers lose their lives in car accidents, black teenagers more often in a hail of bullets. Athletes get sudden heart attacks. Then we give these most precious gifts to the nation, and risk their loss in war.

We can't protect them, although we try. We fret over them instead, natter at them, worry aloud until they send us an exasperated "Mu-therrrrr" or "Daaaaad" to shut us down, because they have that first fear, their own deaths an unimaginable horror.

Not Die in Vain

A New York Times article involving my friend Russell Shaw came out today, and it was just about as bad as expected.

I don't blame the writer, Matt Richtel, with whom I shared a very pleasant conversation. Neither does my editor, Larry Dignan. We both understand that editors tend to cut away anything which doesn't flow directly from a story's main point.

The story, as written, is designed as an indictment against web reporting and blogging, but ironically it stands as its opposite. By ignoring the other side in the interests of space, the Times' editors demonstrated precisely what's wrong with the paper medium, and the broadcast medium. A lack of space.

The fact is, as I told Matt, Russell Shaw did not die in vain. He did not die from overwork. He died in love. Ellen Green was his fiance, but in many ways she was his mistress. Journalism was his wife, and he was always true to journalism. He died in journalism's arms, like a soldier falling in battle or a politician in his mistress' bed. He died much as David Halberstam did. To a journalist, the difference between a car wreck on the way to an interview and a heart attack while waiting for one is the same tragedy -- you missed the interview.

The point is not that Russell overworked himself blogging. He overworked himself doing what he loved to do. He was a freelance, like me. He best moments were, as Rabbi Stone noted in his eulogy, when he could put a -30- on the end of a story.  That feeling of accomplishment, the knowledge you've done your best and sent something worthwhile to readers is like a hit of cocaine to a journalist. It's what we live for. It's why we usually don't write novels until we retire.

A Nation of Makers

At the heart of the economic component in our current crisis is this salient fact.

We are no longer a nation of makers. (A version of this iconic Norman Rockwell image is painted on the side of my car mechanic's workshop in Atlanta.)

In this last generation we have transformed ourselves from a nation of makers into a nation of takers. Most jobs don't really involve the making of anything. They involve either the recycling of money or the spending of it.

I'm proud to say that my lovely bride isn't part of this. One point of pride in her computer programming job has always been that the transaction processing programs she writes make money each time they run. (Another curiosity -- she's been at one employer for a quarter century.)

My son, on the other hand, wants to be a taker. A lawyer. Usually a prosecutor. Sometimes a trade negotiator. My problem with the law is that it doesn't make anything. It refines rules which take from one and give to the other. The plaintiff gets the defendant's money, or the state takes the defendant's liberty. Essential to security, but it doesn't add to GDP.

While the U.S. is still the world's manufacturing leader (believe it or not) our share of the world's value added through manufacturing has been declining throughout this decade. Changing this last fact is the key to a lasting economic turnaround.