Morning Coffee (134)

Soon, oh so soon, the madness will be over. Come 05 November 2008, the United States will have a new President. I won't have to hear, "I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message," 7.5 million times a day as the Obama campaign rushes to break the all-time record for ad spending. Soon, the madness will just be beginning.

There seems to be almost no possible way that Obama will lose this election. He has the momentum. Just yesterday, a highly respected public figure endorsed him: Colin Powell. Obama's momentum is as impressive as it should be terrifying. It's terrifying not solely because of his politics, but because the American people have become so enamored with him. So much so that it's likely that the Obama Effect will result in a Liberal Supermajority.

And therein lies my problem. Tyranny is not limited to rule by one man. I would argue that the worst kind of tyranny is one of majority, especially a majority that has felt so slighted for so long. The sort of anger a singular tyrant wields is usually fleeting. Sometimes it it systematic indeed, but not usually as systematic as was the French Reign of Terror. I'm not saying that Democrats will summarily execute troves of Republicans. But surely, there will be reprisals. Republican dissent will prove very difficult.

And while Republican speech will be suppressed in the Houses of Congress, Democrats, in the name of fairness, will try to limit right-wing speech over the airwaves, an area that Republicans have long dominated. Many Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry, wish to implement a new "Fairness Doctrine" which would require radio stations to give equal billing to both conservative and liberal talk radio. How could this be a bad thing? It sounds pretty good, actually. In principle, many things sound good. But when the original Fairness Doctrine was in effect, both Republicans and Democrats used it to attack critics who were on the radio and television. And the Democrats' wish for a new fairness doctrine may be more sinister than simply being able to attack one's critics in a realm dominated by the opposition. As the article I've linked to points out, a new doctrine might eliminate a great deal of political talk radio altogether. Since stations are in the business of making money (imagine that), they might curtail conservative radio, since legally they have to provide the same amount of time to liberals. Liberal radio generally doesn't do very well (Air America), and these blocks would be money wasters for radio stations. Thus you get more sports radio. Or entertainment radio. Or bad music radio. In essence, more of the same. But also, the article points out that it would be difficult to pass legislation relegating Rush Limbaugh (who I do not really like) into silence. He and his fellow personalities would surely fight. A way around this is simply make legislation that requires radio stations to broadcast more local programming, whether it's wanted or not. This is positively great for local musicians, but bad for nationally syndicated talk radio.

Another sign: yesterday two men stopped by my house asking me about the election and if I planned to vote, etc. They were Democrats canvassing for votes. Good on them. But I've never seen a Republican canvassing for votes in my neighborhood. And I live in a battleground state. (Frankly, a Republican canvasser would probably nauseate me more than a Democrat simply because they're usually more, "true believer-ish." These two were definitely true believers in Obama, but not to the point of being blatant.) I did enjoy dominating the conversation with them though. They were utterly perplexed that I seemed to not like either of my choices for president. When I suggested that I might not vote for either, their retort was, "Well, one of them's going to win." Yes. Yes, one of them will win. Is that a good thing? Does that mean we should be satisfied with the afterbirth our political system has spewed forth? Anyway, I digress...

I have, for several years now, been hoping for a Liberal victory, and a Liberal majority. Not because I am a Liberal. No, I'm a political "Neither." But I want these bright-eyed liberals, as ideology obsessed as Conservatives, to see that their great leaders are as selfish and as inept as the ones on the other side of the spectrum. I'm sure it won't change anything in their minds. I also want to see their anger unleashed. So I can laugh at them for their hypocrisy. Will this be bad for our country? It might, yes. Especially when the opposition might have no ability to say anything, either in Congress or in public.

Speaking of free speech, what's with the railroading of this Joe the Plumber guy? He asks a legitimate question and his whole life is ripped apart. How does owing a fairly meager amount in back taxes and having outstanding traffic fines nullify an otherwise great question? He did not ask Barack Obama to stop by his neighborhood. Joe has not made a fool of himself, as would many of his peers. His responses have been reasonable. He implores people to go out and get answers themselves. I say kudos to Joe Wurzelbacher.

In other news, congratulations to the Tampa Bay Rays for finally putting a fork in the Boston Red Sox. I rooted for the Red Sox in 2004, but they and their fans seems to have acquired the same sense of entitlement as Yankees' fans. They've had two championships in the last four years. The Rays have never even had a winning season until this year, and that makes a better story than another Red Sox championship.

Word of the Day: Malfeasance (noun): Wrongdoing, misconduct, or misbehavior, especially by a public official.

On This Day in History: The Patent of Toleration, which provided limited freedom of worship, was approved by the Hapsburg Monarchy (1781). The House Un-American Activities Committee begins its investigations into Communist infiltration of Hollywood, resulting in a blacklist preventing some from working in the industry for years (1947). The Return of the King was published (1955). Nixon fires Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus after they refuse to fire Watergate prosecutor Archibald Fox (1973). An airplane carrying Lynyrd Skynyrd crashes, killing several members of the band (1977).

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." - George Washington