What did the Idiocracy Hear Obama Say?

  For better or worse, President Chocolate Milk-Toast is campaigning for "independents" and "moderates" already.  Progressives voted for Democrats in November, so he is taking us for granted again. Where else are we gonna go, right?
  You and I, being accelerated readers, heard all kinds of strange things this week - deficit-inducing tax cuts, social security-weakening payroll tax holidays, and vomit-uplifting compromise. But what did the average Jane WineBox or Joe SixPack hear?
  I think they liked what they heard.  I got a FB comment yesterday that basically said "hey, they compromised, that's not a bad thing."
  And it's true.  If you have no imagination, this deal looks like the two sides working together for once.  And wasn't there something about lower taxes in there?  I like that!

  Most of America doesn't follow this stuff closely. Seriously, the shlub at home watching "Ow, My Balls!" is thinking: the economy sucks, and Obama is President, so it's his fault.  And he votes in 2012. He doesn't read Paul Krugman, he's never heard of Quantitative Easing, and he thinks Guantanamo was an Indian chief.

  But you know what else he thinks? He thinks that when the government gets more money, they turn around and give it to black people. That's the propaganda that has been successfully dropped on him like a bomb full of stupid.
  So what are we to do? Join the Idiocracy and just ignore politics? Go on a spiritual quest to find Aqua-Buddah?
  No.  We have to have a presence, we have to have a voice, and we have to get organized.  Our role is to shape public opinion by being vocally, visibly and violently liberal.
  Here's how it works: the extremists enable the reasonable people to shift ideology.  The crazy doctor-killing anti-abortionists on the right enable Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee. Randall Terry lets them look moderate by comparison. And they're not: they are christian nationalists that don't deserve to govern.
  The retarded baptists who protest at military funerals because America tolerates gays enable homophobia like John McCain's to appear reasonable. Timothy McVeigh blowing up a federal building and killing 168 innocent people lets Rand Paul make stupid arguments about smaller government seem tame by comparison.
  We don't have enough crazy shit like that on our side. It's been suppressed.

  I'm not condoning terrorism, but back in the 60s when kids were burning cars, ladies were burning bras, and brothers were rioting, public opinion was allowed to shift left, and we got a Civil Rights Act, Title IX, and the President ended the Vietnam War and instead declared a War on Poverty.
  If we had communists, if we had Black Radicals, if we had an active, vocal extreme left, it would give Obama permission to triangulate and say, "Hey, I'm not talking about nationalizing all industries, here, I'm just saying we need to pass the Employee Fair Choice Act." or: "Hey, I'm not saying we have to guarantee full employment, I'm just asking for a few public works programs" or: "Hey, I'm not saying disband the CIA, I just want them to stop rendition."
  We need angry cursing young media like Citizen Radio and the Young Turks; we need radical environmental groups like Green Peace, animal rights crazies like PETA, peace activists like Code Pink, and LGBT groups demanding action on AIDS. Those of us with money need to support them instead of NPR.
  What happened this week was that Obama took steps to improve his approval rating by catering to a small minority who wanted tax cuts for the rich because only a slim majority were somewhat opposed to them.  As Larry Bartels deftly proved in Model Politics a month and a half ago:

  Among political independents, a whopping 76% of those who want continued tax cuts for the rich say they strongly disapprove of the president’s performance; only 27% of those who support his proposal for selective extension of the tax cuts are equally disenchanted. . . . For expedient politicians, an energized minority trumps a tepid majority every time.

  My job, and yours, is to be the energized minority on the other side.  To be the crazy-ass liberals who allow him to compromise to the left rather than the right.  Then the Democrats will have to react.
  C'mon. It'll be fun.

UPDATE:  From this morning's NYTimes: "Path to re-election? Straight Back to the Center" . . ."When you make it clear that you see yourself as the President who has to govern responsibly, not carrying out an ideological agenda, I think that's what independents are looking for." that was a former congressman from OK.  Ed Rendell is also quoted: "[Obama] only needs to change the minds of about 10 to 15 percent of the electorate, that's all, and he needs to do that by making government work." In other words it was a purely political move to capture independent votes.