But it’s all professional wrestling. When the fight is done, the media maestros walk arm in arm from the tavern, singing self-congratulatory songs about their big-spirited bipartisanship.

Too often, “bipartisanship” is just another word for Sophie’s Choice. One side says save two children. The other side says let both die. The bipartisan solution is to save one at the sacrifice of the other. Politics, after all, is the art of compromise, even if the compromise is morally bankrupt.

Brilliant.
And far, far too true.
Thank you for such insightful analysis.

Fitzgerald started out admiring and envying the rich, then — when he had the chance to see them up close — being appalled by them.

He’s a shill and she’s a shrew.

Beautiful post, as always.

Too often, “bipartisanship” is just another word for Sophie’s Choice. One side says save two children. The other side says let both die. The bipartisan solution is to save one at the sacrifice of the other. Politics, after all, is the art of compromise, even if the compromise is morally bankrupt.

This isn’t quite right. How about this: There are two children in danger, one side says kill them and 10 more. The other side says – we need to come to an agreement, let’s not save any. They compromise halfway – no one is saved, and 5 more children are killed.

Republicans never give up anything in the name of bipartisanship – which is a club they and conservavdems used against the rest of us. Conservatives of all stripes have learned how to take advantage of the rule of the game, but that’s not the same as believing in the rules (which is irrelevant.)

If we could reduce the cash profit in politic campaigns with, for instance, public finance and free TV time, we might be surprised at the wisdom and respectfulness of a broadly informed public. I doubt there’s much hope for such reforms.

You are right, but I have three thoughts. One is – we can make progress on clean elections at the state level. That is nothing to sneeze at.

The second is that we might be able to improve things at the national level – free air time might be seen as less threatening to the system, but would have a great impact (there are serious diminishing returns to campaign media – and ensuring that a challenger or rogue incumbent can get name recognition and their message out there would largely eliminate the advantages of those with big money, in my opinion.)

Third, a grass roots, face-to-face, volunteer driven campaign (like Cynthia described @2) still works, and if done right, can overcome a big money, media driven campaign. We could make that happen where ever the conditions are ripe – without relying on reform making it through our corrupt system. (In LA, this approach has been driven by a rejuvenated labor movement, to offer one example.)

So don’t just dream – organize!

Cynicism is what the Carville ilk are peddling, a poison that will kill us if we take it as truth. Even the Dem consultants I know are cynical and world weary. Winning is everything anymore, but what comes next? Is cynacism depression wearing a mask? That’s what it feels like to me.

I love reading your posts, Glenn, because you have that deep down river of love, peace and understanding coursing through your veins, which trumps petty, daily bullshit.

Namaste.