What scares me most about our current political climate isn't Bush, or Cheney, or even Bob Novak. It's that so many people seem out of their bleeping minds.

 

Or if they are not crazy, I am. Take your pick.

 

This opinion piece is linked all over the Right Blogosphere today. The wingnuts love this stuff:

That seems to be the way John Kerry likes it. Americans should be free to call Bush a moron, a liar, a fraud, a deserter, an agent of the House of Saud, a mass murderer, a mass rapist (according to the speaker at a National Organization for Women rally last week) and the new Hitler (according to just about everyone). But how dare anyone be so impertinent as to insult John Kerry! . . .

Excuse me? Did we not just barely survive Four Days of Hate inside Madison Square Garden? Where I assume every word was vetted by Karl and Karen? And Kerry is held responsible for what somebody allegedly said at a NOW meeting? And do we want to talk about loyalty oaths?

The unfairness of this essay angers me, of course, but I also find it fascinating in a clinical sort of way. It's a shame we can't put wingnuttiness into a petrie dish and study it in a lab. 

But consider the Right Blogospher blogger Stephen Green of VodkaPundit. He is capable of intelligent writing -- I have seen it -- and he takes occasional stabs at introspection, which is extremely rare on the Right Blogosphere. His reaction to Mr. Bush's acceptance speech, although unfathomable, is also revealing --

There was no overriding theme to President Bush’s speech, except for the unspoken one: “This is who I am.” No, wait -- let me amend that. The unspoken theme was, “This is who we are.” As Americans.

Now, I am, as I've said before, approximately a tenth-generation American. My family has been in the Americas for roughly three centuries. I had ancestors on both sides of my family who fought in the Revolution. And I was born and raised in Missouri, which is in the center of the dadblamed Heartland. And I say that is NOT who I am. And that is NOT how a lot of Americans are. Just some Americans.

For all its faults, for all its overtly- and overly-religious tones, this small-l libertarian prefers George Bush’s America to John Kerry’s. I don’t care for NASCAR. I’m not much for country music, Sundays at church, blue-eyed soul, or faith-based initiatives.

But Bush made me feel welcome all the same. No, wait – let me amend that statement, too. Bush made me feel like his place is somewhere I’d like to spend some time and get to know the locals. You know -- down a few beers, chat up the natives and learn their quaint customs.

I don’t feel as welcome, as at home, in the America Kerry painted for us tonight.

I appreciate Mr. Green's honesty here, and I think he has touched on the key to our divisiveness. And part of me can relate.

I left the Ozark Mountains as a young adult, and at the time I had a pretty small comfort zone. People from cities, people who drank beer with meals (I never saw such a thing until I was 23 or so, but then I didn't know what a bagel was, either), Jews (met my first one in college), nonwhite people, people with funny accents, people who said pasta instead of noodles, and people with pierced ears (including women) were all outside my comfort zone way back then. So I understand how that feels.

Human beings react to social discomfort in different ways. Usually we become defensive. Some people are shy or feel awkward. Other people become nasty. We laugh at and ridicule and belittle things that make us uncomfortable, because if we tear them down, they won't be so big and scarey.

Of course, you can always do what I did, which is to realize the discomfort was my problem and adjust. But that takes effort.

Mr. Green continues:

I’ll repeat something I said earlier.

Forget the war. Forget policy. Forget everything but two men who want something from me. Kerry could never have joked about the way he walks – or made any other joke at his own expense. Bush can, and did. That's a guy comfortable in his own skin, and that's a guy I'd give something to, before the other guy. I'm pretty sure a lot of people recognize that, even if only instinctively. In other words, my gut tells me

to vote for Bush.

My brain does, too.

Ah, but I 'spect the brain is just following where the gut leads it. Green goes on to list some policy differences between Kerry and Bush, for example:

I’m not much for faith-based initiatives, but I know for certain that unless we reform Social Security, this nation is in deep trouble. Tonight, Bush touched the “third rail” of American politics. Kerry seems content to keep on, keepin’ on. Strange position for a challenger to take against an incumbent, no?

Which, of course, is a misrepresentation of the issue. Just about every non-wingnut American economist says that social security doesn't need reform as much as it needs to be fully funded, meaning it needs a big surplus now in order to handle the baby boom retirement that is fast closing upon us. With a prudent fiscal policy, which Kerry proposes, social security would be able to scoot along through most of the 21st century. But Bush's scheme to partially privatize social security, with no clue how current obligations will be paid after the "privatized" money is taken out, is just damn irresponsible. It puts social security at greater risk, and even without the risk the numbers just don't crunch.

I believe Mr. Green is intelligent enough to look at those numbers and understand the issue. The problem is that he lacks the courage to do so. There's something about some Americans, including John Kerry and Democrats in general, that makes Green uncomfortable. So rather than look honestly at Bush's policies he fudges them so he can cling to them, like an ideological security blanket.

The part about Bush being "comfortable in his skin" is, of course, utterly in the eye of the beholder. Even disregarding the famous Seven Minutes, which was a study in discomfort if there ever was one, his unscripted television appearances this year revealed a very uncomfortable man.  

Now, without knowing Mr. Green I have no idea exactly what lurks in his psyche that is causing his discomfort. In any event I  never knew that a good President was somebody you could comfortably have a beer with. George Washington was famously aloof, and he turned out OK.

I argued here that the reason righties are so belligerent is that, deep down, they are afraid. All that hostility is a defense reaction. The fact that most of the things they are afraid of are no danger to them doesn't make the fear less real.

Along those lines, I urge you to read this article in the current Nation, "Rust and Rage in the Heartland" by Dale Maharidge.

There are tens of millions of American workers living in a virtual depression, in a virtual Weimar. Their anger is real, as is their fear. Ignoring it is dangerous. The right has been addressing it in the form of appearing decisive with "preventive war," or by cranking up the xenophobia. When many of them go into the voting booth they will punch the card or pull the lever for a candidate who appears strong.

Yes, the Bushies are playing this fear like a violin; for details, see this weekend's Frank Rich column. The Right encourages the fear, feeds it, fans it, does whatever it takes to keep it going. Because that's the source of their power.

It's going to take great leadership -- think Abraham Lincoln or Franklin Roosevelt -- to get us out of this. I don't know if Kerry is up to it. But if Bush get four more years -- Think the country is crazy now? You ain't seen nothin' yet ...

"Suppose the 2004 election for president were being held today, and you had to choose between John Kerry and John Edwards, the Democrats, and George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the Republicans. For whom would you vote?" If undecided: "Even though you haven't made up your mind yet, do you lean more toward supporting Kerry or Bush?

There's an excellent diary post at Daily Kos explaining that why this is not a kosher way to take a poll.

And note that a Zogby poll taken at exactly the same time (scroll down) shows Bush with a glorious 2-point lead, which is within the 3 point margin of error. ARG has Bush up by one point among likely voters. Rasmussen gives Bush a 4-point lead at the moment, but points out that "Very few of the interviews for today's report were completed after the President's speech last night. Most were completed before the speeches given on Wednesday by Senator Zell Miller and Vice President Dick Cheney."

Which brings us to another point: Gallup defines the "bounce" as "the difference in the candidate's vote percentage in the last nationwide poll conducted before the convention and the first nationwide poll conducted after his party's convention." We won't see the real "bounce" numbers until next week.

Another Daily Kos diary reveals CNN's Judy Woodruff going off message.

Throughout today's Inside Politics, Judy Woodruff and company trumpeted the just-released Time Magazine poll showing Bush with an 11-point lead over Kerry.  She asked Mary Beth Cahill about it, sternly asking "Are you upset about this development, obviously Bush has a big bounce out of their convention," and she probably mentioned the poll about 6 times within the hour.

Well, right before the sign-off, they cut back to Woodruff, who obviously thought she was off camera.  And she's talking to someone (unseen), and she says this:

"She said it was an outlier, there's another poll out today that shows them tied."

Update [2004-9-3 16:55:40 by dday]: Pyewacket gives a full transcription: "She said there may be problems with that poll, there's another poll out today that shows them even...[then, a little dismissively] I don't know what it is."

Gallup points out that, historically, candidates with a substantial lead on Labor Day tend to go on to win. Bounces may or may not be an indicator, however.

My web buddy Stirling Newberry, who is smarter than most other people I know bunched together, says that Bush has already peaked -- "even as he was giving his speech, the relentless grind of numbers - facts are, indeed, stubborn things - were eroding beneath him. Bush is, in a sense, goring himself - he should be far ahead, and not inching up by a whisper."

If you are into number crunching, you'll want to read this post by Chris Bowers at MyDD. And in another post, Chris Bowers writes,

Oh yeah, and before anyone starts going on about how this is over, on October 27th, 2000 the CNN / USA Today / Gallup tracking poll had it Bush 52-39 Gore. We all know how that popular vote turned out less than two weeks later.

Bottom line, the poll numbers floating around right now were gathered before Wednesday night's Zell-Dick Hatefest, which may have turned off swing voters. We've yet to see if there's any RNC convention bounce at all.

Democrat Party Chairman, Terry mcAuliffe, has stated he will redouble his efforts this year not only to win complete control of Congress, but to take revenge on President Bush and take total control of our national government.

McAuliffe knows he can count on the support of some unions and every liberal special interest to rise tens of millions of dollars to elect Democrats at all levels of government.

Liberal special interests and some unions will continue to hire hundreds of "professional activists" and put them in place in targeted congressional districts around the country.

Working together with the radical environmentalists and ultra liberal groups like People for the American Way and the Feminist Majority, these organizers are putting together a broad coalition of liberal grassroots activists to identify and get out their voters.

This is what worked for them in 1998 and 2000.

And it's what they failed to do in 2002 so they are redoubling their efforts this year.

... after weeks of signaling that he would use his acceptance speech to announce an agenda for the rest of his presidency, Bush offered only vague thematic outlines or modest programs on most issues.

He revived his 4-year-old proposal for partly privatizing Social Security by allowing younger wage earners to divert part of their payroll taxes into individual investment accounts, but offered no details on how such a costly and controversial idea might be implemented.

He pledged to lead a bipartisan effort to transform the federal tax code into "a simpler, fairer, pro-growth system," but again offered no particulars on what such a system might look like - only a plan to appoint an advisory panel to study the issue.

According to a fact sheet distributed by the White House, among the questions the panel will be asked to consider is whether to "modify the current system or replace the system with new one." It did not indicate whether Bush is prepared to endorse the proposal of some conservatives to completely scrap the federal income tax system in favor of a national sales tax or value- added tax.

Many of the specific programs Bush mentioned have been on his legislative wish-list for some time, such as making it easier for small businesses to band together to buy discounted health insurance, allowing individuals to establish tax-free "health savings accounts" and capping damages in liability lawsuits.

And the new initiatives he offered - increased funding for job training and community colleges, regulatory and tax relief for those who invest in poorer communities, expansions of community health centers in rural areas, more "early intervention" programs in high school - were relatively modest in scope.

Here's the punch line:

Nonetheless, Bush asserted that a common philosophical theme ran through all these ideas. The world, the global economy and American society are changing rapidly, he said, and the federal government "must take your side" to help Americans navigate those changes without killing individual initiative.

Our strategy is succeeding. Four years ago, Afghanistan was the home base of al-Qaida, Pakistan was a transit point for terrorist groups, Saudi Arabia was fertile ground for terrorist fundraising, Libya was secretly pursuing nuclear weapons, Iraq was a gathering threat, and al-Qaida was largely unchallenged as it planned attacks.

A roundup of not-RNC convention news you don't want to miss:

FDNY Officers, Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, Rochester, White Plains Among Over 100 Local Affiliates in the NYSPFFA to Endorse John Kerry

ALBANY, N.Y., Sept. 1 /PRNewswire/ -- Professional Fire Fighters from across the State of New York recently gathered in Binghamton for their Annual Convention.  By a huge plurality they endorsed John Kerry for President.

NEW YORK (CBS) It was the defining moment of his presidency, and for his first stop in the convention city, President Bush chose a New York audience that will evoke memories of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Bush was to meet Wednesday night with firefighters at the Italian Charities of America in Elmhurst, N.Y., about 10 miles from where terrorists crashed two airliners into the World Trade Center nearly three years ago. Campaign spokesman Scott Stanzel says conventioneers will be able to watch as Bush talks with the firefighters. Bush may also visit a local firehouse.

NEW YORK — Keith Hunter spent yesterday morning cleaning up a park in Harlem while his wife shopped on Fifth Avenue.

The Iowa delegate, along with dozens of others from North Carolina and Connecticut, painted weathered benches forest green at a playground in Morningside Park.

Yesterday was part of a GOP-wide service project called "Compassion Across America," where delegates helped to beautify various underserved communities throughout the city.

First off, if Morningside Park is where I think it is, it's in a lovely area of Manhattan called Morningside Heights that intersects the Upper West Side and what we might call Harlem Proper. The park is a stone's throw from Columbia University and the massive Cathedral of St. John the Divine. It's also in the same neighborhood as Riverside Church and my favorite place in Manhattan, Grant's Tomb.

Further, Morningside Park appears to have its own community organization of caretakers and cleaner-uppers.

In other words, the park isn't any more "underserved" than most of the rest of New York City, and probably better served than some parts. And NYC in general would be a lot less "underserved" if Bush would give the city the money he promised after September 11. 

But here are these out-of-towners sweeping into "Harlem" like 19th century white missionaries entering Darkest Africa to bring civilization to unwashed savages.

I like this part:

Hunter wasn't sure what to expect as he stepped off the shuttle bus in Harlem, but was pleasantly surprised at the diversity, he said.

Yeah, those underprivileged Columbia University students do come in all colors.

Granted, Manhattanites are not the neatest people in the world. In their proclivity for littering they are almost as bad as hillbillies. But maybe the people who use the park did not want their benches painted forest green. Maybe they like the weathered look.

I've written one of the Friends of Morningside Park to get his opinion of the Iowa Delegates. It may turn out I'm overreacting. 

Meanwhile, Iowa Delegate Leon Mosley, who endeared himself to New Yorkers by saying "I left God's country. They could use a bunch of people from Iowa to come here to show New Yorkers what life is all about, what being patriotic is all about, and what country is all about," is saying he didn't mean all New Yorkers.  He was only referring to some protesters.

Leon: Go back to Iowa. Now. Don't let the door hit your butt on the way out.

In three straight speeches, one by Cheney at Ellis Island and those by John McCain and Rudolph Giuliani on Monday night at the Republican convention, not once was the name of Osama bin Laden mentioned. ...

Giuliani's bothered the most. He left out bin Laden because Bush can't get the words out of his mouth. Why shouldn't his boss ignore bin Laden? He is the killer who got away and he stands for the war that kills Americans every day.

Instead Giuliani played everybody for rank suckers and converted the old "Win one for the Gipper" to "Thank God Bush is the president." Giuliani doesn't have even a little bit of shame.

Language is a wonderful thing. It can be used to express thoughts, to conceal thoughts, but more often, to replace thinking. (Kelly Fordyce)