Buck up, People. What's there to be angry about?

Voters are anti-incumbent and angry, new poll finds

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Most Americans are angry about "something" when it comes to how the country is run, and they are more likely than in previous years to vote for a challenger this November, a new poll suggests.

A majority of Americans surveyed -- and a higher percentage than recorded during the same time last year -- said things in the United States are going "badly." Among this year's respondents, 29 percent said "pretty badly" and 25 percent -- up from 15 percent a month ago -- answered "very badly." By comparison, 37 percent described the way things are going as "fairly well," and 9 percent answered "very well."

Of these people, 76 percent said there was "something" to be angry about in the country today. By comparison, 59 percent felt that way when polled in February.

oooh, I'm feeling woozy, falling backwards, wavy lines....

1-23-2004

Anger and Fear, Fear and Anger. What's the difference?

The conventional wisdom is busily peddling the idea that Howard Dean is an angry man, and, that "anger' won't sell to an American electorate. Thanks to his little outburst in Iowa--and to people like Chris Matthews, gleefully playing that Iowa videoclip over and over with a grin reserved for a new toy--Dean may prove them right, for the wrong reasons.

Yet, strangely, there's little mention of the effects of the "paralytic fear" being fuel-injected into the American psyche by the administration Dean and the other Democrats hope to unseat. The dueling narratives seem to be,"We must be fearful about our security." And "We must be angry about the shortsightedness of the current administration."

If you, along with me, take those as given, my question would be: if fear is the currency by which America is being led today, how is anger at that leader and that tactic misplaced?

Certainly, Business, Media and Establishment influentials find themselves in the odd position of having to back a quirky incumbent horse because of national esprit d'corps--he's less than satisfactory or sensible, but he's all we've got right now. In an earlier post, I quoted Nathaniel Hawthorne: "No man . . . can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude without finally being bewildered as to which may be the true." This has been the quiet quandary the powerful have endured for the past 18 months or so--since the concerted push on Iraq got official administration sanction. The facts have always been the facts: experience and common sense told many in the know that reality was not sync-ing up with desired outcomes vis a vis motives, WMDs, intelligence, spin and political maneuvering. But for the "wise ones," there's an obstacle. Changing course would have many unfavorable ramifications. Number one of those would be: What were we thinking? Number two would be: We'd look silly.

Such is the case in boardrooms and chambers of power everyday in America. Dumb decisions made by smart people afraid to admit that shit happens and they're not the Amazing Kreskin or Peter Drucker. The dry holes of leadership whim become rat holes: self-perpetuating drains on energy, attention and money because we can't admit fallibility. So what do they do? They lie. First to themselves, then to us. The "anger" spin, conveniently bulleted, but left unexplored, is just such a defensive diversion.

Under the standard calculus--using say, The City on a Hill, smiling Reagan model--the anger doesn't sell wisdom may hold true. But something I haven't seen noted by mainstream thinkers and bloviators--surprise, surprise--is that this electorate is different than past ones. And that this president is no Reagan when it comes to the reassuring delivery department.

In this, I would suggest that Bush is much less like Reagan, and more like Carter in the effects of his demeanor and stewardship of the nation...

The rest of it? Brothers and sisters, I invite you to spelunk the guts--yeech, sorry--of Howard and George. Follow your half-baked Nostra-velli here to see if he really was two years and a half ahead of his time. For what it's worth, the Lexan® Sphere of Truth has predicted compelling trajectories before...

10-29-04

THE BUNKERS OF AL QAQAA ...

[snipped are acts 1, 2, 3 of a tragic high explosives bungle - here's the epilogue with essential quatrain below]

...Just as 400,000 Iraqi soldiers disbanded and sent home toting their weapons was a bad idea, so too is flipping open a conventional weapons bazaar like Iraq. In for a dime, in for a dollar. This week, Bush asked for another 75 Billion, making Kerry's claims of a 200 Billion cost for Iraq an underestimate. Keep counting. This will be known as the one-trillion dollar hunch by the end of the decade. To paraphrase Colin Powell, we own it.

If I was George Bush, I wouldn't want a second term. It will destroy the viability of a Republican President, and possibly his party, for 20 years. Too bad. And ironic. In running away from his daddy's shadow, he severed contact with the one man who perhaps could have saved him from himself.

Don't mess with Lexan®