First, I am trying to figure out if I stay in the Democratic Party. If not, I will be a leftwing independent. But no more money for the Democrats, except an Alan Grayson here and there.
Second, I am now 50 years old. My husband (yes, I am gay) is 43. We are deep into our professions and I am at that point where I have to start thinking about the next phase of work and my professional life.
Both of us are tired of working our asses off to change things, giving dollars (large amounts for us) to people like Obama and then ending up with no hope for change.
I think everything, politically, is up for grabs. I have a hunch that Obama and his crew WANT the leftwing of the party to leave. Their idea is to then bring in what is left of the moderate Republicans.
Well, nice for them. That won't give us and the country what is needed. What is really sad as that the "left" in this country (and that includes my husband and me) would be just garden-variety liberals in any civilized country.
The White House is already demonizing us as "crazy" and "extremist" and "shouters." Why? Because want universal health care, common-sense regulation of the financial sector, strong labor unions, etc.
These are all mainstream values in most democracies. But not here. And not with Obama.
We are all so screwed.
Apphouse50
· 2 months ago
I realize it's probably naive to compare present day activism to that which was in evidence on the streets during the 60's, but what can I tell ya' -- I'm a graduate of sixties activism.
And from here it doesn't look to me as if today's progressive activism has approached anything even close to some critical mass that would end up like the 70's -- god forbid. I just don't see enough people willing to take up the challenge being sent out by today's activists, and we can debate the reasons but that's what I see.
Of course, I was molded by a time when people screamed loud and long and consistently for the change they were demanding, out on the streets. Today's activism seems hidden away in front of computers, and I wonder if it has the same kind of force. On the other hand, if it yields something better than what the 60's yielded, hey, more power to 'em.
But I often find myself wondering why people aren't more pissed off. And why they aren't getting L-O-U-D about it.
limpidglass
· 2 months ago
There's no draft for these wars. That's why you don't see students protesting in the streets.
The forces behind these wars learned the lessons of Vietnam well: don't have a draft, put the war on a credit card, and don't show the bodies on the evening news.
We use mercenaries instead, and our complicit media takes care to sanitize everything we see and hear about Iraq and Afghanistan. To us here, the war is almost unreal, unless you've got friends or family in the service.
As long as we are detached from the reality of the war, the force of protest is nullified.
kimbutgar
· 2 months ago
But the youth will be protesting when college becomes unobtainable to them and they will not be able to find good paying jobs because of that we will return to the culture of 3 generations of family living together. This might not be a bad things but it will cause a lot of anger.
limpidglass
· 2 months ago
the youth will be protesting when college becomes unobtainable to them and they will not be able to find good paying jobs because of that we will return to the culture of 3 generations of family living together.
I think you're right, that will happen, but it's about five years or so off.
cowboyneok
· 2 months ago
People are screaming loudly but the medium is different. We do it online now in cyberspace.
vkobaya
· 2 months ago
I'm also a graduate of the sixties. As I remember, the hippies of the sixties became the selfish, self-serving yuppies of the seventies because those kids never were sincere, it was all about getting out of the war. As I remember them, they were some of most hypocritical, self-indulgent, self-serving brats the world has ever seen. And, they still are.
Apphouse50
· 2 months ago
Well, I hear you, but also have to say that without the protests of the 60's, I doubt the war would have been ended when it was (even though it took a long time). And the civil rights victories of the 60's were directly a result of the protests by blacks and whites alike.
I think limpidglass's point about the draft is a good one; but I don't know what it will take to get people in this country up off their asses and into the streets and the polling places reliably to create change.
nicho
· 2 months ago
Activism only works if the government is responsive to the people it governs. The US government no longer is.
Back in the '60s, politicians were afraid of the voters, because they needed the votes to stay in office. Now, they are afraid only of the lobbyists. With enough lobbyist money, they can engineer the votes they need through massive (and often misleading) media campaigns. Without the money, they can't.
So, all the letter writing, phone calls, marching in the streets means nothing, because it can all be canceled out by one phone call from a lobbyist.
Al Gore covered this quite thoroughly in his book "Assault of Reason." There used to be a two-way conversation between representative and voter. Now, it's a one-way conversation, carried out from the politician to the voters through the media.
Way back, I remember members of Congress reacting if they got 10 or 20 letters on the same topic. Now, they can get 200,000 letters and feel free to ignore them in favor of what the lobbyists want them to do.
I started in activism in the early '60s and was heavily involved in civil rights, anti-Vietnam, gay rights, equal rights amendment, and AIDS issues. I thought things were going to get better, but the game has changed.
I don't think the activists are burnt out as much as that they've come to realize their actions don't really have an effect. You don't burn out if you think you have a chance to succeed. What I've come to is a "what the hell" attitude. I don't see anything having any effect any more.
The country has pretty much become a corporate dictatorship. Obama and the Congress are putting up a front of running an actual democratic government, but they are just pawns of the corporations, who are calling all the shots.
And, burning stuff down, as someone suggested, isn't going to work. They're ready for that. They have a playbook -- as Greg Palast has said. They are carrying out the plays one by one: drive down wages, privatize the infrastructure, remove taxes from the rich, weaken education, etc. The last page in their book is how to deal with the civil unrest that follows. This is why Blackwater is allowed to thrive as a private corporate army and why posse comitatus was revoked.
The thing that has been the real disappointment is that so many of the people who have suffered and will suffer from this have been hoodwinked into cheering on the corporatocracy that is trying to destroy their way of life. Even sadder is that most of my family is among those cheerleaders.
guest
· 2 months ago
I think alot of people, millions of people, have poured money into alot of organizations, antiwar, environmental, civil rights and on and on, especially after 9/11 happened. And looking at what the world is like now in 2009, it seems to me things have only gotten a hell of alot worse, which is what I was originally talking about. Burn out, the feeling of disillusionment and all that, I think in many ways is a natural feeling when you look at the world today. Look at the climate change issue, its pretty easy to look at some data and news like bears arent hibernating and all that and conclude we really are doomed, or look at the wars, and say, I have been protesting these things since day 1, and Bush didnt listen, and obama isnt listening. The war in Afghanistan is being escalated.
I think in many ways being burnt out and disillusioned is a natural feeling you have to seeing a world thats completely out of control, like it is now.
Feeling complete powerlessness, and anger, and rage at those who start wars, or ruin the environment, thats how I feel.
But what can be done? I opposed this war from day 1, have given money, have written editorials in my paper, supported artists and authors and people working for peace, watched all the movies and documentaries, read all the books, listened to all the music on the war, gone to see speakers and lecturers, participated in protest marches and volunteer at my local peace and justice organization.
But the wars rage on...
RitornaVincitor
· 2 months ago
I think a lot will depend on how the Obama years turn out. They started off with so much promise and enthusiasm, and many young people felt engaged and empowered. The typical disillusionment that is always predicted has turned out to be worse than expected. If Obama can turn it around, we may see a rebirth of activism. If not, we may be witnessing the birth of a new drop out generation.
davidasposted
· 2 months ago
This generation may drop out from electoral politics perhaps, but not necessarily from affecting changes in our lives by other means. We may simply have learned that electoral politics is not the way to go to see the changes we want to see.
Indigo
· 2 months ago
Activists? But daddy might take the T-bird away!
tyree
· 2 months ago
the future of america if it even survives is more of the same , more criminals working the system thru politics, more poverty less middle class, decay of americas infrastructure, more college grads who cant find thier anus with a rear view mirrior, and who will become pizza delivery drivers waiting for thoes shovel ready jobs, or looking to be ticket takers on thoes imaginary high speed trains, and thoes who still believe in green jobs , solar pannels and windmills will still be standing in lines for thoes jobs and meanwhile china will corner the market with cheap labor products like solar pannels and electric cars and windmills , all in all the futures crap!
Gridlock
· 2 months ago
I would say a lot of people are quite burnt out, after a decade of being pissed off, protesting, marching, and being political.. nothing changed. At all.
Butch1
· 2 months ago
The new version of senators and representatives do not listen to all of that anymore. Outside of voting them out of office, I do not know what we could do further, to impress them that they represent the people and not the corporations.
How does one get a law through that bans permanently, all lobbyists, and any campaign donations period? The solution is make sure every person running for office gets a certain amount of money to run their campaign and nothing more. Every one gets the same amount. No money "gifts" or other "end-run" methods to get the jump on one's opponent. Running for office should start two-weeks before the voting is done. This would eliminate campaigns starting one to one and a half years before people vote. It would also assure that people had their representative working on the issues in Congress and not their campaign. I also think "term-limits" should be mandatory. There are too many of them complacent and used to being at the DC trough. They look upon the common citizen with derision. They need to be retired and sent home. They are of no use to us or this country. I'm sure there are more ways and anyone would like to add on to my list, please do.
Gridlock
· 2 months ago
Your ideas should be implemented at once. Frankly, the US needs to be more like France. In France, the government is terrified of the people because the people WILL strike or burn down entire neighborhoods.
Butch1
· 2 months ago
I agree. Our only problem is that we have been asleep at the switch or that we believe the lies that a stronger police force, e.g. S.W.A.T. teams, and other police officers being trained by Blackwater on how to "control" the crowds, would be to our benefit and "protect" us. I don't even recognize our police force anymore. They look like para-military units that need to wear hoods and are ready to pounce on the average citizen the second their commands are not responded to in their time frame. This police state needs to be corrected. They have all this training and they look for an excuse to use it. Why does one suppose there are all these cop shows on TV? It desensitizes us into thinking that cops beating up on people is normal and that the alleged perp deserves it. The saying used to be "innocent until proven guilty" and I find it hard to believe that when a citizen questions a cop, that should be reason enough for them to get roughed up and arrested for "resisting arrest," of all things or talking back to an officer. Laws are going to be needed to push these thugs back into manageable positions. This para-military show is too close to a real police state. ( perhaps, it's already here )
caphillprof
· 2 months ago
Perhaps the US should be more like France, except France has both a health care system and an educational system. The US lacks both. More importantly, France has a political system, the United States does not. Elections, activism, protests don't matter in the United States, not for the last 30 years or so. You can't work within the system, since the system doesn't really work. You can't work without the system, because Americans enjoy ill health and lots of ignorance.
libertydan
· 2 months ago
They should have known nothing would change with Obama, it was so obvious.
terrypierson
· 2 months ago
I really like this article. I am a follower of AMERICAblog now.
I don't blame the left for dropping out since the 70s. Life's too short to spend it worked up trying to counter right-wingers whose entire life is about being brainwashed and hating. The right-wing will never get too much anger. They live for it. They don't get burnt out like normal people. So what do I predict? Things will worsen but it's up to this generation to take the reins now and deal with it.
kladinvt
· 2 months ago
The label the media assigned to the 1970's always seemed wrong to me, especially after witnesses the sheer greed of the 1980s, which to me, was much more the "me decade". Then again, maybe decades with repugs as president seem to bring out the worst in Americans.
Õ¿Õ
· 2 months ago
It's up to this new generation and I have confidence in them. They seem more about working together. It's mostly theirs now.
aaandrew
· 2 months ago
I suspect it will be the network decade. Everyone seems to be developing networks: social, political, professional. When my wife's employer, a local ballet school, requires their teachers to be on Facebook, and our son's preschool sends out message ever ten minutes trying to develop the class and the families into a network for activities and fundraisers (his pre-k class actually has a social director) this is the sign of the Networked Decade.
We've been through "Me" and "My tribe" and now it will be a time of multi-valent networking. My nephews and nieces in their late teens and twenties all have very extensive and active networks of friends, and my colleagues at work, including myself, all use online professional networks like Linked in extensively. We'll all be linked to one another in some form or another. We're becoming a generation of joiners, whether you want to or not. And those who will not join will get left behind.
NotTimothyGeithner
· 2 months ago
I suspect the network decade won't come to pass. Who is going to pay for Facebook's server usage? It doesn't come close to making money. They burn through cash and have stayed funded based on promises and investors, but at some point, there won't be investors. Facebook and social networking sites are bound for failure in any future economy.
combustibleturnip
· 2 months ago
I disagree with the assessment of the 70's. It was a time of great activism on the environmental front and furthered the civil rights movement. And Jimmy carter didn't get elected because of an inward movement. I think the majority of Americans politically are inward most of the time, anyway.
Anon
· 2 months ago
On the post-1970 retreat, I think of it as going into exile. Still there in fact because the big money authoritarians are still running the noise machine. Going on forty years of fascism with a friendly face.
blueoysterjoe
· 2 months ago
It may be hard to drop out. America has been living in a credit bubble that enabled the whole "me" thing to happen in the first place.
American consumerism will drop, or at least stagnate, and we will be forced to confront communal issues like climate change, population explosion, peak oil, water shortages, etc. etc.
As bad as things are, it is possible that activism will not become this raging, acute phenomena, but more of a way of life, as we find ways to navigate the troubled waters ahead.
coreyschmitz
· 2 months ago
A sort of boring but obvious point is that with Democrats ostensibly in control, a lot of people have checked out. Like the goal was to get those people elected and everything would work out. Of course, that was the first step; it's all for naught if we don't keep pushing them harder than ever. I'm not as pessimistic as many people around here. Yes I am worried, I am angry; but to paraphrase Izzy Stone, I take the long-view of history. The Bush years were a dark age where in many ways we regressed as a people and a nation. These next year will be a progression. It might not happen as quickly as we want or even the way we want it to, but I think we'll be better off tomorrow than we are today. Like I said, we only won one victory. Progress never comes easily.
jeffg166
· 2 months ago
Activism like everything else is cyclical. As the country continues to fall apart if will ramp up. How, when or why is anyone's guess. History repeats itself. It will happen when least expected.
cowboyneok
· 2 months ago
I'm ready to be as politically active as ever. I think some never lose the sense they need to remain plugged in and try to fight for positive change. I do think periods of economic and military stability cause the majority of people to concentrate more on themselves. I don't think we have too much of a reason to fear complacency considering how screwed up Bu$hco. made things the past eight years.
davidasposted
· 2 months ago
What I would LIKE to see is many of the more liberal-minded members of my generation attempt to make an end-run around the traditional top-down model of governance and its actors in order to achieve a standard of living that better reflects in our values. It does not matter any more whether most Democrats actually intend to do good by the individuals and groups responsible for electing them (by this I mean not only people who cast a vote, but also those who perform the work it takes to succeed: campaigning, donating funds, etc); whatever their intentions, when push comes to shove most Democrats will not defend our interests against those of interest groups whose representatives they interact with every day in Washington D.C. and your state capital of choice. The disappointments of the Obama administration (present and future) demonstrate to many members of my generation who got caught up in Obama’s rhetoric during the campaign the ineffectiveness of getting involved in national or even state politics. Why play a game wherein the players are not equal, when there’s no real chance to win, where the rules constantly change in favor of those who change them? The 2008 election represented a genuine opportunity to change a lot of bad things about this country, some of us placed our bets on Obama to facilitate those changes, and we lost (again). Of course some people will continue to play the game just as they might dutifully purchased lottery tickets every week in the vain hope of success. But the rest of us just might have learned this time; as the supercomputer in the film War Games explains, “The only winning move is not to play.”
What is our alternative? Instead of focusing on the internal as Zac suggests, or on national and/or state politics which we have seen does not produce the kind of results we wish to see, perhaps we will instead focus ourselves locally. This does not mean we cannot collaborate with other like-minded persons of similar or different experiences using the technologies available to us, but rather that we will act for local effect and reject and/or ignore state or national efforts to stymie our actions; a libertarian effort of liberal persuasion, if you will. We will transform the communities around us into the place we want to be, open source the methods and publicize our successes and failures among folks who seek to do the same elsewhere. Many members of my generation are already keen on this process as it relates to the consumption of media online and others (cf. makers and DIYers) have expanded it elsewhere. Maybe we will decide to play a different game in this new decade.
Skycat
· 2 months ago
The results of the debate on health care reform should be quite telling. What it's come to is the people versus the corporations. While the corporations have the financial resources at their disposal to support lobbyists and special interests, in their arrogance they may have woken up the sleeping giant that rests alongside all of us and perhaps the tea-baggers and their ilk will realize they have more in common with us than those who claim to represent their interests.
With the decline of labor as the electoral force behind the Democrats, the parties had to turn to other sources to get out the vote. Of course the GOP has always wanted to break the power of labor, and the Democrats really aren't interested in the effort it would take to rebuild it.
So for decades now, ever since Carter, both parties have cultivated the religious right as a ready source of voter turnout.
The Republicans have done so far more blatantly and effectively, but the Democrats have tried to play to this constituency too, including Obama.
As a result the religious right has been greatly empowered, well-funded, and highly organized politically. And both parties seek to curry their favor.
In the short term, someone like Obama can GOTV and drive up enthusiasm among the politically apathetic. But we've seen how transient that effect is, as so many Democrats are no longer involved, assuming that electing Obama is enough.
That leaves the theocratic right as the only major grassroots political force in this country. They're the only ones who really understand how to work the levers of power. They're mad as hell that Bush didn't give them everything they wanted, like a ban on abortion, (though he gave them quite a bit) and determined to get it next time. They're also pissed that many of their favorite members of Congress (DeLay, Frist, Allen, Santorum, Talent) have either resigned or been defeated, and they're determined to elect a new, even more extreme crop of legislators.
This economic crisis provides fertile soil for them to work in. And work they shall, until they manage to put one of their own in the White House. Huckabee, maybe. Or maybe it will be someone else.
Unless the problems of the Republic are fixed, it's only a matter of time.
kimbutgar
· 2 months ago
This is a well thought out hypothesis that I hope you are wrong about. I don't by any means think you could be wrong but I am scared if we go in this direction all social justice that we have achieved in this country will effectively be destroyed. Those theocratic crazies are dangerous to our country. I fear a type of quasi religious persecution of those who do not follow this path. You could almost say that progressives/minorities/gays/women will be the new victims of the theocratic holocaust that will occur in this country. Again I hope your hypothesis is wrong. I can only hope the internet generation will be more enlightened to not let this occur.
Bubbles
· 2 months ago
What I would really like to see are a strong push towards national sovereignty amendments that severely curtail the roll of lobbyist and corruption, and seeing both as treasonous acts.
I want an amendment that says that sovereignty is vested in the people, manifested in the vote, and any attempt to 'dilute' or water down that soveriegnty is an act of treason. You can lobby your government, but all you can provide and all public officials can receive is information, not aid, money or comfort. Any aid, money or comfort given to, and received by a public official is an act of treason on behalf of the giver and on behalf of the taker. String 'em up in the public square.
I also want an Amendment that allows for spending caps on campaigns for public office.
All Comments
Second, I am now 50 years old. My husband (yes, I am gay) is 43. We are deep into our professions and I am at that point where I have to start thinking about the next phase of work and my professional life.
Both of us are tired of working our asses off to change things, giving dollars (large amounts for us) to people like Obama and then ending up with no hope for change.
I think everything, politically, is up for grabs. I have a hunch that Obama and his crew WANT the leftwing of the party to leave. Their idea is to then bring in what is left of the moderate Republicans.
Well, nice for them. That won't give us and the country what is needed. What is really sad as that the "left" in this country (and that includes my husband and me) would be just garden-variety liberals in any civilized country.
The White House is already demonizing us as "crazy" and "extremist" and "shouters." Why? Because want universal health care, common-sense regulation of the financial sector, strong labor unions, etc.
These are all mainstream values in most democracies. But not here. And not with Obama.
We are all so screwed.
And from here it doesn't look to me as if today's progressive activism has approached anything even close to some critical mass that would end up like the 70's -- god forbid. I just don't see enough people willing to take up the challenge being sent out by today's activists, and we can debate the reasons but that's what I see.
Of course, I was molded by a time when people screamed loud and long and consistently for the change they were demanding, out on the streets. Today's activism seems hidden away in front of computers, and I wonder if it has the same kind of force. On the other hand, if it yields something better than what the 60's yielded, hey, more power to 'em.
But I often find myself wondering why people aren't more pissed off. And why they aren't getting L-O-U-D about it.
The forces behind these wars learned the lessons of Vietnam well: don't have a draft, put the war on a credit card, and don't show the bodies on the evening news.
We use mercenaries instead, and our complicit media takes care to sanitize everything we see and hear about Iraq and Afghanistan. To us here, the war is almost unreal, unless you've got friends or family in the service.
As long as we are detached from the reality of the war, the force of protest is nullified.
I think you're right, that will happen, but it's about five years or so off.
I think limpidglass's point about the draft is a good one; but I don't know what it will take to get people in this country up off their asses and into the streets and the polling places reliably to create change.
Back in the '60s, politicians were afraid of the voters, because they needed the votes to stay in office. Now, they are afraid only of the lobbyists. With enough lobbyist money, they can engineer the votes they need through massive (and often misleading) media campaigns. Without the money, they can't.
So, all the letter writing, phone calls, marching in the streets means nothing, because it can all be canceled out by one phone call from a lobbyist.
Al Gore covered this quite thoroughly in his book "Assault of Reason." There used to be a two-way conversation between representative and voter. Now, it's a one-way conversation, carried out from the politician to the voters through the media.
Way back, I remember members of Congress reacting if they got 10 or 20 letters on the same topic. Now, they can get 200,000 letters and feel free to ignore them in favor of what the lobbyists want them to do.
I started in activism in the early '60s and was heavily involved in civil rights, anti-Vietnam, gay rights, equal rights amendment, and AIDS issues. I thought things were going to get better, but the game has changed.
I don't think the activists are burnt out as much as that they've come to realize their actions don't really have an effect. You don't burn out if you think you have a chance to succeed. What I've come to is a "what the hell" attitude. I don't see anything having any effect any more.
The country has pretty much become a corporate dictatorship. Obama and the Congress are putting up a front of running an actual democratic government, but they are just pawns of the corporations, who are calling all the shots.
And, burning stuff down, as someone suggested, isn't going to work. They're ready for that. They have a playbook -- as Greg Palast has said. They are carrying out the plays one by one: drive down wages, privatize the infrastructure, remove taxes from the rich, weaken education, etc. The last page in their book is how to deal with the civil unrest that follows. This is why Blackwater is allowed to thrive as a private corporate army and why posse comitatus was revoked.
The thing that has been the real disappointment is that so many of the people who have suffered and will suffer from this have been hoodwinked into cheering on the corporatocracy that is trying to destroy their way of life. Even sadder is that most of my family is among those cheerleaders.
I think in many ways being burnt out and disillusioned is a natural feeling you have to seeing a world thats completely out of control, like it is now.
Feeling complete powerlessness, and anger, and rage at those who start wars, or ruin the environment, thats how I feel.
But what can be done? I opposed this war from day 1, have given money, have written editorials in my paper, supported artists and authors and people working for peace, watched all the movies and documentaries, read all the books, listened to all the music on the war, gone to see speakers and lecturers, participated in protest marches and volunteer at my local peace and justice organization.
But the wars rage on...
How does one get a law through that bans permanently, all lobbyists, and any campaign donations period? The solution is make sure every person running for office gets a certain amount of money to run their campaign and nothing more. Every one gets the same amount. No money "gifts" or other "end-run" methods to get the jump on one's opponent. Running for office should start two-weeks before the voting is done. This would eliminate campaigns starting one to one and a half years before people vote. It would also assure that people had their representative working on the issues in Congress and not their campaign. I also think "term-limits" should be mandatory. There are too many of them complacent and used to being at the DC trough. They look upon the common citizen with derision. They need to be retired and sent home. They are of no use to us or this country. I'm sure there are more ways and anyone would like to add on to my list, please do.
http://www.progressforamoreperfectunion.blogspo...
We've been through "Me" and "My tribe" and now it will be a time of multi-valent networking. My nephews and nieces in their late teens and twenties all have very extensive and active networks of friends, and my colleagues at work, including myself, all use online professional networks like Linked in extensively. We'll all be linked to one another in some form or another. We're becoming a generation of joiners, whether you want to or not. And those who will not join will get left behind.
American consumerism will drop, or at least stagnate, and we will be forced to confront communal issues like climate change, population explosion, peak oil, water shortages, etc. etc.
As bad as things are, it is possible that activism will not become this raging, acute phenomena, but more of a way of life, as we find ways to navigate the troubled waters ahead.
What is our alternative? Instead of focusing on the internal as Zac suggests, or on national and/or state politics which we have seen does not produce the kind of results we wish to see, perhaps we will instead focus ourselves locally. This does not mean we cannot collaborate with other like-minded persons of similar or different experiences using the technologies available to us, but rather that we will act for local effect and reject and/or ignore state or national efforts to stymie our actions; a libertarian effort of liberal persuasion, if you will. We will transform the communities around us into the place we want to be, open source the methods and publicize our successes and failures among folks who seek to do the same elsewhere. Many members of my generation are already keen on this process as it relates to the consumption of media online and others (cf. makers and DIYers) have expanded it elsewhere. Maybe we will decide to play a different game in this new decade.
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2009/05/ag...
nd.html
With the decline of labor as the electoral force behind the Democrats, the parties had to turn to other sources to get out the vote. Of course the GOP has always wanted to break the power of labor, and the Democrats really aren't interested in the effort it would take to rebuild it.
So for decades now, ever since Carter, both parties have cultivated the religious right as a ready source of voter turnout.
The Republicans have done so far more blatantly and effectively, but the Democrats have tried to play to this constituency too, including Obama.
As a result the religious right has been greatly empowered, well-funded, and highly organized politically. And both parties seek to curry their favor.
In the short term, someone like Obama can GOTV and drive up enthusiasm among the politically apathetic. But we've seen how transient that effect is, as so many Democrats are no longer involved, assuming that electing Obama is enough.
That leaves the theocratic right as the only major grassroots political force in this country. They're the only ones who really understand how to work the levers of power. They're mad as hell that Bush didn't give them everything they wanted, like a ban on abortion, (though he gave them quite a bit) and determined to get it next time. They're also pissed that many of their favorite members of Congress (DeLay, Frist, Allen, Santorum, Talent) have either resigned or been defeated, and they're determined to elect a new, even more extreme crop of legislators.
This economic crisis provides fertile soil for them to work in. And work they shall, until they manage to put one of their own in the White House. Huckabee, maybe. Or maybe it will be someone else.
Unless the problems of the Republic are fixed, it's only a matter of time.
I want an amendment that says that sovereignty is vested in the people, manifested in the vote, and any attempt to 'dilute' or water down that soveriegnty is an act of treason. You can lobby your government, but all you can provide and all public officials can receive is information, not aid, money or comfort. Any aid, money or comfort given to, and received by a public official is an act of treason on behalf of the giver and on behalf of the taker. String 'em up in the public square.
I also want an Amendment that allows for spending caps on campaigns for public office.