Final Arguments Before the Election?

An open (and final) call for whistleblowers

So far, nobody has offered to bet against my assertion that we will witness a Pardon Tsunami during the weeks after an Obama victory. Almost certainly, President George W. Bush has promised scads of get-out-of-jail-free cards to those who busily ripped off this great nation during the last eight years. A gang of kleptos and political hatchetmen who rightfully fear the resurrection of the U.S. Civil Service -- including all the auditors, FBI and Justice agents, inspectors general and so on -- suddenly unleashed from their neocon leash-holders.

Newly inaugurated President Barack Obama won’t have to start a witch hunt, something that isn’t in his character anyway. He need only allow our public servants to return to doing their jobs, and indictments will flow, like a river that’s been locked far too long behind a glacier.

That is... unless Bush issues the promised pardons.

(Open to question: will he arrange things so that someone will pardon him?)

Now there’s an interesting dynamic, here -- an example of the Prisoner’s Dilemma. How can any of the people expecting executive clemency be sure that W will keep his word? After all, the larger the stack of pardons, the bigger the penalty, in political terms, to be paid by both the GOP and Bush’s remaining public stature (such as it is). If the stack gets high enough, the Republican Party might never recover... and Bush might have to move to Dubai. Hence, some of the promises may just be no more than empty words, meant to keep mid-level people silent till the election. Anyone who is counting on such a promise ought to consider how reliable it may be, after November 4.

There is an alternative, to squeal before the election. It should offer some appealing aspects for your run-of-the-mill neocon klepto or enabler to ponder.

Notably, George Bush isn’t the only one who can offer get-out-of-jail-free cards! Rep. Henry Waxman can grant immunity for testimony given under oath, for example. And President Obama will be able to pardon, too. Above all, there is often forgiveness, public acclaim and hero status for the first fellow who abandons a gang of criminals, because of an attack of conscience.

Also, do not count on a presidential pardon - even if you get one - to be perfect protection. First, Congress might try a gambit I’ve recommended - using sort of an “inverse signing statement” to corner the definition of a pardon so that it only covers acts that are openly avowed and admitted in cooperative sworn testimony. Then there is the matter of civil damages. You might have to flee the country, anyway.

Key point: the truth is going to come out. This is the diametric opposite of the Clinton Era witch hunts, when relentlessly-fixated partisan searches wound up not turning up anything palpable, at all. (Not a single Clintonian was ever even indicted for malfeasance in the performance of official duties.) Instead, this time, Democrats will barely have to lift a finger, while civil servants do it all. And the rats who are slow to leave the sinking ship will be treated as rats, by a disgusted America, forever.

Conclusion: pay heed you henchmen out there. The next week may be your last chance to join (and help) the winning side of history. Don’t blow it.


Oh. Long ago I offered bets on whether Al Qaeda would try another election-influencing gambit There have been some clumsy web postings and trial balloons. But unless Osama issues a tape (and even then, perhaps), the net response this time may be a wary shrug and a yawn.


Thoughts on the Palin Soap Opera

It’s not so much the amounts ($150,000 spent on the candidate’s clothes, plus permanent stylists following her around). Those who already like her will rationalize that it’s much harder for a female candidate to keep up a fresh appearance and helping her is a legitimate expense (even if it’s 2-3 X what the average American makes in a year.) No, the real killer is where she bought the clothes. Nieman Marcus and Saks.

Oh, I get it. New York elite stuff is fine -- in its place. Insist that the country be ruled by a kakocracy... but it’s another thong when it comes to unimportant things, like a doctor when you’re sick, a lawyer when you’re in trouble, a scientist and engineer to re-invent your cars... or some gay designers to help you look better than Joe Plumber. City slicker expertise is okay, in its place. So long as the smartypants don’t presume to suggest ways to actually guide a great and complicated republic.

Cheryl had an insight about all this, one that lets Sarah Palin off the hook, just a bit. She calls Palin “Eliza Dolittle” and sees her as the small-town country girl who is grabbed up and re-made by a bunch of cynical men, as in “My Fair Lady,” told what to say and to whom and dressed and coached for a part that is way over her head. Hm. Cool perspective!

Though I figure there is also, within Palin, a very canny natural politician. Then there’s the scary bits. Heck, she’s large, I’ll admit that. She can contain multitudes. I just hope we’re never forced to worry and learn a whole lot more about em all.


The most effective (though least mature) argument to use with an “ostrich.”

I’ve tried hard to offer ways you might try to get that decent (or somewhat decent) but obstinate conservative uncle or aunt to wake up and see how thoroughly conservatism has been betrayed by the hijackers of their movement.

But time is short now (thanks bee to merciful God) and most of them already know all that stuff. Right now, the problem is that many somewhat-wakened ostriches are still having trouble wrestling their hand toward actually voting for the Democrat.

Oh sure, you can tell yours that Obama is going to win, anyway. Voting for him would help spank the GOP and make them go back to the drawing board. A landslide could ensure they won’t be obstinate about revising their message for next time, or seeking new blood.

------

At the opposite end there’s a cluster of reasons that may strike closer to home. So, I am going to dial down the maturity level here and offer a few arguments that go to the gut level, where many people make their political decisions (alas).

Tell em this: if they can manage to vote Obama this time, they will always in the future be able to say “Well, I voted for Obama in 2008. And hence --

“-- nobody can ever again call me racist.”

“-- I get to brag if he succeeds.”

“-- and if he fails, I get to say that I gave you *#*! democrats a chance, and you blew it!”

Especially number one. It could be a potent emotion-level argument. Even if (especially if) they really are _____, down deep. (Funny thing though: once the precedent is set... it tends to alter people’s thinking, from then on. See my short story “The Giving Plague.”)

For a far more mature view of the same general category of take on things... see an important essay on how Obama will transform the world’s perceptions of America. I just read a french language newspaper while in Montreal. (Yes I can read and speak another language, whoopee.) And there was a survey of opinions around the world on the U.S. election. The figures are staggering!

They want us back. They want U.S. back. And they see him as embodying our better nature.

There is no single act that America will ever do, that will more swiftly restore our popularity and leadership in the world.


== Funniest videos yet... and then the best ==

Look, it’s time to declare this what it is. A be-in!

It’s been a long time since the sixties and we’ve been so mired in culture war BS...and we’ll be nervous about this whole deal until weeks after Bho and Bide are safely in DC - ensconced forever far from each other (I hope) with separate Secret Service details.

Still... it would be a damned shame not to take note that this is also the funnest and funniest and most creativity-drenched election ever! Dang, these kids in Generation We are sharp!

I mean, it’s a raucous laugh-in, with Tina Fey on SNL and with Jon Stewart’s unbelievably above-average riff, with Jason Jones in Wasilla... (See it! Especially if you can find a version with Stewart’s deeply angry/hilarious framing remarks.)...

...but it is the burst of private and amateur videos and such that has proved almost overwhelming. (More below). We can thank Bush for this much. People really are feeling alive. More intensely patriotic and hopeful than I have seen in years.

Though, of course, again it does all come down to this.


== Links: ===

--- Obama, getting amusing at tha annual Smith Dinner -- comedy Obama, Part 1 and Part 2.

Fascinating insights from David Brooks, of all people:

Esquire is backing Democrat Barack Obama for president _ its first endorsement in the magazine's 75-year history. The LA Times has not endorsed a president since 1977.. but check it out.

A cute item by Ron Howard, with Andy Griffith & Henry Winkler.

Ever notice that Sarah Palin anagrams to "Sharia plan." So, clearly, she's the one who plans to institute Muslim law in the United States. Other anagrams include: a sharp nail a plain rash. Any chance of a numeralogical match with 666? Pleeeeeze?

Plus sundry links...

http://mickelehsoap.blogspot.com/2008/10/sarah-palin-is-real-crypto-muslim-in.html

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/9/22252/3680/22/624418

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DIc8jdra0o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAyK-enrF1g

McCain’s Turtle Island story

And finally, I am not proud to spread this. But I am desperate. And anyone who sees it KNOWS that there is something wrong. I know there may be mitigating factors and reasons. Still, something is wrong and it oughta creep anybody out:

Your Little Holiday Assignment: Convert an Ostrich

As folks prepare for coming days of joyful and (full-bellied) reunion with family members from across the continent, another tradition looms -- old-fashioned encounters between loving relatives who happen to despise each others’ political views.

Yes, many families wisely ban talking politics during holidays... or at the dinner table. By all means, keep peace in the clan.

Yet, there’s another side to all this. The election of 2008 is crucial. It must not be a squeaker - which only guarantees more “culture war.” Only a landslide will do. And, for that to happen, we need millions of basically decent “ostrich” conservatives.

We need them to wake up and get mad at the crooks who’ve hijacked their party. Decent conservatives like that sweet uncle of yours, who stays glued to Fox, desperately keeping head-in sand to ignore what’s happened to the GOP. To America.

The holidays are your chance to say to that uncle or aunt:

”This country that we both love is in trouble. If I’m right, then a lot more trouble than you realize. For America’s sake... and out of respect for me... would you come with me on a long walk? Away from the house? (We’ll drop all political talk, after we get back.)

“There are some facts I want to show you. About how our nation has been betrayed.”

What can you say, to convince an ostrich who is in frantic denial? Well, for starters, not all “nice conservatives” are ostriches. Many will cling fanatically to party and cult loyalties, countering with catechisms from Rush Limbaugh. But others might be roused. And if you rouse just one, to get angry at the gang of thieves who hijacked the GOP, then he or she may spread that anger to others.

It seems worth a try. Firmly, though also with tact and love. Difficult, but still...

For more on this, see my “The Ostrich Papers: How it will take ALL Decent Americans to Restore Decency to America”

And if you decide to proceed, here’s a whole tsunami of challenges you might print out to confront him or her with.

And a smaller-capsule “A Cheat Sheet for Ostrich Hunters.”

(A suggestion. These are more effective read aloud! Asking an ostrich to read such a list inevitably lets them skim and dismiss.) Make him or her see that the list is composed entirely of conservative issues! Thus, by their very own standards, decent conservatives should help rid us of these awful people. And the, rebuild their movement into one they can again be proud of.

Here is the super-condensed version.

Which president would be the logical choice for a patriotic and logical "decent conservative?"

* One balanced budgets...
...and the other bankrupted us.

* One enhanced government efficiency (according to neutral auditing companies) by increasing competitive bidding for contracts...
...while the other gave $300+ billions in no-bid contracts directly to friends, while losing more than ten billions in raw cash, then appointed known crooks to be the inspectors and auditors.

* One oversaw the nation’s greatest boom in small business creation...
...and the other a surge of monopolies, while small businesses floundered.

* One cut government secrecy way down, even while being investigated...
...while the other sent secrecy rocketing to levels never seen even in the Cold War.

* One worked with governors to enhance experimentation at the state level...
...and the other asserted federal authority more than any other president in history, bringing states’ rights to a new low.

* One helped all society to prosper spectacularly...
...and the other helped only aristocrats.

Which president would be a "strong" commander in chief, in the eyes of any "decent conservative"?

* One earned respect from the U.S. Officer Corps...
...and the other one betrayed the military at every turn, driving officers to flee the service at a rate never before seen.

* One maintained military readiness, including thirty fully ready combat brigades...
...and the other stripped us bare, exhausting our brave troops and leaving us with at most two ready brigades.

* One handled his war with fierce, surgical precision and blazing speed, costing no American lives and transforming an entire continent for the better, while boosting our popularity and alliances...
...and the other president drove away nearly all of our allies, made us more hated than ever, left our states defenseless, and devastated our state of readiness, while accomplishing almost nothing at all.

* One doubles the Border Patrol ...
...and the other shatters it.

Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, was a core hero of conservatism for thirty years. So --

* Which president does Greenspan praise as the smartest, most openminded, most focused on long term economic health and best for the economy?
...vs the next one, who scores the “very worst” on every count, including basic honesty?


Which president was the "sleaze" subjected to a $2 billion witch hunt?

* The one who left office without a single administration appointee indicted for official duties? (Not one. Not even one.) ...
...or the next president, who (despite bullying the FBI) loses comrades to jail or ignominy almost every week.

Oh, I give up. There is no way to summarize in such a small space. Because ostriches will squirm and struggle to keep their heads in the sand. Brevity is no virtue when isolated points can be deflected with glib Fox-sophomorisms.

No, it must be relentless and overwhelming, like an intervention with an alcoholic.

The only way to do this is to go to those pages I cite above and go through the whole thing (or at least this page) with your chosen victim... er, I mean ostrich.

Over and over again, aloud, until the hypnotic neocon spell shatters and the slumbering ones -- our beloved cousins and neighbors and fellow citizens -- finally wake up.

Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, and God bless -- America, civilization, us all.

====    ====    ====

PS...Some others are also on this trail! For example, William Frey, M.D. has a website titled Repentant Republicans. Here's one of his first essays, reprinted at Consortium News.
And another.

David Brin

http://www.davidbrin.com

Twitter                Facebook

Are We Giving Birth to ...well... "Gaia"?

I want to refer you to the latest paper -"On the Promise of Noopolitik" - by two of the most brilliant social thinkers around, today, David Ronfedlt and John Arquilla, of the Rand Corporation. Unlike many utopian or extropian wish fantasies, they are talking about a simple extrapolation of today's positive trends, via what I have called the :"Age of Amateurs" toward a near era when leveraged individual and "smart mob" and coalescing critical skills will make our sum intelligence something truly and fantastically greater than the parts.

See how they relate all this to the ruminations in 1925 of Teilhard de Chardin, in The Phenomenon of Man. One might also have hearkened to J.D. Bernal's THE WORLD, THE FLESH AND THE DEVIL: An enquiry into the future of the Three Enemies of the Rational Soul, from the same period. (Available online).

A great paper. It is, of course, a topic that we can start talking about, over beers, one day after work... and wake up amid a sea of bottle, wondering what day it is, without even having touched half of the ramifications. Still let me touch on a few very lightly.

1) Of course, what they discuss is something that I described, pretty thoroughly, in the last dozen or so chapters of EARTH. Wherein I am VERY critical of the typical "Childhood's End" notion of how humanity might become part of some future macro intelligence. Whether it is clanking assimilation - as in the Borg - or floating above tatami mats while birds hover - as in Asimov's "Gaia" - or clone based telepathy a la Joe Haldeman - it is still almost always depicted as an either-or dichotomy... a surrender of individuality, in order to gain the benefits of mass intelligence..

In EARTH I portray this coalescence and elevation as something quite different. As a reification, a fulfillment, a celebration of human individuality,


2) This makes sense when you ponder that the noosphere will have to partake in the most successful aspects of its immediate predecessor... the Western Enlightenment.

Indeed, the very success of the Enlightenment is what has brought us to the verge of this new birth. And a very dangerous birthing process it will be. (Look back at the last time this was tried - prematurely, precociously, disastrously - in the great experiment of Pericles.)

Crucial to remember is that none of these possibilities - this condition that is p[regnant with a new kind of humanity - arose out of the mothodologies used by standard,or traditional, hierarchical societies. Priests, preaching rigid rules of good thinking. Nobles punishing any deviations from right-behavior. We reflexively turn to these twin methods, and have for countless millennia. Heck, George Lucas is still preaching them, today! But they have a PERFECT track record of never, ever working.

In stark contrast, the Enlightenment trick - invented by Locke and Smith - is to use rule-based arenas of FAIR COMPETITION (science, markets, courts, and democracy) to elicit the plus-side benefits of joyful creativity out of people, while preventing the brutally repressive, secretive, cheating side of human nature from spoiling competition. Locke and Smith, innovating out of instinct and a sense of pragmatic "fairness", could not have known that they were emulating the very same fecund synergies that we see in evolution, in nature! But the effect is exact and fantastically productive.

In complexity theory, experts call this sort of thing an "emergent property." What is COMPETITIVE at one level becomes visibly and powerfully COOPERATIVE, when viewed at the next higher level. Take healthy ecosystems, for example. "The circle of life." Ecosystems - like markets - will tend to stay balanced until someone gets a huge edge, enough to "cheat." In which case, watch out....are you listening, humanity? (Well, we're the smart ones, trying to TELL OURSELVES to stop cheating. Quite a demand, for folks recently out of the caves.)

3) Since Enlightenment systems rely utterly on RECIPROCAL ACCOUNTABILITY... and thus (viz Hayek) upon open information flows...this means that the Enlightenment - and its offspring the Noosphere -- are fundamentally in conflict with basic drives of human nature. Above all, two human traits: self-delusion and a longing for feudalism. (We inherit the latter because we all are descended from the harems of countless kings.)


4) Hence my key point. The transformation that John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt describe is obvious to society's smartest men and women. Those with vision can see it coming. But their reactions differ greatly.

Some respond to the approaching birth with excitement, by funding research to help it along. Elon Musk, for example. Others look with dread on the pain and potential dangers of the birthing process -- take Bill Joy. In this matter, Arthur Clarke may have had it right.

Finally, there are many, many amid the elites who desperately do not want this new era to happen! They realize that the noosphere is an inevitable outcome of the Enlightenment Experiment, if current trends of citizen uplift and citizen-empowerment continue. And even if the newborn is healthy, they see themselves as losers, because their privileged positions will no longer be assured. Better to reign over a grinding, insipid pyramid than to tumble into mere citizenship in a fecund, spectacular "emergent property."

There is a lot of momentum toward this birth. Thus, the opposition's counter-push cannot merely be obstructionist. It must be actively and radically reactionary. The clock must not simply be frozen. It must be wound backwards. To earlier modes of hierarchical control.

5) The Ronfeldt &Arquilla paper shows awareness of this resistance, but a certain naivete about exactly what's happening. It is not nationalism, per se, that is blocking progress toward a massively synergistic reification of worldwide human discourse. Indeed, some nation states - if left alone - have been friendly midwives to the process. The best example - after state-supported universities - was when the United States of America simply LET GO OF THE INTERNET and gave it to the world. Proof of midwifery. Period. (Today's Libertarianism is both right and horrifically simplistic.)

No, it is NOT nationalism, per se, that is driving the frantic resistance that we are currently witnessing vs. mass-human empowerment and reification. Rather, I see the Enlightenment nation state being hijacked at two levels:

(1) by those alienated against the future on emotional-romantic terms and

(2) by clades of very smart men who see their very last chance to re-institute traditional human social hierarchies, before it is too late.

Ponder, if this is the agenda, then elites in all parts of the world - purportedly divided by language, nationality, religion and official dogma - might see common cause against the thing that frightens them most. The birth of multi-layered, "metazoan" humanity. In that case, they might USE their apparent national and ideological differences to pit citizens against each other and raise fear levels. The surest way to prevent confident embrace of a new way of thinking.

Have I just made myself a target of this lurid-seeming cabal of super-smart but super troglodytic elites?

Fortunately, I have too little influence in this world to be considered a threat.

In fact, I keep waiting for them to offer me a buyout! But then, I may be too small even for that.

Wish me a good trip and keep using comments to keep the community alive.

Visit kos.

db

Finally, I may be putting this journal; on hiatus for a few weeks. If you see nothing from me till early September, never fear. I will leave the comments section, below, as a general forum. There is even a chance that I might ask Stefan to post a "comment-relayed-from-Brin"... from time to time! (He has one of the choicest email addresses ever.)

Also, please drop in at my final "Ostrich Papers"  Also posted on my website. Yes, it is vastly too long (4000 words!) for the scatterbrained...um... multiprocessing generation. Still, I felt that SOMEWHERE there needed to be a "guidebook" for ostrich hunters.

Happy hunting.

Request for Ostrich zingers...

Urgent request for your favorite hypocritical moments

For my Kos posting of the Ostrich Papers, I want to supplement with a list of favorite YouTube Hypocrisy Moments... short blips that you can force your ostrich to watch in short jolts.

One of you offered The Agonist by Sean Paul Kelly --  a real doozy!

NEEDED! Things I've seen but do not have handy...

Bush standing in front of the MISSION ACCOMPLISHED sign... and then later blaming the sailors for it when the White House had ordered it made.

Bush criticizing Clinton during the Balkans war about needing an exit strategy before committing our men to war.

Bush promising budget surpluses.

ANY neocon claiming that “we lost Vietnam because clueless amateur politicians meddled and bullied professional sodiers....

ANY online site that has all sorts of this kind of stuff.

Thanks guys.

See: The Ostrich Papers: What if Bill Clinton had...

Planning for the "Pardon Tsunami"

At my DailyKos blog I’ve started posting segments copied from my posted article on “Suggestions to the new Congress”. Although you folks have seen it all, you are welcome to weigh in there (and possibly boost my Kos ratings). Certainly the topics merit further exposure. Right now we are discussing suggestions 1,2,3 which are about investigating corruption.

There I only hinted at what I think would be the cleverest gambit of all. To try and HEM IN President Bush's power to issue vast numbers of "get out of jail free" pardons.

There are several ways to do this without attracting automatic cancellation by the Supreme Court. Any solution must not infringe on his actual right to pardon. And yet, with sufficient cleverness, it should be possible to...

option 1- Hem him in POLITICALLY. A top Dem should issue a dare. "Will you promise not to pardon more people than the previous two presidents COMBINED?"

The idea is to put him between a rock and a hard place. If he accepts the dare (unlikely) each of his myriad corrupt cronies will worry whether their promised pardon will make it under the cutoff. They may contemplate whether to instead take the bird in front of them - if Democratic Congressional committees start offering immunity for testimony.

If (more likely) he refuses to make the promise, then a seed of wonder is planted in millions of American voters minds, about just what he may have in mind for after the 08 elections.

At minimum, it will enhance the political damage when (not if) he issues the pardon tsunami,


option 2. Hem in the DEFINITION of a"pardon". Congress may be able to get past the Supremes a definition that restricts a pardon's ability to let a bastard get off scott free. For example: "A pardon can only apply to actions that a person openly admits and avows. It must specify whatever illegal actions it is meant to cover. Furthermore, the person pardoned must testify and answer questions, in order to qualify for complete erasure of responsibility."

This would still let this monstrous cabal of thieves pardpn wretched-awful SOBs who have been ripping us off, saving them from going to prison. That can’t be helped. But it would mean that they must testify (perhaps in the original, latin meaning of the word!) They must point fingers at others. And restitution of ill-gotten gains would remain a possibility.

Above all, by drawing attention to the approaching pardon tsunami NOW, we would put it up front in the public's mind. They will start viewing items in the news in this light and perceive patterns. It is something to start pondering now.

-----

Other matters: See an interesting new book:  Reinventing the Bazaar: A natural history of markets, written by John McMillin of Stanford’s School of Business.


And finally: YOUR NEXT ASSIGNMENT IN THE POLITICAL BESTIARY!

Apparently, some folks in my area are willing to start reconsidering their policy of trying to run classic Santa Monica liberals in districts that have been gerrymandered to be conservative by personality. When I wrote to our recent democratic candidate, Francine Busby: "Help recruit military veterans who can resonate with local voters and LOOK conservative... while being faithful to core liberal values..."

She responded: "If you are aware of anyone who is a good match and is interested, please let me know."

Aha. A counter-dare. Fair enough. Let's all ponder, then.

I know that by now all of you have chosen an "ostrich conservative" -- a decent person who remains obstinately delusional about the neocons -- to clamp onto like a lamprey and never let go until they open their eyes. And you are all spreading this meme, recruiting others to be ostrich-awakeners. I have faith in you all and I know you won't let us down.

Now another task: look around you for another creature in the zoo. Look for a mongoose!

A mongoose is a person who has utter toughness and willingness to face cobras, combined with big-hearted ability to stand up for the little guy. Ideal are former military men or women, who convey the surfaces of old-fashioned, patriotic and crewcut conservatism -- and certainly adhere to the best values from that side of things -- while also being open-eyed aware of what's going on around us and eager to strengthen the one institution in American life that stands of chance of saving this country -- The Democratic Party. These are the candidates we need to find for every gerrymandered GOP district. So that when folks in such inherently (by personality) conservative districts are fed-up and looking around in 2008, we won't make the insanely self-destructive mistake of forcing them to choose between Dick Cheney and Ellen Degeneris.

All of you. Find a mongoose and start twisting his or her arm to consider running for office in 2008. It is NOT TOO SOON!

Of course, given the odds, maybe you should talk to five or six of them. That's why we must start now. It's a talent search that could take some time.