When Activism Backfires
In the fall of 1999, New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani received a catalog for “Sensations,” an exhibit scheduled to open at the Brooklyn Museum of Art. Giuliani was appalled as he flipped through pages that previewed paintings and sculpture that mixed graphic sexual images with religious icons and depictions of children. One particular painting of the Virgin Mary surrounded by floating male genitalia and splattered with elephant dung became the focus of the mayor’s outrage. Giuliani threatened to cut off millions of dollars of city support for the museum if the show opened. And the mayor had plenty of visible and vocal support. Churches organized huge rallies and prayer vigils outside of the museum.
As a result of the demonstrations and denouncements, crowds flocked to “Sensations.” Some people came to support freedom of expression, other bought a ticket to see what all the controversy was about. “Sensations” ultimately became the most successful exhibition ever held at the Brooklyn Museum, and a prime example of how activism can sometimes backfire and help create a demand for the object or issue that triggers the protest.
The Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Project, which is sponsored by the American Civil Liberties Union, has a simple handbook on activism that encourages people to work for change through existing political and social channels. Project leaders acknowledge confrontational tactics such as demonstrations, boycotts and acts of civil disobedience can be effective, but they concede those tactics can also alienate the public.
The Occupy movement, launched as a populist protest against corporate greed and economic inequality, did just that. Activists took over Zuccotti Park and formed an encampment in the financial district in Manhattan. Within weeks, Occupy Wall Street spawned similar protests in cities throughout the country. The movement’s message was initially well-received. Restaurants and businesses sent food and supplies to the protesters who also won praise from political leaders.
But over time, health and sanitation problems crept into the camps along with drugs, theft and violent crime. Public anger mounted, and when police finally cleared out the parks there was little sympathy for the activists. The tactic of taking over public places backfired, but it did not generate support for the wealthy banks and corporations that inspired the protests. However, the public’s good will was squandered, and the movement lost its momentum.
Some activists who confront the public are still effective advocates. During the 1980s, the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power, ACT UP, jammed Wall Street with flamboyant protest marches and disrupted church services by tossing condoms at congregants. Although ACT UP sparked public anger and distrust toward the gay community, the group is credited with breaking the regulatory log jam that kept life-saving drugs from AIDS patients.
In contrast, the Tea Party used the political process to win several battles only to help their opposition win wars. A loose alliance of Republican and Libertarian groups, tea partiers believe in small government and limited taxes. They also vehemently oppose President Barack Obama and his policies.
Tea partiers have poured money and manpower into the primary campaigns of ultra-conservative candidates who challenged moderate Republican incumbents because they worked with the Obama administration. And they won those primaries by appealing to voter frustration and fear. But the campaigns backfired in the general election, and conservative activists ultimately helped elect several liberal Democrats.
The Tea Party’s anti-government message has also backfired. The movement has attracted conspiracy theorists, racists and other anti-government groups on the fringe the political spectrum. Those extreme views alienated people who might have otherwise supported some of the movement’s economic positions.
One Million Moms, the media watchdog arm of the conservative American Family Association, has suffered a string of backfires in its recent attempts at censorship. The activist moms’ strategy is to boycott sponsors of any type of media that depicts sexually, particularly homosexuality.
One Million Moms demanded that JC Penny fire their gay spokeswomen, Ellen DeGeneres, or risk losing their business. JC Penny refused, the public responded with a huge wave of support for DeGeneres, and consumers are now seeing a hip and human side of the stodgy department store. The moms also helped an Archie comic book sell out after they condemned its gay marriage theme, and their attack on a sexually-charged Liquid Plumr commercial helped the video ad go viral.
The success of any activist movement depends on different factors, and advocates always run the risk that demonstrations and campaigns will publicize and popularize the issues and objects of their protests. And activists can and do alienate the public. Still, activists launched the Civil Rights movement, ended the Vietnam War and have advanced scores of just causes. Despite their misfires and backfires, activists play a key role in a democracy.
Sources
http://gbge.aclu.org/organize/protests-and-civil-disobedience
http://comicbook.com/blog/2012/03/03/life-with-archie-gay-wedding-issue-sells-out/
Bruce Bartlett: George W. Bush was a “Pretend” Conservative
A Guest Post from Textbroker
The interview by Bill Moyers of former Reagan and Bush advisor Bruce Bartlett, which was broadcast Friday night on PBS, has convinced me how the neo-conservatives have fumbled badly on the economy.
You can find the interview here: Bill Moyers: Where the Right Went Wrong
Where the right went wrong was the theme of the interview of Mr. Bartlett, who has been, and still is, considered a supporter of the conservative economic principles of smaller government and lower taxes. Bruce Bartlett was one of the architects of "supply side" economics, which formed the basis of American domestic policy under President Ronald Reagan. He also served as a treasury official under President George H. Bush. Recently, Mr. Bartlett has become one of the critics of current conservative economic policy. Among the observations made in the interview:
(1) Today's conservatives are phonies. He referred to President George W. Bush as a "pretend" conservative, and said he believes these policies have damaged the American economy. He now believes that the policy of lower taxes has gone too far.
(2) Taxes were much higher in the past. In the interview with Bill Moyers, Mr. Bartlett noted that in 1986 the tax rate on upper incomes was around 50 percent. Under George W. Bush, taxes were lowered, and Mr. Bartlett readily admits that reduced revenues in conjunction with greatly increased expenditures generated the huge debt that exists today.
(3) If not corrected, the budget situation will require dramatic cuts in popular programs. Those that will have to be reduced include Medicare and Medicaid. But he doubts whether such cuts will be politically acceptable.
(4) He sees a complete disconnect as to how many Americans view the issues of taxes and government spending. An example he gave was that of a TEA party member demanding that the government "keep its hands off" Medicare, which is of course a government program. He noted that many Americans do not realize how low taxes are today. He attributes this misunderstanding not only to the current level of political discourse but of the media's handling of the issue, and specifically mentioned how the center of misinformation is the Fox Network.
Eventually, the raising of taxes is the only way Mr. Bartlett believes the country can save itself. Their refusal to raise taxes is, according to him, where the right went wrong.
When Obama Wins, Thank a Republican
by Brendan Delaney
According to Joe Scarborough on Meet The Press this morning, Newt Gingrich’s recent Republican Primary win in South Carolina was not so much a victory for Newt Gingrich as it was a primal scream by Republican voters against the Republican Party establishment.
Newt Gingrich wins South Carolina Primary
As a former Republican myself, I can identify with those who are so frustrated with their own party that, in order to send a message of contempt to their party leaders, they would be willing to nominate a completely unelectable candidate like Newt Gingrich. I sent my own message to the Republican party in 2007, when it came time for me to renew my drivers’ license. At that time, when given the opportunity to change my political affiliation, I opted to become a Democrat. I did this because I didn’t want to be associated with a party that I felt no longer represented the best interests of anyone I knew. I was also highly disillusioned by the way they so cynically rammed through a candidate as unqualified, and unintelligent, as George W. Bush (whom I did not vote for, btw). The election of George W. Bush allowed the Republican Party to take care of their cronies in corporate America, and also set in motion many of the policies that led to the dismal state of our economy today. And while they may have secured the White House in 2000 and 2004, they sacrificed the allegiance of people like me - people who believed in the Republican party and its ideals, before the Republican party cast aside those ideals in favor of catering to the wealthiest 1% of Americans.
So now I am a Democrat, but it hasn’t exactly been a match made in heaven. I’m a big fan of American business, and I’m not a huge fan of unions. These are two qualities that put me at odds with a lot of card-carrying Democrats. While I’ll concede that unions are great, if you happen to be in one, they also drive up prices for the rest of us, which leaves less money in our pockets, less money for spending, and ultimately, less jobs in the economy. Business, particularly small business, is the lifeblood of our economy. It creates 80% of the jobs, and generates tax revenues that fund many of the government programs that so many Democrats are fond of. The lifeblood of our economy is not big corporate America, which, in cahoots with the financial sector, seems increasingly intent on sucking the wealth out of the middle class, hollowing out our country from within, and lining their pockets with ill-gotten gains. They have done this with the blessing of the Republican Party, which has assisted them by channeling their political donations and lobbying efforts.
So when I left the Republican Party in 2007, it was because I came to realize what many Republican Party members are just now learning - that the Republican Party doesn’t represent the best interest of the bulk of Republicans. Instead, they are controlled by, and work in the best interest of, large corporations and the big banks in the financial sector. Republican Party leaders cynically cloak their true motives with messages of “freedom” and “job creation.” And they perpetuate the notion that it’s more American to be a Republican. Unfortunately, a lot of Republican Party members believe just that. But, as the South Carolina Primary has proven, a lot of them are starting to wise up.
If Joe Scarborough is correct, then the “primal scream” heard in South Carolina is, in effect, a protest by Republicans against the Republican Party establishment. And it’s not the first Republican protest we have seen from within the ranks of the party. To date, there have been three Republican primaries, and there have been three separate winners. And the very existence of Ron Paul as a semi-viable (though ultimately doomed) candidate is a form of protest as well. His enduring success, despite the best efforts of mainstream media to ignore his existence (a topic itself worthy of a lengthy blog post), only further serves to demonstrate that Republicans are in the throes of an internal revolution. And revolutions, as Republicans know, are never good for business.
At the end of the day, what we have learned (the net-net, in business-speak) is that the Republicans have shot themselves in the foot, and it's potentially fatal. In 2012, Republicans have a tremendous opportunity to take back the White House, and they are squandering it. They sold out their own party, and created an environment that is ripe for exactly what they are hoping to avoid - a two-term Democratic president. As a result, the Democrats aren’t going to win the election in 2012, the Republicans are going to lose it. So, for all you Democrats out there, when you’re dancing in the streets in November after Obama is re-elected president, be sure stop for a moment and thank those who made that victory possible - the powers that be in the Republican Party.
Pictures from Wall St Protests
My company recently moved to the financial district, so I have a front row seat to the "Occupy Wall St" protests.
Is Donald Trump Trying to Ruin Republican Chances for the White House?
What’s the deal with The Donald? The billionaire and would-be Republican presidential candidate has stirred up a hornet’s nest of controversy lately. Many people say that he is not really interested in the presidency at all, but rather he is just a self-absorbed publicity hound who will do anything to keep himself and his business empire in the media spotlight he so obviously adores. Yet others have speculated that Trump is secretly sympathetic to the Democratic Party and is trying to undermine Republican chances in the election. From his previous flirtations with Democrats to his adamant birtherism to his threat of a last-ditch independent run, 
many Republicans are suspicious of Trump’s true intentions. Moreover, his 180-degree turns on taxes, abortion, and health care make even notorious flip-flopper Mitt Romney look consistent. Could Trump be stirring up trouble just to suck oxygen away from other potential Republican candidates?
There is no doubt that Trump has changed his mind on a number of hot-button issues over the years. He has switched his voter affiliation from Republican to Independent to Democrat and back to Republican. He told Larry King in 1999 that he was in favor of universal health care, but now decries Obamacare as “unconstitutional.” He has given money to Republicans but also to Democrats reviled by conservatives and the Tea Party, people like Ted Kennedy, Anthony Weiner, Charlie Rangel, Harry Reid, John Kerry, and Joe Biden. Trump says he is pro-life, but in 1999 he told Fox News, “I’m totally pro-choice.” Though he professes to be anti-tax now, in 1999 he suggested a one-time 14.25 percent tax on the wealthiest Americans to erase the national debt. All of these zigzags make some exasperated Republicans and amused Democrats wonder if he is secretly working for the Democratic Party as a plant.
And then there is the birtherism. If Trump secretly wants to torpedo Republican chances for the White House in 2012, there is no better issue to dwell upon. Trump has become the loudest and most insistent advocate for the widely debunked conspiracy theory that President Barack Obama was not born in the United States and therefore does not have a proper birth certificate or, if he does, it harbors some secret the president does not want revealed like “he’s a Muslim.” Though the birther issue appeals to the extreme right and could theoretically help – or at least not hurt – in the Republican primary, it is widely considered to be an anathema for the independent voters any Republican nominee would need to win over in the general election. Even famed Bush strategist Karl Rove said on Fox News that Trump was “smarter than this” and “a joke candidate.”
Finally, if he doesn’t win the Republican nomination, Trump has said he would consider a run as an independent. That scenario is particularly worrisome to Republicans, as it could potentially siphon off crucial votes, splitting the party and handing the president a second term.
So, what is The Donald up to? Only time will tell…
U.S. Government Averts Shutdown, For Now
How Did it Come to This?
With only hours to spare, both the GOP and Democrats worked furiously into the night to avert a governmental shutdown due to a budget dispute. There were many deals laid on the table over the last few weeks although neither party could come to an agreement. With only hours to go, John Boehner, who is Speaker of the House, met with influential Democrats and President Obama to ink a deal that would cut governmental spending by $38.5 billion dollars over the course of the year.
What's at Stake
Some political analysts claim that the Democrats stand the most to gain if a shutdown should occur. Because Republicans have fallen victim to inter-party fighting, a sensible budget was not an easy accomplishment. Republicans took months to draft a shaky budget proposal, which Democrats used as fodder. Parts of the proposed budget contained sweeping cuts to entitlement programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, which are programs that affect older people and those in financial distress. With Democrats holding out for less extreme cuts that would affect other federal programs, Republicans risk looking insensitive to the needs of certain segments of the population. The last time there was a shutdown of the Federal government was in 1995 under the presidency of Bill Clinton, whose ratings would soar following an eventual budget deal. This fact also weighed heavy in the hearts of many of the veteran members of the GOP.
Success for Who
Although the shutdown was avoided and Federal workers' pay is safe, many people wonder exactly which party should claim success. Democrats claim victory based on the fact that the government will still function. The GOP claims victory because they will cut spending over the next year, which is what their party says was the reason for the sweeping GOP wins in November of 2010. However, most economists venture that there is no clear winner due to larger issues that loom in the foreground. The safety of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is at stake because of two costly wars and a housing sector drop that has sent the U.S. in a downward spiral over the last three years. To add to the woes of both houses of Congress, unemployment still remains high in most states.
Tea Party Influence
Another aspect of the political canvas across the country is a movement called the Tea Party. This movement looks to implement sweeping cuts in spending that they hope will bring the country out of its stale economy. Lately, the Tea Party has been expressing its disdain for House Speaker John Boehner. Judson Phillips has been the most verbal of the bunch and has made it known that John Boehner can easily be replaced if he does not follow the same sentiment as the Tea Party. Many political experts believe that it may have been because of the Tea Party that Boehner waited so long to come to a deal.
Jon Stewart Reacts to Arizona Shootings
Jon is particularly insightful about how, unfortunately, we can't draw a direct line between the vitriol in modern politics and causation of the Arizona shootings. But it would be great if we could.
Here is the link: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-january-10-2011/arizona-shootings-reaction
Republicans Block Bill Letting Tax Cuts for Wealthy Expire
http://www.necn.com/12/04/10/bPolitics-bRepublicans-block-bill-lettin/landing.html?blockID=366419&feedID=4212
If you try to stop corruption in Afghanistan, you’ll get thrown in jail for corruption
It's great to see our tax dollars going to support this Bizarro World nation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/03/world/asia/03wikileaks-corruption.html?partner=rss&emc=rss