Is there any reason to continue?

I had planned to padlock this blog at the beginning of the year, after the trannies attacked. The enterprise kept going only because, at the last moment, an actual paid ad showed up.

I got into blogging to do whatever small thing I could to help the Democrats win in 2004. Before the internet, there was no place for guys like me.

The mainstream media was conservative despite its liberal rep. Meanwhile, the few non-mainstream voices were -- well, hell, let's just list a few names: Alexander Cockburn, Chris Hitchens, Michael Albert, Pacifica... In short: the dreaded progressive purist mafiosi. The kind of people who make me long for a sharp stick whenever we lock eyes.

Few people now recall that the same horseshit rumors about Clinton's "drug dealing" appeared in both The Nation and American Spectator. As always -- as always -- the progressives actually thought they were being hip whenever they attacked a Democratic president. Even though these nonsensical accusations were based on the most dubious of sources (such as Terry Reed, whose story kept growing like Pinocchio's nose), nobody ever apologized. Nobody ever asked Alexander Cockburn to explain why he cribbed notes from Larry Nichols.

(By the way: That's one thing the PPs have in common with the GOPers: A psychological inability to apologize. If either Cockburn or Bush ran over your child, they'd blame the kid for being there.)

The PPs have always hated the Democratic party more than they hated the Republicans. FDR planned the attack on Pearl Harbor...JFK was controlled by the mob and his father was a Nazi...Jimmy Carter deliberately instigated the Tehran hostage takeover under orders from David Rockefeller... I heard these claims not from any right-wing sources, but from lefties.

I've seen 'em make these claims in person: The know-it-all smile, the ultra-smug tone of voice, the lean back in the chair while taking a drag, the sneering chuckle. The entire pose is designed to convey the impression that anyone who disagrees with their reheated Birchisms must be hopelessly naive. (That's an interesting subject in and of itself: The subtle penetration of right-wing extremism into left-wing thought.)

In youth, I bought into this crap. What young man wants to seem naive? Later, I realized that most of these PPs hadn't read one third as much as they pretended, and that much of their information came from dubious sources.

I used to have a tape recording of a lecture by Noam Chomsky in which he blamed the assassination of Patrice Lumumba on JFK, notorious Enemy of All Mankind. If someone had pointed out that Lumumba died before Kennedy took the oath of office, Chomsky no doubt would have called the fact-checker a hagiographer, one of his favorite words.

Then came the net, and I discovered that there were other folks like me. A big inspiration was Bob Fertik of Democrats.com, who came right out and said, without a trace of apology, that Bill Clinton was a great president.

Indeed he was. But at the time, that sentiment had the shock of the new. Actual support for a Democratic president...? Unthinkable! Expressing such an idea would do permanent injury to one's hipness credentials.

Then came Josh Marshall. Kos. Democratic Underground. Buzzflash. A host of other bloggers.

This was something new: A movement filled with fresh voices, with nary a peep from that vile Nation crowd. And unlike the progressive purists -- who like defeat, because they prefer to bitch from the sidelines -- this new crew actually started to rack up accomplishments in the real world.

Well, it's over.

The PPS have rallied, and they have once more turned the left against the Democratic Party. The lone voice for sanity on D.U. was William Pitt, and the movement hounded him offstage.

My readership disgusts me. You people care only about spewing Pelosi-hate and Dem-hate. Some of you have even tried to sell me those crappy, vague rumors about Clinton ("something something Mena Clinton Reed Seal something something something..."). Time and again, every time you infants see something in the news you don't like, you deliver the Standard Issue Both Parties Are the Same Lecture. And you genuinely seem to be under the impression that I've never heard it before.

You refuse to see that the main reason why some Democrats are vulnerable to conservative pressure -- and they are -- stems from the fact that we still live in an ultra-conservative culture. That's the reason why I cannot work up much anger at the 41 House members who voted for a lousy bill. Many Dems managed to squeak to electoral victory in red states or red districts. They cannot afford to cross their constituents, most of whom think that Adam and Eve drove dinosaur-powered stone cars like the ones on the Flintstones.

Yes, I know that there is something emotionally unsatisfying about blaming the people rather than the leaders. Nevertheless, realism demands that we pin the blame on the hordes of ignorant hillbillies who live in Shithole, Indiana and Pissville, Alabama. Without their votes, no Congressional majority can endure.

You people do not understand that -- despite the war's unpopularity -- in much of this country, it is still 2003, and Dems really do have excellent reason to fear becoming victimized by the sort of scurrilous attacks that felled Max Cleland. The right still controls the media agenda, which is why you know how much John Edwards spent on a haircut and you don't know similar facts about Mitt Romney.

Most of my readers remain locked into mindless Pelosi-hate, especially after the FISA bill. In fact, her behavior on this matter has been impeccable. She voted against the bill, she argued against the bill, she tried to have it changed. Moreover, she is still fighting against it:

“Many provisions of this legislation are unacceptable, and although the bill has a six month sunset clause, I do not believe the American people will want to wait that long before corrective action is taken,” Pelosi, D-Calif., wrote to Judiciary Chairman John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., and Intelligence Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas.

Nevertheless, everywhere one goes in blogostan left, one encounters fools who blame Nancy Pelosi for the passage of this legislation. They act as though she wrote the damned thing. Even on Daily Kos:

For Nancy Pelosi: May we recommend Dancer's Knee Pads? They will complement her style as she leads the Democrats in their daily kabuki dance called "oversight." She will look stunning as she dances away from her responsibilities to the Constitution.

Disgusting. Absolutely swinish.

Well, I know where this is going. Seen it before.

Anyone who predicts gains for the Democrats is a fool. 2008 will be 1980. The Republicans will regain Congress and Fred Thompson will be president. Nader will receive a larger share of the vote than ever before -- either that, or the PPs will scream for Bloomberg. (Not that they like Bloomberg, but they will consider the Democratic candidate intolerable.)

As Sam Elliot says in Gettysburg, "I can see it clear, like it's already happened."

After the disaster, the progressives will respond by saying:

A) "It doesn't matter; both parties are the same."
B) "It's all the fault of Nancy Pelosi! She said 'off the table'!"

The real problem will, of course, be the usual one: Liberals will form a circular firing squad while the Republicans will fire up the robot factory. That factory is in some disarray now, but it will function with its usual efficiency as soon as the party chooses a candidate and the leadership finally and formally decides to distance itself from W.

My ladyfriend recently met a physical therapist from Germany who hates working in this country because people who need help don't get it, and because she is never sure of being paid. And why is that situation the way it is? One reason, and one reason only: Because across the board, right and left, the people of this country despise the Democratic Party. Even those who vote for it are always looking for any reason to vote otherwise.

Some voices in the Democratic blogosphere are finally starting to wake up to the facts: The impeachment movement has stopped being anti-Republican and has become anti-Democratic, and the progressive movement is far, far more fractious than are the conservatives. The problem has yet to reach the point where (say) Josh Marshall deigns to mention it, but that point will come soon.

All of which leaves me wondering: Why am I continuing?

I get no money from this gig. Last night, a message from a long-term reader caused me to grimace so fiercely that I cracked a tooth. In fact, I am now, quite literally, in severe dental pain -- without dollar one to pay a dentist.

So why bother?

The only way to make money from this gig would be to indulge in nonstop self-promotion -- and even that would probably be a useless gesture, since what I have to sell is not what you people want to hear. People prefer myths. Brad Friedman keeps inviting me to speak on the radio, and I keep saying no, because the listeners would allow me to address one and only one subject. I'm the tranny lightning rod.

If I decided to turn to Pelosi-hate and trannyism, I could make enough money from this blog to pay rent. Hell, I could buy a damn house -- while doing half the writing!

And maybe I should do just that. It's all going to hell anyways. The Democratic cause is hopeless, thanks to you motherfuckers. You ruined the impeachment drive (you, not Nancy Pelosi). So why should I not make a few cynical bucks?

(Oh, and uni: If I do decide to keep going, you are banned forever. Blame it on the toothache.)