During the earliest, craziest stages of the cold war, McCarthyites invented a new term of opprobrium: Premature anti-fasicst. This phrase referred to anyone (usually those on the left) who had opposed Hitler or the international fascist movement before, oh, say, 1937 or 1938. The red-hunters presumed that anyone who supported the fight against Franco during the Spanish civil war just had to be a bolshie. (This presumption did not stop the right from adopting Orwell as a secular saint.)
Eventually, those accused of being "premature anti-fascists" decided to wear that description as the proverbial badge of honor.
Perhaps the left will invent a new derisive phrase for those Democrats who, during the election, became convinced that Obama was just another corrupt right-wing politician. Our diagnosis was proven correct, but we hit upon it so early that we retain an aura of political cooties. Thus, we are Premature Anti-Lightbringers -- or PALs.
I like the sound of that. In fact, I may like it better than PUMA -- a phrase (and a movement) which served a purpose but which has, perhaps, run its course.
So: Are we PALs?
20 comments:
I prefer the term SmartProgs.
"Our diagnosis was proven correct, but we hit upon it so early that we retain an aura of political cooties."
Chure, we can be PALs ;-)
Yup, we're PALs.
I have this...feeling no one who denounced Obama is going to be considered uncool much longer.
It's too bad most of the PUMAs went bad (where "bad" is defined as lying through your teeth about Democrats). It was a really cool name.
Hmm. A technical critique: To work as an acronym and propagate widely, all the parts of the acronym need to be known. But LightBringer, as a synonym for Obama, isn't known outside a relatively narrow circle of bloggers, eh? (And if you say, propagate both, are you making the job 2x as hard, for 4x? I'd say the latter.)
Nevertheless, I applaud the history, the critique, and the attempt.
Can I be a PUMA PAL?
For those of you needing it, here's the link to the original "Lightworker" column by Mark Morford. A snippet:
"Here's where it gets gooey. Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul."
Excuse me while I go throw up.
At some point "Lightworker" morphed into "Lightbringer," which is funnier. I may have had something to do with that transformation.
Sounds good to me Joe. Do we get a secret handshake and decoder ring with membership?
Just asking...hehehe
Mark MORFORD wrote that??? My gawd, bluelyon, you should've handed out the barf bags *beforehand* !
I dunno about PALs...I don't like the connotations of "premature." And to borrow a turn from Mark Twain, I think the reports of the demise of PUMA have been greatly exaggerated.
What I don't understand is how anyone can continue to read the advice and prognostications of someone who ISN'T a PAL? Haven't they proven themselves naive &/or willfully blind?
Sometimes twice over like former Bush-voters who then turned leftier-than-thou and were at the forefront of the Lightbullier movement?
PAL? I like Premature anti-fascist better. I don't like Fascists, no matter what their strips, whether they have a [D] behind their matters not.
Isn't the word for light bringer Lucifer?
I remember that bizarre Mark Morford article & find it interesting that we've not heard a peep out of him since on the subject. Lightbringer, lightworker - it's the same narcissistic, ahistorical new age egotism that gloms glassy-eyed onto anything that reflects back to the person how great they are. the ultimate in delusional spirituality.
I prefer Prescient Anti-Lightbringers or PALs. The Obots are the Premature Obama Worship Ninnies or POWNs.
Joan
emmag - Morford's still delusional. Just check out his latest:
We finally have a president -- and will have a president, for much of the next decade -- who is simply light years more gifted, articulate, diplomatic, calm, fair-minded, astute, eloquent and (still) downright globally inspiring than any in decades. No matter your stance on the inherited war in Afghanistan, no matter the fistful of failures and disappointments to date, I remain fully convinced I'm witnessing the finest, most exciting, historic, deeply effective president in my lifetime, and probably yours. Don't believe it? Call me in 2020, and let's review.
The best part: We don't yet know his full capabilities, his true range. Right now Obama remains saddled with merely trying to unbury us, stem the hemorrhaging, recover some of the brutal BushCo losses. Such a task can't help but be frontloaded with bad news. But here's my prediction: once he can more fully dedicate his energies toward creating something new, instead of repairing the old and decrepit? Exhilarating.
And there's this from December.
Cringe-worthy. I used to read Morford religiously, but soon tired of his new agey gooey sex schtick, so I had no idea how off the rails he'd gone over Obama. He is an Obot to the nth degree.
Rookie years are often no accurate guide to future hall of fame-level accomplishments, nor is character, nor is corruption, in my view. (Although bad enough character or corruption might prevent the formal induction for those with such career credentials; see 'Pete Rose.') That's as true for presidents as for athletes.
Consider, or for those old enough, remember, Clinton's first year.
With an anemic recovery, 'it's the economy, stupid!' was the message, and Clinton had promised the classic neo-Keynesian remedies of an expansionary fiscal policy of middle class tax cuts, and significant seeding of high-tech investment into the big city (Democrat) areas, such as high speed rail infrastructure projects.
Bad news on all fronts: the Democratic leadership in the Congress insisted that the pay-go rules they'd instituted with Bush the Wiser remain in place, so there could be no new net stimulus, period. Clinton fought them, but lost on this issue.
Fed Chair Greenspan told him his goal of cutting the annual deficit in half by 4 years wasn't enough, and Clinton was forced to entirely eliminate the middle class tax cut, and so reduce the stimulus plan that it was a nothing-burger, and Congress refused to pass what was then a trivial amount that wouldn't have much helped anyway.
Later, Clinton went against Dem Party economic orthodoxy to agree to a foolish 7-year timetable to balance the budget, and agreed to use the then-more-inaccurate CBO scoring instead of the OMB's projections.
Were you, or would you have been, an early Clinton detractor, based on this record? And what do you think now, 8 years and 8 years again later of that record?
Oddly, in a way, Obama has delivered the Democratic fantasy league policy positions that Clinton had promised to do and failed to do (while Clinton succeeded anyway, imo): a very large, the largest, middle class tax cut, a huge stimulus package, and almost a HCR bill (however bad it is, remember, Clinton got one bill passed through the House Ways and Means Committee (Rosty's bill, period).
I don't think Sam Smith over at the Progressive Review has ever changed his mind that Bill (and Hill) were the worst things to ever happen to the Democratic Party to that date (even if he now pegs Obama as creating a greater level of harm, if he does, not sure). For a period of time, that view had ample empirical supportive evidence, but now, in hindsight, I think most Democrats would disagree.
XI
Mr Mike, you & I are on the same page bro, my thoughts exactly
Hillary Clinton was the worst, most warmongering Democratic candidate after Biden. The idea that there was any derangement about that Scoop Jacksonette, lackey of the top four insurers, etc. is itself deranged indeed. I am grateful McCain is not president and grateful Clinton is not president. I never messiahed Obama, and only morons want to create false dichotomies. The PUMAS were a GOP campaign by the neocons to try to make sure there would not even be a gap between Bush and whoever succeeded him in warmongering.
I well remember that vicious creep Hillary Clinton spitting on those of us marching against invading Iraq. She did it every day, and the only person in the Senate worse than her was Biden. In the House, Gephardt was not as bad as Clinton. She has never, in her whole political and legal career, done one good thing. It's literally, not figuratively, insane to venerate her like you're doing.
It's psychotic epic fail. Clinton was the whitewash that tied the Reagan Bush Bush years together, but even he was substantially better than his fascist Goldwaterite racist bomber wife.
Post a Comment