it's the day after.
the day after president obambi's constitutionally mandated annual state of the union speech, delivered to a joint session of congress -- and to the millions of viewers in TV land, who make judgments about politics based on how they feel personally, and not according to any rational analysis of, well, much of anything.
for myself, i tune it out. i never watch these things. i try to never watch TV at all. it's a vast intellectual wasteland. on the satellite dish i used to have, sometimes at the very edge of the dial were some programs from educational institutions that were of some value. for everything else, and especially anything you'd consider news or public-interest programming, that was all turned into rah-rah boosterism for the elite political consensus about the time of the first gulf war.
it was no longer fashionable to question the assertions of the politically approved spokesfolks or punditry; access was contingent on giving your unquestioning support for ruling truisms, be they political, economic or entertainment. you had to assent to stupidity in all the public space of the media. that commandment for blind obedience and rigid nationalist conformity have evolved into the current corporate media circus -- where all public discourse is filtered through a handful of politically invested corporate behemouths.
until just a few weeks ago, i had never even heard sarah palin's voice! for a year and a half almost, by virtue of never watching what drivel passes for the public conversation in america, i had successfully ducked out of the path of her whiny imprecations, and all i knew of her was through the written word, not 15-second soundbites -- or, according to the current fashion, a tweet. (palin's introduction to the public at her nominating convention proved to be a one-time, make or break moment to win the affection of the yahoo assembly, and once accomplished, she's held firm to her spot on the political scene since.)
all the politicians who covet the top job wish they were giving that speech, but for now we have Obambi, and he had the job of selling his smile to the public, and blowing flowery fragrances of rhetoric to a public devoid of taste or discernment. everything has devolved to the level of an impression, where success is based on a well-turned phrase or two, and how the opinion leaders -- in their subservience to the corporate paymasters -- exude self-interested pronouncements for ill or nil on the speech.
how do you feel about how you feel? this could be the succinct way to gauge our reaction to the president's speech. there's a lot of rhetorical fat to chew on, but no meat in taco.
do you feel positive about the future, are you bullish on america?
that the alternative is unthinkable makes the answer robotically positive. no one wants to contemplate the failure of the system they're invested in -- not the rulers, and certainly not the poor schmucks who have to live with the scraps the elite throws down from the table.
obambi surrounds himself with the financial elites that will be required to finance his billion-dollar reelection campaign. he has to deliver the goods when it comes to fattening their corporate and personal bottom lines -- and blowing feathers at those fat asses. he's nothing if not reliable, when it's his ass that's on the line -- and you'll see it spread wide for all those who want to do obeisance with a kiss to the system that elevated him to the top job.
if you hate him, like the national white peoples party and FOX news yahoo psychos do, it's a reason to stay fired up, simmering rage just barely not blowing the lid off the tea kettle. it's a bit like the controlled nuclear chain reaction that powers a nuclear generator -- and the plant operators at RNC/chamber of commerce think they know how to stave off a full-blown meltdown.
this is my vision of wankernomics: whether you're on the president's side or not, you're going to end up paying to tab for the recklessness of the corporate sponsors of this clusterfuck we call the US economy. we're leveraged out the wazoo, we make nothing of value but weapons, and our national treasury is wasted on unwinnable wars and bailing out bankers' bad debts. whether you're for or against the man or one or the other parties, the result is basically the same. wankernomics is you getting poorer so that the elites can become ever richer.