On B1 Bombers

Eugene Jarecki, whose documentary "Why We Fight" about the military-industrial-complex was the subject of my first-ever blog post, continues his analysis of how political mandates are manufactured. This thing about the B1 Bomber you're about to read is as brilliant as it is twisted. He then tells us what to do about it.

Today, the B1 Bomber has a piece of it made in every single U.S. state. This simple fact offers a window into a heinous defense industry practice called "political engineering" -- a strategy for the grotesque misuse of taxpayer dollars. Simply put, a loose alliance of actors from the military, industry, and Congress (what Eisenhower first called the "military-industrial-congressional-complex" before removing the word "congressional") work together to ensure that the contracts and subcontracts to produce a given weapons system are distributed as widely as possible across congressional districts. This way, if the program ever comes up for reevaluation, there's a built-in constituency in Congress for its continuation.

He implores all of us who are blowing our collective wads over Democratic nominee Barack Obama to keep him and the Democrats honest as they face this formidable phenomenon known as political engineering. No president -- no matter how inspiring -- can do squat against these mandates without some counterbalance from us, the public.

Aside from ill-conceived comparisons to dieting (you'll have to read the full article for that), his calls for organizing for social change make perfect sense and, more importantly, offer hope. Real hope.

"...[M]ake civic engagement an extension of what you already do for work or play. And the second is to break out of the isolation and individuation that so many of us experience in our television, cell-phone, and computer-dominated existence.

...No matter what our individual vocation, we must follow Margaret Mead's timeless wisdom about the power of small groups of organized people to change the world. In an interconnected age more than ever, we must not toil in isolation but join forces with others to build groupings of pressure-groups - not shadowy think tanks on K street - but everyday organizations in small towns and big towns that fix their attention on a needed area of social change and work tirelessly for it...Just to give an example, if 1,000 people in all 435 congressional districts committed themselves to spend 5 hours a month acting as a watchdog on congressional waste and corruption, making that information public, and demanding transparency and accountability, just think of the impact those 2,175,000 man-hours could have on our system."

Government of the people, right?

It's October 2008. Children of the future, take note

A recap of the year so far. (the latter half, at least.)

The Orioles, sadly, didn't come close.

The global economy has swerved into a credit freeze disaster because of an excess of unwise investments and a shortage of trusting lenders or investors. My parents' retirement account has been cut in half. The bogeymen in all this? Subprime loans turned to mortgage-backed securities, known as complex financial instrument, sometimes known as derivatives. Dress up like THAT for Halloween.

Barack Obama has everyone's hopes awful high.

And, finally, gratifyingly, a woman from Alaska has electrified and united not just the Republican base, but EVERYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD. An electorate stands in rapt, fearsome attention, reminiscent of the days of -- never. Sputtering comedy careers have found new life.

Yesterday, Frontline fabulously profiled both Obama -- the community organizer who early on in his career inspired many with the stolen Cesar Chavez labor slogan: Yes We Can! -- and John McCain, the prisoner of war and former hottie who stumbled into a beer heiress and an impressive political career. It's a historic election, no doubt.

But I propose that it is not too early (and not a jinx) to bring up the long-term prospects of an Obama win. Glenn Greenwald does it well:

Nonetheless, it's worth underscoring -- in fact, it's vital to keep in mind -- that the option of politically empowering Democrats is the opposite of a panacea. The Democratic Party structure in Washington, and particularly its leadership in Congress, is more corrupted and destructive than anything else there is -- with the exception of the right-wing faction that has been running the country for the last eight years. Contrary to the inane conventional Beltway wisdom that bipartisanship is oh-so-tragically scarce, Democrats as an entity have, over and over, passively acquiesced to, and frequently actively enabled and participated in, many of the worst abuses of the last eight years. Their leadership in Congress is corrupt and craven to the bone in many of the same ways the GOP leadership has been -- and they're about to be far more entrenched and their power far less checked.

Not to be negative or anything.