I want to like Salon.com, despite the site’s propensity for “lifestyle” trivia. Hell, I watch “Game of Thrones” and while I do not directly experience the “Tyranny of Cloth Diapers”, I know people who do. It was kind of endearing when the first time I held my niece (my favorite person in the whole wide world), her big floppy, loose but politically correct swaddling failed and she peed all over my nearly politically correct (second hand) Brioni suit. Needless to say we’ve been very close since then and she’s almost as loud and obnoxious as me.
So I read Salon, I get it. We’re people. We have varied and deep connections to our families and our friends and our dalliances. Okay, the world is going to hell in a handbasket and I like to watch “Game of Thrones” every Sunday.
But two articles in Salon last week were so annoying, so wimpy and so naive that I had to remind myself again that Salon.com is just another pandering whore one passes by on the Rue Saint Denis called the Internet. Other than Glenn Greenwald, whose consistent, logical, political outrage will keep me coming back, Salon.com is a bastion of “Progressive” Nattering Nabobdom.
First, Jonathan Bernstein’s article on Friday, “Dems desert the left” provoked a big duh.
“Liberals appear to be missing some major opportunities to influence the next round of Democratic senators, just when they have the chance to do so.” Just what opportunities have liberals had to influence the Democrat party or Democrat senators since the election of Jimmy Carter, a southern white guy who tried but failed to bring the old slave states back into the fold?
That’s the point, even since the days of FDR, liberals always compromised their core beliefs to make expedient political deals with the Old South. When the South finally defected forever in 1968, that was the time for Democrats to start questioning idiotic anachronisms like the Electoral College. Of course they weren’t going to do that. Nobody seems to understand that the Democrat Party co-opted true socialists and liberals back in the 20s and 30s because they were scared shitless that someday a real rain would come and wash them from power.
So modern Democrats are always pandering to Bubba to get reelected, counting on mush-headed liberals to keep hoping. Why would Democrats truly advocate for a liberal agenda when hope is enough?
Then there was Joan Walsh’s revelation last week, “SF cops back top 1 percent,” produced a WTF? and a double-duh.
“While most cops on the scene were polite to protesters and shareholders alike, a few made clear they work for the top 1 percent.” A few? How about all of them, happy to collect their overtime pay protecting private property for which Wells Fargo will never reimburse the City of San Francisco. In fact, Wells Fargo won’t even indirectly reimburse the City because they don’t pay any fucking income tax. Oh, that’s right, the California Constitution prohibits cities from levying a local income tax.
Sure, San Francisco cops are a kinder, gentler version of, say, LA cops or 1968 Chicago cops, but they’re still cops. What did Joan expect? Did she think she could, like in the image above, put a flower in Officer Palladino’s Glock and win him over?
Cops always back the 1%. That’s what we pay them to do.
Even my four-year-old niece knows that a protester cannot expect anything other than violence from the cops. Not because I told her or her parents told her, but because she happened to see the police beating Occupy protesters in Oakland when she was getting a ride home from preschool.
Tomorrow it’s going to be a shit show in Los Angeles, if only a poop show in San Francisco.