Thoughts this go-round

In Elizabeth's recent post, she mentioned the wonder wrought by the likes of Palin, O'Donnell, Angle et al. (As to her broader point about the nauseating, smug sanctimony oozing from Slate's "Who Gets to Be a Feminist?" conversation, I am in whole-hearted agreement.) As is meet and proper for his role in these parts (and hey, I'm sincerely glad we have any commenters left, given the tumbleweeds that have started rolling through this blog), Official Bleakonomy Gadfly John decided to ignore the main topic and issue a paean to those lovely ladies of the lunatic Right.

And so, to GJ and his like-minded ilk, I say "Good luck." Go for it.

I understand that the economy is in the crapper. I understand that the jobs market continues to smell like last week's sardines. I understand that people are freaked out by deficit spending, no matter what certain economic theories say. And yes, I even understand that the GOP is doing a decent job of flogging these issues, despite being noticeably short on ideas that would actually make things better.

Now, from my perspective, the President and Congress (the latter largely at the end of the last presidential administration) have done a creditable job of trying to stabilize things. TARP seems to have done its work. The auto industry didn't implode. Our economy didn't go into wholesale collapse. Things could maybe be better, but considering the crap sandwich the President was handed upon taking office, I think things could plausibly have been a whole hell of a lot worse.

Which brings us to the current election cycle. People are mad as hell that things aren't better, and they blame the man in the White House. Fair enough, I suppose. But what do they intend to do about it? It seems decent percentages want to vote for candidates that are flagrantly insane.

I'm sorry that New York Republicans somehow managed to nominate a man for the gubernatorial race so odious that even Al D'Amato called him "dangerous" and "unfit for office," but that's what they did. And it seems a third of New Yorkers are willing to vote for him anyway. Doubtless sane Republicans in Delaware wish their party had gone with someone other than a resume-fabricating neo-Puritan without even a semblance of a clue. (I actually watched the O'Donnell/Coons debate on C-SPAN, and I defy anyone to change my opinion that the woman is an abject moron.) But lo and behold, about 35% of voters in her state are going to vote for her anyway. And those are just the races where the maniacs are going to lose. In Nevada, admittedly lackluster Harry Reid could easily lose his seat to a woman who has suggested that armed revolution is a workable option for angry Americans.

All of this brings to mind a favorite quote of mine from H. L. Mencken: "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." Or the campaign slogan of Bill and Opus when they ran for the White House in 1984 under the banner of the Meadow Party: "This time, why not the worst?"

Why not, America? Why not?

I survey the panoply of "Tea Party" candidates and see a motley collection of demagogues, cretins and raving lunatics. (And I haven't even mentioned their deranged queen.) It seems plenty of Americans see worthwhile candidates for higher office. And so, voters in Nevada and Alaska and Kentucky and Delaware, etc etc etc in saecula saeculorum, you want 'em? Go for it.

Let's see what happens when the Congress gets the new members America richly deserves.

Update: I hadn't read Eugene Robinson's column for today when I wrote this, but suffice it to say I agree with every word he says.

Update II, Son of Update: Also, Steve Benen.