OK, this article by Daniel Wolff is not that bad, although I really fail to see the connection between politics and the song lyrics he's discussing. But one thing gets me: the idea that the anti-bush crowd didn't care about getting out of Iraq, about universal health care, about confronting social problems in general, that it was really "Anything but Bush and real issues".
That's not true at all. Why do you think we wanted Bush out? So that we could go cheer on neo-liberalism or so that a progressive agenda would at least have a glimmer of hope of being possible in Washington?
Right now we're seeing the results of an ultra-conservative administration being re-elected....ultra-conservative policy being put in action, ultra-conservative laws being passed, ultra-conservative political appointments being made. That means that people have to be on the offensive, countering the policies which are coming out of Washington which are actively against our values, rather than trying to push a somewhat centrist administration towards more progressive goals.
I would rather not have to look at a paper, see the policies the administration is putting out, and think that if they really get put into place serious parts of the ecology, of the social welfare system (as it still exists), of personal rights, would be gone.
And, yes, of course, I know, during the Clinton administration there was more logging on national forest land than in the first Bush term, Clinton terminated welfare, Clinton started the buildup to the restrictive laws which are passing right now.
All this is true but the fact that liberals didn't stick up for themselves during the Clinton years and press the Clinton administration to be more progressive doesn't mean that there weren't opportunities during the Clinton administration which are now closed in the Bush administration, or that those same possibilities wouldn't be there if Kerry was elected instead of Bush.
It's sort of like Wolff's experience of coming in contact with people who were anti-Bush and not much else: I'm sorry if those people really are out there but their shortsightedness isn't my responsability. It would still be a better thing if Kerry was in the oval office. Whether people use that opportunity to actually press for social change or not is sort of beyond my control, and I don't see how their lack of will power would actually negate the progress won by keeping ultra-conservatives, who in my opinion want to press policies which will in the long run have much greater damage than those of centrists, out of power.