The NY Daily News published on its web site a column I wrote about my concerns about the political polarization that’s taken place in our country:

For someone as optimistic and energetic as I am, it's a very strange feeling being totally pessimistic about the future of our country. The political polarization has reached such an extreme that I find that I can't even have a conversation with people who don't share my general political views.

On the rare occasion that I do have such conversations - often with good friends whom I really respect, and whom I think are moderate and thoughtful people - I'm stunned by the vitriol they express toward Democrats in general and President Obama in particular. They genuinely, passionately believe that Obama is a liar, a socialist, a hater of Israel and a terrorist appeaser.

It's nothing short of bizarre and it fills me with despair. If I can't even have talk about politics with good friends, then there's no hope for any kind of unity and compromise in our political system, which we so desperately need given the enormous challenges we face. Instead, I see us going down the road of Kenya (which I'm familiar with because my parents and sister live there), in which politics is tribal and it's kill or be killed (sometimes, literally), and where no tactics, no matter how despicable, are off the table.

We're still a long way from this, of course, but the trend is troubling - and if it doesn't reverse, I fear we are doomed to a future of political paralysis which will lead to stagnation and mediocrity, like Japan in recent decades. We will always be an enormously wealthy country - as Japan still is (it has 10 times the GDP per capita as China, for example) - but if my fears prove correct, we will not be the dynamic, vibrant, inspiring, truly great country we once were.

-----------------------

Is there any end to the anti-Obama anger? I can't even talk politics with my friends anymore

By Whitney Tilson

Thursday, September 23rd 2010, 1:30 PM

www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/09/23/2010-09-23_is_there_any_end_to_the_antiobama_anger_i_cant_even_talk_politics_with_my_friend.html#ixzz10NbT1rfE

Tom Friedman in his column today is so right – and I’m so pessimistic that we can come together to meet our challenges:

Studying China’s ability to invest for the future doesn’t make me feel we have the wrong system. It makes me feel that we are abusing our right system. There is absolutely no reason our democracy should not be able to generate the kind of focus, legitimacy, unity and stick-to-it-iveness to do big things — democratically — that China does autocratically. We’ve done it before. But we’re not doing it now because too many of our poll-driven, toxically partisan, cable-TV-addicted, money-corrupted political class are more interested in what keeps them in power than what would again make America powerful, more interested in defeating each other than saving the country.

“How can you compete with a country that is run like a company?” an Indian entrepreneur at the forum asked me of China. He then answered his own question: For democracy to be effective and deliver the policies and infrastructure our societies need requires the political center to be focused, united and energized. That means electing candidates who will do what is right for the country not just for their ideological wing or whoever comes with the biggest bag of money. For democracies to address big problems — and that’s all we have these days — requires a lot of people pulling in the same direction, and that is precisely what we’re lacking.

-------------------

September 21, 2010

Too Many Hamburgers?

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Tianjin, China

www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/opinion/22friedman.html

To visit China today as an American is to compare and to be compared. And from the very opening session of this year’s World Economic Forum here in Tianjin, our Chinese hosts did not hesitate to do some comparing. China’s CCTV aired a skit showing four children — one wearing the Chinese flag, another the American, another the Indian, and another the Brazilian — getting ready to run a race. Before they take off, the American child, “Anthony,” boasts that he will win “because I always win,” and he jumps out to a big lead. But soon Anthony doubles over with cramps. “Now is our chance to overtake him for the first time!” shouts the Chinese child. “What’s wrong with Anthony?” asks another. “He is overweight and flabby,” says another child. “He ate too many hamburgers.”

That is how they see us.

 

I’m not the only Obama supporter feeling depressed (Jon Stewart devoted six minutes of his show last night to this town hall and it’s well worth watching: www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-september-21-2010/meet-the-depressed.  It’s not his usual highly partisan thing – Jon Stewart is feeling depressed and let down too…):

It was billed as “Investing in America,” a live televised conversation on the state of the economy between President Obama and American workers, students, business people and retirees, a kind of Wall Street to Main Street reality check.

But it sounded like a therapy session for disillusioned Obama supporters.

In question after question during a one-hour session, which took place on Monday at the Newseum here and was televised on CNBC, Mr. Obama was confronted by people who sounded frustrated and anxious — even as some said they supported his agenda and proclaimed themselves honored to be in his presence.

People from Main Street wanted to know if the American dream still lived for them. People on Wall Street complained that he was treating them like a piñata, “whacking us with a stick,” in the words of Anthony Scaramucci, a former law school classmate of Mr. Obama’s who now runs a hedge fund and was one of the president’s questioners.

“I’m exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the mantle of change that I voted for,” said the first questioner, an African-American woman who identified herself as a chief financial officer, a mother and a military veteran. “I’ve been told that I voted for a man who was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class and I’m waiting sir, I’m waiting. I still don’t feel it yet.”

A 30-year-old law school graduate told Mr. Obama that he had hoped to pursue a career in public service — like the president — but complained that he could barely pay the interest on his student loans, let alone think of getting married or starting a family.

“I was really inspired by you and your campaign and the message you brought, and that inspiration is dying away,” he said, adding, “And I really want to know, is the American dream dead for me?”

The extraordinarily personal tone of the session, coupled with more substantive policy questions from the host, John Harwood of CNBC and The New York Times, reflects the erosion of support for Mr. Obama among the constituencies that sent him to the White House two years ago.

-------------------

Disappointed Supporters Question Obama

By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

Published: September 20, 2010

www.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/us/politics/21obama.html

WASHINGTON — It was billed as “Investing in America,” a live televised conversation on the state of the economy between President Obama and American workers, students, business people and retirees, a kind of Wall Street to Main Street reality check. 

Before we completely despair, it’s important to note that Carter, Reagan and Clinton all had LOWER approval ratings at this stage of their Presidencies:

What if Obama had done not-X? Would things really be better for him? How do we know they wouldn't be worse?

Sadly, we can't hit rewind on the cosmic VCR and persuade Obama to do the other thing in the name of science. But we have had a number of presidents who did very different things, and that gives us some basis on which to make judgments. Let's start with approval ratings. Gallup's system will let me compare only four presidents at once, so I chose the last three presidents who entered office amid a recession and didn't have a country-unifying terrorist attack in their first year. That gives us Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter. The dashed line is an average of all recent presidents.

Obama's current approval rating of 44 percent beats Clinton, Carter and Reagan. All of them were between 39 percent and 41 percent at this point in their presidencies. And all of them were former governors who accomplished less legislatively than Obama has at this point in his presidency.

 

---------------------

If only Obama had ...

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/08/if_only_obama_had.html

Krugman thinks the rabid anger toward Obama is mostly rooted in the rich hating him for wanting to raise their taxes, which I think is too simple (though it’s certainly a factor).  The point he makes about “normal rules of civilized (and rational) discourse no longer apply” is spot on, however:

Anger is sweeping America. True, this white-hot rage is a minority phenomenon, not something that characterizes most of our fellow citizens. But the angry minority is angry indeed, consisting of people who feel that things to which they are entitled are being taken away. And they’re out for revenge.

No, I’m not talking about the Tea Partiers. I’m talking about the rich.

These are terrible times for many people in this country. Poverty, especially acute poverty, has soared in the economic slump; millions of people have lost their homes. Young people can’t find jobs; laid-off 50-somethings fear that they’ll never work again.

Yet if you want to find real political rage — the kind of rage that makes people compare President Obama to Hitler, or accuse him of treason — you won’t find it among these suffering Americans. You’ll find it instead among the very privileged, people who don’t have to worry about losing their jobs, their homes, or their health insurance, but who are outraged, outraged, at the thought of paying modestly higher taxes.

The rage of the rich has been building ever since Mr. Obama took office. At first, however, it was largely confined to Wall Street. Thus when New York magazine published an article titled “The Wail Of the 1%,” it was talking about financial wheeler-dealers whose firms had been bailed out with taxpayer funds, but were furious at suggestions that the price of these bailouts should include temporary limits on bonuses. When the billionaire Stephen Schwarzman compared an Obama proposal to the Nazi invasion of Poland, the proposal in question would have closed a tax loophole that specifically benefits fund managers like him.

Now, however, as decision time looms for the fate of the Bush tax cuts — will top tax rates go back to Clinton-era levels? — the rage of the rich has broadened, and also in some ways changed its character.

For one thing, craziness has gone mainstream. It’s one thing when a billionaire rants at a dinner event. It’s another when Forbes magazine runs a cover story alleging that the president of the United States is deliberately trying to bring America down as part of his Kenyan, “anticolonialist” agenda, that “the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s.” When it comes to defending the interests of the rich, it seems, the normal rules of civilized (and rational) discourse no longer apply.

-----------------------------------------

September 19, 2010

The Angry Rich

By PAUL KRUGMAN

www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/opinion/20krugman.html

How Obama Thinks

I was so stunned by what Krugman said Dinesh D’Souza wrote in Forbes that I figured Krugman must have taken a sentence out of context so I looked it up (below and at: www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-private-enterprises-obama-business-problem_print.html) and it’s even MORE despicable than Krugman says!  You really have to read it to understand how stunning it is that a mainstream Republican would write this, and that a mainstream publication would publish it.  Here are the last two paragraphs:

Colonialism today is a dead issue. No one cares about it except the man in the White House. He is the last anticolonial. Emerging market economies such as China, India, Chile and Indonesia have solved the problem of backwardness; they are exploiting their labor advantage and growing much faster than the U.S. If America is going to remain on top, we have to compete in an increasingly tough environment.

But instead of readying us for the challenge, our President is trapped in his father's time machine. Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s. This philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation's agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. The son makes it happen, but he candidly admits he is only living out his father's dream. The invisible father provides the inspiration, and the son dutifully gets the job done. America today is governed by a ghost.

Obama barely knew his father!

-------------------

On The Cover/Top Stories
How Obama Thinks
Dinesh D'Souza, 09.27.10, 12:00 AM ET

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-private-enterprises-obama-business-problem_print.html

Barack Obama is the most antibusiness president in a generation, perhaps in American history. Thanks to him the era of big government is back. Obama runs up taxpayer debt not in the billions but in the trillions. He has expanded the federal government's control over home mortgages, investment banking, health care, autos and energy. The Weekly Standard summarizes Obama's approach as omnipotence at home, impotence abroad.

Maureen Dowd’s take on this travesty is spot on, especially her conclusion: “It’s Newt and D’Souza and their ilk who put America at risk.”:

Gingrich praised D’Souza’s article in Forbes, previewing an upcoming book called “The Roots of Obama’s Rage.”

Newt told The National Review Online that it was the “most profound insight I have read in the last six years about Barack Obama” and said D’Souza shows that the president “is so outside our comprehension” that you can only understand him “if you understand Kenyan, anticolonial behavior.”

Newt added: “This a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result of which he is now president.”

So the smear artists are claiming not only that the president is a socialist but that he suffers from a socialism gene.

“Our president is trapped in his father’s time machine,” D’Souza writes in Forbes, offering a genetic theory of ideology. “Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s. This philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation’s agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son.”

Playing into the bigotry of birthers and haters who paint Obama as “the other,” D’Souza writes that the president was raised offshore, spending “his formative years — the first 17 years of his life — off the American mainland, in Hawaii, Indonesia and Pakistan, with multiple subsequent journeys to Africa.” The ominous-sounding time in Pakistan was merely a visit when Obama was a college student.

…If it wasn’t so sick it would be funny. It’s worse than a conspiracy theory because this conspiracy consists of a single dead individual. The idea that there’s something illegitimate about anticolonialism on the part of a Kenyan man in the 1940s, ’50s and ’60s is stupid. And it’s inconsistent to accuse a president who’s raining drones on bad guys in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen of having an inherited anticolonial ideology.

It’s also really low. D’Souza and Gingrich are not merely discrediting the president’s father’s ideology. They’re discrediting his character and insinuating that the son inherited not just his father’s bad ideology but a bad character, too.

…This fear-mongering is ugly. D’Souza and Gingrich employ the tactics the Bush administration used to get us into Iraq — cherry-picking, insinuation, half-truths and dishonest reasoning.

If the conservatives are so interested in psychoanalyzing father and son relationships, why didn’t they do so back when W. was rushing to avenge and one-up his father by finishing what daddy started with Saddam?

On their Web site, Callista and Newt tout “Gingrich Productions” and promote an apocalyptic movie with the same kind of scary music that Fox uses, suggesting that the Obama administration is weak in the war against “radical Islam.” The movie and the Web site are called “America at Risk.”

It’s Newt and D’Souza and their ilk who put America at risk.

----------------------------------------

Who’s the Con Man?

By MAUREEN DOWD

Published: September 14, 2010

WASHINGTON

www.nytimes.com/2010/09/15/opinion/15dowd.html

Friedman with a powerful example of how China is kicking out butts because of our political paralysis:

Aren’t We Clever?

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Published: September 18, 2010

www.nytimes.com/2010/09/19/opinion/19friedman.html

What a contrast. In a year that’s on track to be our planet’s hottest on record, America turned “climate change” into a four-letter word that many U.S. politicians won’t even dare utter in public. If this were just some parlor game, it wouldn’t matter. But the totally bogus “discrediting” of climate science has had serious implications. For starters, it helped scuttle Senate passage of the energy-climate bill needed to scale U.S.-made clean technologies, leaving America at a distinct disadvantage in the next great global industry. And that brings me to the contrast: While American Republicans were turning climate change into a wedge issue, the Chinese Communists were turning it into a work issue.

“There is really no debate about climate change in China,” said Peggy Liu, chairwoman of the Joint U.S.-China Collaboration on Clean Energy, a nonprofit group working to accelerate the greening of China. “China’s leaders are mostly engineers and scientists, so they don’t waste time questioning scientific data.” The push for green in China, she added, “is a practical discussion on health and wealth. There is no need to emphasize future consequences when people already see, eat and breathe pollution every day.”

And because runaway pollution in China means wasted lives, air, water, ecosystems and money — and wasted money means fewer jobs and more political instability — China’s leaders would never go a year (like we will) without energy legislation mandating new ways to do more with less. It’s a three-for-one shot for them. By becoming more energy efficient per unit of G.D.P., China saves money, takes the lead in the next great global industry and earns credit with the world for mitigating climate change.

So while America’s Republicans turned “climate change” into a four-letter word — J-O-K-E — China’s Communists also turned it into a four-letter word — J-O-B-S.

“China is changing from the factory of the world to the clean-tech laboratory of the world,” said Liu. “It has the unique ability to pit low-cost capital with large-scale experiments to find models that work.” China has designated and invested in pilot cities for electric vehicles, smart grids, LED lighting, rural biomass and low-carbon communities. “They’re able to quickly throw spaghetti on the wall to see what clean-tech models stick, and then have the political will to scale them quickly across the country,” Liu added. “This allows China to create jobs and learn quickly.”

Nick Kristof argues correctly that the right’s attacks on ALL Muslims are not only immoral and contrary to what our nation stands for, but also massively contrary to our self-interest, as it dramatically increases the number of people who want to harm us.

Many Americans have suggested that more moderate Muslims should stand up to extremists, speak out for tolerance, and apologize for sins committed by their brethren.

That’s reasonable advice, and as a moderate myself, I’m going to take it. (Throat clearing.) I hereby apologize to Muslims for the wave of bigotry and simple nuttiness that has lately been directed at you. The venom on the airwaves, equating Muslims with terrorists, should embarrass us more than you. Muslims are one of the last minorities in the United States that it is still possible to demean openly, and I apologize for the slurs.

…Radicals tend to empower radicals, creating a gulf of mutual misunderstanding and anger. Many Americans believe that Osama bin Laden is representative of Muslims, and many Afghans believe that the Rev. Terry Jones (who talked about burning Korans) is representative of Christians.

Many Americans honestly believe that Muslims are prone to violence, but humans are too complicated and diverse to lump into groups that we form invidious conclusions about. We’ve mostly learned that about blacks, Jews and other groups that suffered historic discrimination, but it’s still O.K. to make sweeping statements about “Muslims” as an undifferentiated mass.

-------------------

September 18, 2010

Message to Muslims: I’m Sorry

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

www.nytimes.com/2010/09/19/opinion/19kristof.html

 

Join me at Jon Stewart's RALLY TO RESTORE SANITY in DC on Sat., Oct. 30th

I checked to make sure that this is real, not some elaborate hoax, and it’s really happening: Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are hosting a rally on the mall in Washington DC on Saturday, Oct. 30^th.  Called the “Rally to Restore Sanity” (Colbert hilariously calls his “The March to Keep Fear Alive”), I actually think this is going to be a VERY important political event, a powerful statement for sanity and moderation, and against the radical right, which is threatening to hijack our country by spreading hatred and divisiveness – plus it will surely be a BLAST, as Stewart and Colbert are the two funniest men alive!  I can’t wait to hold up the signs they will be providing, including ‘I Disagree With You, But I’m Pretty Sure You’re Not Hitler,’ ‘I’m Not Afraid of Muslims/Tea Partiers/Socialists/Immigrants/Gun Owners/Gays…But I Am Scared of Spiders,’ ‘Got Competence?,’ ‘9/11 was an OUTSIDE job,’ and ‘Take It Down a Notch, America.’

 

So, yes, I’m going and bringing my entire family – it’s a great opportunity to start getting my three girls politically active, plus show them the sights.  Susan and I have taken them around this country and the world, but they’ve never been to DC so we’re looking forward to visiting the White House, the Air and Space Museum, etc.

 

To see the hilarious segment announcing the rally on The Daily Show this week, see www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-16-2010/rally-to-restore-sanity (starts at 0:55).  And here’s Colbert: www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/359382/september-16-2010/march-to-keep-fear-alive (starts at 2:30).  High comedy!

 

Here’s an excerpt about the rally their web site, www.rallytorestoresanity.com:

 

"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!"

Who among us has not wanted to open their window and shout that at the top of their lungs?

Seriously, who?

Because we're looking for those people. We're looking for the people who think shouting is annoying, counterproductive, and terrible for your throat; who feel that the loudest voices shouldn't be the only ones that get heard; and who believe that the only time it's appropriate to draw a Hitler mustache on someone is when that person is actually Hitler. Or Charlie Chaplin in certain roles.

Are you one of those people? Excellent. Then we'd like you to join us in Washington, DC on October 30 -- a date of no significance whatsoever -- at the Daily Show's "Rally to Restore Sanity." Ours is a rally for the people who've been too busy to go to rallies, who actually have lives and families and jobs (or are looking for jobs) -- not so much the Silent Majority as the Busy Majority. If we had to sum up the political view of our participants in a single sentence... we couldn't. That's sort of the point.

Think of our event as Woodstock, but with the nudity and drugs replaced by respectful disagreement; the Million Man March, only a lot smaller, and a bit less of a sausage fest; or the Gathering of the Juggalos, but instead of throwing our feces at Tila Tequila, we'll be actively *not* throwing our feces at Tila Tequila. Join us in the shadow of the Washington Monument. And bring your indoor voice. Or don't. If you'd rather stay home, go to work, or drive your kids to soccer practice... Actually, please come anyway. Ask the sitter if she can stay a few extra hours, just this once. We'll make it worth your while.

 

Below are two articles about the rally.  The exact time on the 30^th isn’t set yet, but you can sign up to get info as it becomes available at: www.rallytorestoresanity.com.

 

I hope to see you there!

 

PS—The cheapest way to get to DC from East Coast cities (NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore) is one of the express bus services like MegaBus (www.megabus.com) or BoltBus (www.boltbus.com) – there are busses to/from NYC almost every hour and the prices are ridiculously low, ranging from $8-$23 each way.  I took MegaBus a few months ago and it was comfortable and had free wi-fi – what’s not to like?!

---------------------------

Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert D.C.rally has a deadly serious purpose

It may have started out as a game and a joke but the Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert rally in Washington D.C. may be the most important political event this year.

The political stage has been completely dominated this election season by Glenn Beck and other right wing commentators and the various Tea party rallies.

Can Stewart and Colbert prove there is a major alternative American voice out there as the mid term elections approach and the Tea Party is running rampant?

The October 30th "Rally to Restore Sanity" ,coming just a short time before those elections could prove to be a rallying cry and a Woodstock for the millions of liberals and moderates whose voices, with the exception of Stewart and Colbert, have not been heard.

Stewart in particular has shown an ability to articulate the sheer puzzlement and occasional despair at the charges being flung from the right against the Obama administration and others.

He skewers the worst excesses nightly as does Colbert in a more complex fashion.

But who do they speak for, and will the people they speak for turn up on the mall and give voice to the reality that while both are comedians, what they are addressing is deadly serious?

Time will tell but it will be a fascinating exercise in power politics, behind all the grins and one liners.

-------------------

Stewart, Colbert Plan Competing DC Rallies

By Erik Hayden | September 17, 2010 8:47am

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/Stewart-Colbert-Plan-Competing-DC-Rallies-5064

 

Not to be outdone by Glenn Beck, Jon Stewart has announced a DC rally on the National Mall October 30th. Entitled the "Rally To Restore Sanity," it is aimed at people who normally don't attend rallies (people with "shit to do," he explains). Not to be outdone by Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert has also announced a DC rally on the same day, cheekily dubbed "The March To Keep Fear Alive." The moves, evidently calibrated to combat Glenn Beck's huge "Restoring Honor" event last month, also are conveniently timed a few days before election day 2010. Not only do Colbert and Stewart cash in on the political fever before the midterms, they can perhaps even make a political statement or two while lampooning. Critics call it a savvy move.

·         Pre-Announcement Buzz Melissa Bell at The Washington Post details the build up to the announcement: there were "a number of 'pre-announcement announcements' on the show and an online campaign started by Reddit.com. The users on Reddit called for Stephen Colbert to match Glenn Beck's 'Restoring America' march with one for 'Restoring Truthiness.' They even raised $239,075 for schools on Colbert's behalf. Stewart said the date of the show has no significance--a reference to Glenn Beck's rally falling on the anniversary of Martin Luther King's speech."

·         Stewart's Event Seems Like 'A Direct Response' to Beck observes Michael O'Brien at The Hill, who notes that Stewart described it as a "million moderate march" against ideological extremists in both parties. But both Stewart's and Colbert's rallies, "ostensibly have the purpose of mocking some of the more strident rhetoric members of both parties have employed in political debates over the past decade."

·         Is It a Comedy Rally or a Rally Against 'Extremism'?  The New York Times Bill Carter hedged, "The rally will clearly have some comedy elements (as well as likely guest stars, Mr. Stewart said), and his partner on the Comedy Central cable channel, Stephen Colbert, appeared on the show in his usual conservative blowhard persona to threaten to infiltrate the rally. Mr. Stewart also promised to supply the crowd with signs if they did not bring their own, including as examples, 'I Disagree With You, But I’m Pretty Sure You’re Not Hitler,' and 'Take It Down a Notch, America.'"

·         'It's Unclear If the Rallies Will Actually Take Place'  reports Aliyah Shahid at The New York Daily News, "but Stewart will be in D.C. that week to host his show on Oct. 25-28. And he insisted on the show that he had already reserved a spot on the National Mall, declaring 'the forms have been filled out, the checks have been written.'"

• The 'Timing and Message Are Undeniably Political'  writes The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder. "I'd imagine that these rallies will draw counter-rallies, and that smart conservative folks will try to incorporate them in a way that helps Republicans as well....Depending on how the media covers the run-up to these rallies, Stewart and Colbert could generate interest and enthusiasm among the type of voters who have so far been turned off by the independent conservative resurgence."

--------------------

www.rallytorestoresanity.com

 

"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!"

Who among us has not wanted to open their window and shout that at the top of their lungs?

Seriously, who?

Because we're looking for those people. We're looking for the people who think shouting is annoying, counterproductive, and terrible for your throat; who feel that the loudest voices shouldn't be the only ones that get heard; and who believe that the only time it's appropriate to draw a Hitler mustache on someone is when that person is actually Hitler. Or Charlie Chaplin in certain roles.

Are you one of those people? Excellent. Then we'd like you to join us in Washington, DC on October 30 -- a date of no significance whatsoever -- at the Daily Show's "Rally to Restore Sanity." Ours is a rally for the people who've been too busy to go to rallies, who actually have lives and families and jobs (or are looking for jobs) -- not so much the Silent Majority as the Busy Majority. If we had to sum up the political view of our participants in a single sentence... we couldn't. That's sort of the point.

Think of our event as Woodstock, but with the nudity and drugs replaced by respectful disagreement; the Million Man March, only a lot smaller, and a bit less of a sausage fest; or the Gathering of the Juggalos, but instead of throwing our feces at Tila Tequila, we'll be actively *not* throwing our feces at Tila Tequila. Join us in the shadow of the Washington Monument. And bring your indoor voice. Or don't. If you'd rather stay home, go to work, or drive your kids to soccer practice... Actually, please come anyway. Ask the sitter if she can stay a few extra hours, just this once. We'll make it worth your while.

Watch Jon's call-to-reasonableness on The Daily Show.

Keep checking back for updates and rally information.

Name:

E-mail: