THE BLOG
06/28/2008 05:12 am ET | Updated May 25, 2011

Oh, I Get It, Democrats Are The B-Team

The plot wherein the hero you've counted on turns out to be an accomplice to the crime.

I'm no politician. I'm a filmmaker. I tell stories. So my natural tendency is to see the "story" in the play of life. The current Democratic leadership's latest idea to give the Bush Co. war machine billions more dollars for the fraud-based war and occupation in Iraq rises up like a plot twist befitting Shakespeare himself.

In act one, our hero, the Democratic leadership, rallies belief and support from the frustrated people, who dedicate unheard of levels of money and cell phone minutes toward putting the hero in power, assured by countless promises that he would rescue the country from certain demise should it continue on its evil trajectory into the Death Star.

In act two, complications ensue as our hero apparently encounters obstacle upon obstacle to achieving his promised objective.

Now at the turning point of act three, it is revealed that our hero is not a true hero at all, but an accomplice. Luke Skywalker is actually working for Darth Vader, not against him.

Oh, the horror!

He's even turned a once defiant Princess Leia -- MoveOn.org's Nita Chaudhary -- into a nodding lapdog. She's rallying people to bake friggin cookies instead of stopping the war funding!

We're not fooled. We know surrender and complicity when we see it.

What has turned Luke to the dark side? Fear? Ego? The futility of the effort? Money? Power?

Maybe Darth's offers to Luke to rule with him and conquer the universe were all too powerful to turn down.

Perhaps this has been the story all along. It certainly looks like the Democratic leadership has been the secret "B team." They've become the go-to guys for the war profiteers if the A-team of the Repubs can't hide the nation's stomach-turning for long enough to accomplish the mission.

What's the next scene? Drop the bomb on Iran? Perhaps there's an idea of working it in the media as a jobs-creation effort for out-of-work home-building contractors?

Oh, I can hear the Dem leadership protest, no, no Luke is not working for Darth, he's only pretending to go along with Darth so he can get him into a dark corner and cut his head off -- oh, metaphorically speaking, of course.

I'm not buying the protests. Luke is giving a far-too-convincing performance as a turncoat.

We know Majority Leader Steny Hoyer has been working behind closed doors to give Bush and the telecoms immunity for their illegal wiretapping, even after Dems worked so hard to stop it. The immunity bill's sponsor, Senator Jay Rockefeller, not surprisingly, has lately been receiving large campaign contributions from high-level executives in the telecommunication industry. And Obama is going along! They got to him.

At this point, I'm far past the point of believing anything Luke says.

He cannot convince me that I should befriend the looters coming to raid my house by opening the door and helping them carry out the goods.

Funding the war means more war. It means continued occupation. We're not stupid.

Funding the war means millions upon millions more dollars will find their way to the pockets of military contractors and their stockholders, not to the regular people laid off and struggling to pay their rip-off mortgages that have benefitted billionaires. Do you think we didn't catch that subplot?

Funding the war means the dollar continues to plummet, because we'll never be able to repay this war debt, even if we wanted to. It means ever more worldwide sell-off of the dollar, which means ever-spiraling prices for gas and food.

Did you think that part of the story sailed over our heads? I know the media has been dangling ever more salacious content to distract us from that bit of boring exposition, but every day at the grocery store, believe me, we get it.

Of course, now that the hero has turned out to be such a despicable character, there's a real likelihood that half the audience will walk out of the theater and demand their money back.

To quote economist Michael Hudson, "If the choices are between 'Yes, please,' and 'Yes, thank you,' what's the point of voting?"

Part of the audience, however, is not going to leave the theater until this plot is rewritten. We're going to boo and hiss and not let this thing continue until there's a new script. And if we have to replace Luke with an unknown to do it, we will.

The people do indeed have control over the ending of this story. We are not going to allow this to end as a cautionary tale of how to destroy a republic once based on representative government and fair elections.

We unequivocally choose an ending where corruption is exposed, integrity triumphs and this fraud-based war and occupation absolutely and completely ends and its devious benefactors are brought to justice.