Privatize the Library of Congress!

Why not? How many people actually read all those books? Wouldn't they be better in the hands of collectors and people who really read and would appreciate them? This would be a way to cut the national deficit. Also, I think we should liquidate the holdings at the National Gallery while we're at it. Maybe I can get one of the Rothko's from the new exhibit for my house. Besides wasn't Rothko a pinko? A feeble April Fool's joke but given where the right is going you never know.

A personal note--Of all the people who have ever committed suicide, Mark Rothko is the one I wish had never done it. The cerebral and sublime pleasure his art has given me knows no bounds. We all owe his children an immense debt of gratitude for their tenancious fight to preserve his legacy against the vultures of art dealers over the years. Their prolonged legal case is almost as fascinating as their father's art. The National Gallery has an exhibit of his "black paintings", those intended for the Menil Chapel in Houston. And little did I know the post office has issued a series of stamps of abstract expressionist paintings including Jackson Pollack and Rothko.

For those interested in the resurgent militia movement and their links to the right, you can consult the Southern Poverty Law Center's frequent reports or read Leonard Zeskind's Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream ( Farrar Straus, 2009). Zeskind traces the history of the militia from its neo-nazi roots through its re-emergence through the Liberty Lobby, the Klan and the melding of the survivalist movement with the Christian identity crowd. After the militia movement was decimated after the Oklahoma City bombings, they re-emerged after 9/11 in the anti-immigration and people like the Minutemen and Partiot movement. And some of us get the thrill of them all converging on Washington and Virginia on April 19th, the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing, for the celebration of the Second Amendment. What we just saw with the so-called Christian militia in Michigan, Ohio and Indiana is simply a continuation of this 35-year old history.

For years I thought the Southern Poverty Law Center and Morris Dees had simply run out of material. Created during the civil rights movement to monitor racist groups, particularly the KKK, they have re-emerged as a leading monitor of extreme right groups in this country and ,unfortunately, have had to diversify their analysis to cover a proliferation of these organizations. The other group that has refocused its attention of the rise of the extreme Right is the Anti-Defamation League, which has been alerting the public to the "infiltration" of the tea party "movement" by these white nationalists and neo-Nazis. Zeskind would probably add the neo-confederates to this pot.

The tolerance of these groups by people whom I always thought were "rational" conservatives is deeply disturbing. The militia defendents are called "activists" by the conservative media, not "terrorists" or "murderers". In the last week, a "white supremacist" was convicted of trying to assassinate President Obama. There have been several of these cases in the last year, but no denunciations from the conservatives.

The membrane between these extremists and so-called conservatives no longer exists in terms of their political vocabulary, although they differ in terms of actions. I have received e-mails describing the Oath-Keepers, an organization created by a Ron Paul follower and composed of serving police and military officers, as patriots. I would treat them as extremist cells within our law enforcement system and not reliable. The Oath Keepers will be here for the April rally along with the former head of the Alabama militia, who urged all citizens to vandalize Democratic party headquarters and offices of all congresspeople who voted for healthcare.

Sean Hannity today on his show called his audience "Timothy McVeigh" wannabes. The seamless line between the armed groups and the conservative echochamber raises real questions about the ultimate motives of both the conservative entertainment industry and their political practitioners. As a Washington Post columnist wrote this week,"the only threat of political violence these days comes from the Right, not the Left."

I was going to write today about what today's conservatives really believe. But I simply don't know. I knew they crossed a line when CPAC allowed the John Birch Society back as a sponsor after decades spent in the wilderness. Clearly, there are major national issues they need to be addressed in a serious manner.

I heard from one conservative about the David Frum affair. He severely criticized David Frum because he called out conservatives and this was unacceptable because it gave ammunition to the Left. He complained that this was the problem with some conservatives because they want acceptance from the Left. The other crime was Frum's chronic urge for celibrity status.

Another observation, which took me off guard, was "now we have a counter-culture" and the Left is getting the type of response from us that we used to get from them. From my perspective, the conservatives have cultural hegemony through the print and electronic media and their well-funded think tanks and front groups as well as their total domination of talk radio. But this comment revealed a psychological position, not a political one.

Throughout Obama's short presidency, I have been swamped with e-mails about his connection to this leftwing group and that personality. This stuff started in the beginning of last presidential campaign and I thought it was so off the wall considering he was a person who grew up after most of the Left had died down. Then I thought it was just the work of people like David Horowitz, who will spend all of his old age deeply resenting his days at Ramparts. But it goes to the heart of the conservative movement.

Now that the conservatives have been ousted from political power, except from our judicial system, there has re-emerged a deep inferiority complex that the older figures feel toward the Left. It comes out in odd places like Ross Douhat's column claiming that the sex abuse cases in the Catholic Church come from the permissive attitudes that existed in the 70s. or Johnny Yoo, "Torture" Lawyer, who said two days ago that when he teaches at Berkeley, he feels like West Berlin during the Cold War, surrounded by hippies. Neither one of them were even cognizant during those times. Others have raised with me the list of sleights they have experienced over the years from people whom they perceive as on the Left, people I just think are relatively liberal with no leftwing inclinations at all. This is a pervasive stance of young and older conservatives and apparently is accepted as a creed.

The older conservatives I can understand because they were underfunded when they began and existed as outsiders in the late 60s and early 70s. This period scarred them deeply and they feel they haven't gotten personal and professional recognition for what they have achieved. Many have written several books and hundreds of articles. At the same time, many I know have become rich and rich off conservative foundations, who personally pay them significant salaries. A university professor would kill for such a deal. The conservative movement has created a very stable welfare system for themselves. But none of them possess the self-reflection to realize this.

I get the distinct sense they are waiting to find their next vehicle to rise again to power like the California Kitchen cabinet did with Ronald Reagan. They are disgruntled with the Republican Party for failing the cause. They don't want to voice their disappointment with George W. Bush,even though privately they believe he was a disaster, and enjoy the Cheneys outbursts because they reflect an attack on the "politically correct". Now it seems it's political correctness to oppose torture, rendition and wiretapping. The more outrageous the proposition the better. That's why the Ronald Reagan they adopt now is not the President but the GE spokesman who attacked Medicare as socialized medicine. It's not the President who worked with Bill Bradley to save Social Security for a generation. Or the President who sought nuclear arms reduction agreements.

Conservatives also are turning rather abruptly against neo-conservatives for their embrace of Big Government Conservativism advocated by Bill Kristol. There is a splintering going on concerning foreign policy, many abandoning support for democracy programs abroad and reverting to the isolationism of the paleoconservatives. There seems to be a neutrality about the Iraq War issue and a disdain toward any talk of nation-building. They feel the later was just a sop to the Democrats.

Where they are today, I still don't know. Forget about the Left, I asked what they believed today. There was a general lament that the "intellectuals" like Irving Kristol and Bill Buckley were gone. This vacuum can become dangerous if they allow the extremes to fill the void. They would feel it is perposterous that the right posed any threat to the country.