dagblog - Comments for "Fed up with the Ds and Rs ????"

The Soviet Union and United

Orion — Sun, 05 Dec 2010 03:19:20 +0000

In reply to Fed up with the Ds and Rs ????

The Soviet Union and United States comparisons are especially salient when you present two corresponding dilemmas: both ended up at a point of stalemate in which neither had the ability to profit any longer. Free trade has resulted in manufacturing taking off in India and China and declining in the US, with the apparently misguided notion by leaders that America could sustain as a consumer economy. For largely different reasons, the Soviet Union was not profitable and enjoyed the same end result that we seem headed towards. The Soviets and the Americans both did share endless wars, however, one of them even in the same country.

I would posit that the United States has been in many regards a phony union. Seattle, Washington, for instance, shares more in values and worldview with Vancouver, British Columbia than it does with Lexington, Kentucky or even the metropolises of the Northeast. People are better able to manage their lives and make personal political change at a local level than through a national government that often puts them at odds with people that have entirely different priorities and worldview.

One Nation Working Together

we are stardust — Sat, 04 Dec 2010 16:36:52 +0000

In reply to I definitely agree, Donal,

One Nation Working Together was an attempt at a grassroots movement for change for those sick of an effective freeze of wages at 1973 levels, corporate bailouts, no EFCA passed, punitive tax policy for working families, etc. The D.C. rally was poorly attended, and came the week before Stewart's rally. Feh! (I wondered how many chose to go there instead; who knows?)

Those who are more in favor of 'move your money' and internet-spread boycots of banks and corporations have something, though none of those movements seemed to have materialized in any grand ways; both forms may be necessary.

As far as Obama, all the signals he's given to date say that he intends to 'work more closely with Republicans' for his remaining two years, which may mean that Dems for Economic Justice, etc. will be forced to make end runs around the President; a sobering thought. I keep seeing Sherrod Brown in that role. I think the House Dems can be lit up, save for the Melissa-Bean-caucus. ;o( You go, Jeezus!

I definitely agree, Donal,

SleepinJeezus — Sat, 04 Dec 2010 15:58:05 +0000

In reply to That's a great comment SJ.

I definitely agree, Donal, that we can learn a thing or two from the driving forces that propel Dick Armey's disingenuous Tea Party Phenomenon. Populist anger is palpable throughout the country, and Armey has very deliberately and quite cynically provided an outlet for that populist anger in the absence of any real and legitimate alternative.

In Obama's case, I have abandoned all hope that he is capable of pulling himself and the Party away from the corporate teat long enough to do what's required. The ball is definitely in his court to prove he's capable of FDR type leadership of the kind that allows for rhetoric such as:

"Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me--and I welcome their hatred."

It would begin with a speech wherein Obama announces that we are taking bold steps forward in a new direction; that he and the Democrats have had enough of the ways of Washington that insist the corporate masters must be given primary consideration before the work of the people can be engaged. It must include a challenge that the Dems are now ready to stick a fork in the neck of the monied interests who have grown so rapacious as to demand $700 billion in tax cuts when the rest of the country struggles to put food on the table and a roof over their head.

Obama ain't got it in him, I fear. And time's a-wasting. We'd do well to put our efforts in seeking a replacement for 2012 and purging the Party of its ties to K Street as its limiting force with notice served that the people's interests will now reign supreme, and that we will not be compromised any longer in deference to our monied masters.

Obama has had his chance, and he has been a dismal failure in the most important category of being an honest broker on behalf of the Democratic constituency. He could change all that, and he has wonderful tools at his disposal to do so (his rhetorical skills; Organizing for America; etc.). But we are fools if we put everything on hold hoping he somehow, someday will see the light. Darkness awaits instead, and we best be lighting a few lamps of real "hope and change" or just go quietly instead into that dark night.

That's a great comment SJ.

Donal — Sat, 04 Dec 2010 15:26:09 +0000

In reply to At its inception and

That's a great comment SJ. Perhaps the Tea Party represents a fumbling first step towards doing, "the hard work of democracy," and perhaps our response should be to do the same hard work for our own interests. Instead people want someone else, whether Obama or Palin or Beck or Stewart or Assange, to step in, do all the work and solve all their problems for them. As Amy Goodman said, we have to make Obama do the right things.

At its inception and

SleepinJeezus — Sat, 04 Dec 2010 14:51:56 +0000

In reply to Fed up with the Ds and Rs ????

At its inception and throughout our history, our system of governance has been predicated on the ability of "We, the People" to bring about change at the ballot box. And only a fool gives up on that in favor of a violent overthrow or putsch or coup d'etat. Ultimately, it would seem, you have faith in democracy, or you don't. And I haven't quite yet abandoned faith in our ability to self-govern to choose instead a desperate attempt to force righteous change upon the population.

Democracy is hard work. I'm reminded about Franklin's warning offered on the threshold of this experiment in governance when asked what form of government "We, the People" had just installed. "A Republic, if you can keep it," was the answer.

I completely understand c's frustration that lies at the root of his rant. But I disagree with the implication that perhaps its time to storm the barricades when we haven't first tried to actually engage the hard work of a democracy, which is the effective petitioning of the electorate with an alternative to our presently corrupted and compromised government.

At present, we essentially have but one political party. Both Dems and Repubs are in the pocket of the monied interests. Repubs, I understand. The oligarchs are their natural constituency. But the Dems? Herein lies the crux of the problem. The political party that should be carrying the water for the working stiffs and the poor is presently in the tank for the other side in all matters of importance. And this is becoming more of a problem than ever.

It seems to me that the answer to present problems is to commit the hard work of re-shaping the Dem Party into a vehicle that represents the proletariat in the CLass War being waged against us. And that will come about only if we first find a way to purge the Dem Party of the Obamas and the Blue Dogs and the DLC and the Clintons and the Emanuels and all rest who so wilfully play the game in accord with the script provided to them by their corporate owners. In its place, you establish real leadership capable of (and enabled to) present(ing) a message of strength and redemption to the middle class and the poor. Show me a poitical movement that is capable of knocking the monied interests on their ass, and I guarantee an overwhelming level of support from the masses in providing that movement with the authority to do so. The Dem Party could be - and must be! - that movement going forward.

But time is running out, which is something I become keenly aware of when considering Mr. Smith's prescription (rightly considered and advocated) posted in the comments above to "kill corporate money and influence" by affecting change in seating of Supreme Court Justices and campaign finance law, etc.

As it was once said by Justice William O. Douglas:

"As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air however slight lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."

I fear the darkness that is nearly upon us. We can no longer abide the opportunity cost of supporting and electing these Palooka-Dems in a hope that "they won't do too much harm." Not even in 2012. Instead, while time remains in the twilight of this democracy, we need to raise the alarm loudly and hopefully stir within the population at last a willingness to fight back against oppression by providing them a vehicle both worthy and capable of making such an effort. The Dem Party could become such an oppositional force in Washington working on behalf of the peoople against their oppressors. Indeed, making a second party of the Democrats is, in my estimation, the best if not only real chance we have.

"A Republic, if you can keep it."

Keep the Faith. And then roll up your sleeves with me and others to commit the hard work to make it happen. It can be accomplished, but only if you first have faith in your fellow man sufficient to drive a wholesale and difficult effort to rescue democracy itself.

Carpe diem! At last, carpe diem.

Please; if you're going to

we are stardust — Sat, 04 Dec 2010 13:25:58 +0000

In reply to Oh boy ... Ted Rall?Get a

Please; if you're going to quote Stymie, he actually said, "O-tay, Buttwheat."

Oh boy ... Ted Rall?Get a

oldenGoldenDecoy — Sat, 04 Dec 2010 13:08:47 +0000

In reply to Fed up with the Ds and Rs ????

Oh boy ... Ted Rall?

Get a fricking grip... and grip it real tight.

A marginally successful political cartoonist and columnist who fed on the angst of the twentysomethings and Generation X of the 90's becomes the latest in a long line of writers throughout history who stand at the top of the ramparts egging the crowd on and then as the tumult rises he's last seen walking away with a fat sum for his scribblings?

I personally view with a jaundiced eye any individual who spent as much time as Rall spent traveling so freely back in the late 90's up into 2006-7 in China and Central Asia through the former areas of what was once the Soviet empire. And specifically his U.S. State Department-sponsored visit to Turkmenistan "teaching" the nature of free press in a democracy to students.

As Stymie in the Our Gang Comedies once said... OK Buckwheat!

I also personally view this screed as what I've referred to for almost five decades back to the days of the SDS as ...shaking the dissident tree.

You see, one never knows what subversive nuts will shake out of the foliage.

Hint hint ... Which side is he REALLY on?

That's why I say get a fricking grip...

Slowly back away from the cake.

~OGD~

And therein lies the problem

Atheist — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 19:15:20 +0000

In reply to I doubt that I will have to

And therein lies the problem with using violence as a solution, no? How can we justify violence for what we think is correct and condemn it when others are imposing their judgments through it (e.g., in the defense of a fetus)?

I doubt that I will have to

cmaukonen — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 19:05:53 +0000

In reply to Well, then we're screwed

I doubt that I will have to and that angry mob will most likely be from the right rather than the left since they do not believe they have that much too loose.

Well, then we're screwed

MrSmith1 — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 17:23:28 +0000

In reply to Because the government will

Well, then we're screwed either way aren't we? (sigh) Okay, we'll do it your way. Call me when your angry mob is ready to make its move. (I want to hide so they don't accidentally hit me by mistake.)