I also hold your same principles but it is might difficult sometimes. NGU

but I do .All we see now is a screen selling the convenience of ignorance.Democracy takes honest work .

He is speaking out against the problems that are plaguing the country and also forcing Hilary to open her eyes and realize that she no longer is the presumed nominee. If she manages to gain the nomination can she be held accountable to actually strive to effect significant change?

Whether you buy into the OP or not (I don't), what you're saying is "nobody would vote for these people, so they MUST have all been rigged elections. A lazy opinion.

see corporate influence and control over our government as a problem. Might I suggest that your salons aren't healthy or helpful.

Democracy is decision making by the voting public, however well- or poorly-informed they are. This is the Democracy we (collectively) have asked for, and if we want something different, we need to work like hell, rather than throw up our hands and say "all is lost".

It's true there is a lot of corporate money in politics but it is still the people who vote and that's democracy.

it's a wide "tent" we are in with elite dems who support Hillary.

That holds true regardless of which political party said member of elite belongs to. They are wheeling and dealing in their mansions and multiple homes (Gstaad, St. Bart's, Martha's Vinyard, etc.), on their mega-yachts, private islands, etc. And based on my experience of nearly a decade as a judge of elections, which includes seeing the names on the return envelopes of those who submit absentee ballots in my wealthy community, I don't believe that the elite bother to register in political parties, let alone vote at all. What we see on web blogs are hangers-on to the elite. I think of the elite, i.e,. the One Percent, as akin to sharks, i.e, voraciously devouring every bit of wealth they come across. Sharks are often accompanied by remora fish. When scuba diving in tropical waters of the Caribbean and Pacific, I have seen as many as 3 remora fish accompanying a single, large shark. The shark is quite oblivious to these fish. But the remoras have chosen to rely on the shark for their survival.

and I think you're spot on with your assessment.

I've often thought of them as the courtiers, but I like your analogy much better. Well done!

The other enablers of the very rich are a certain segment of the lower middle class. As Steinbeck explained, "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."

the tenth-percenters are a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.

Feeding on the host, oh yes.

-- Mal

There are a few "remora's" posting here though..very few but vocal. I don't mind their being here and expressing their views. But, their seemingly "total lack of understanding" that others have lived very different lives, experiences and therefore may have different viewpoints of what it means to be a Democrat. They tend to prefer New Way/Third Way/DLC. That often causes a lot of friction and hard feelings.

any electronic vote counting company is owned by 1% ers

since the mid 60s when electronic vote counting was introduced we have had a "red shift"

here is a link to the best documented stolen election in the country

http://www.sweetremedy.tv/fatallyflawed/media/RTA_Fraud_Flyer_3_7_12.pdf

that race was a ballot question but the same thing could be done in any race

“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”

Although, apparently maintaining the myth is still incredibility EASY in this population and therefore continues to be profitable. so the curtains will remain closed, no matter how obvious the brick wall stands there behind the thin-almost-sheer fabric.

the republic died on 22NOV1963. 1968 put a few more nails in the coffin, just to make it clear

He explained it perfectly.

I also think we're witnessing the beginning of the end of the US as we know it. We might survive as smaller countires (as that Russian professor predicted), but I think the rifts that are growing between Left and Right are too large to overcome (and the system is too rigged), sans some sort of "miracle". Just hope I end up in a Blue area when the war is over and the lines are redrawn.

There are so many divides in America today, and so many digging into their belief structures that I think melding together is becoming more and more difficult.

The rift between left and right continues to grow as do rifts in many other areas. And the economic divide is incredible and growing.

We are becoming a nation of tribal behavior with turf boundaries not to be crossed. It is so sad to see this happening, but so many seem to be ignoramuses and ever more Idiocracy is taking hold. Just looking at the republican lineup for 2016 is extremely concerning. The immaturity of these potential candidates is appalling.

And the greed in the country takes full advantage of this to advance their causes and profits while the uniformed vote in those most willing to screw them over.

The coming civil war will be between Right and Left, not north and south. I think the Right means it when they say "The only good Liberal is a dead Liberal".

attribute to takeover of the media by the right in the last 20 years. Irreversible damage I'm afraid. Same for the resources and power concentrated on the side of the corporatists and banks. That smaller democratic areas will survive is what I pray, for the sake of future generations and the earth.

I have planned on trying to get out of here to hedge my bets....but not sure which direction to go.

and systems -- I really need to bookmark stuff more but he wasn't a US citizen and it was about a century ago but the most interesting aspects of the book were when he addressed the American two party system.

I'm trying to find it but searches are yielding books that specifically address it but the book was much more than that but he was dead on when it came to the US system and IIRC predicted would lead to its collapse but I'd rather find book info and post what it says.

The book is specific when the book I'm thinking of was various with the addressing as the American one considered the "most interesting" there is a word that I'm thinking of at the tip of my tongue and if I remember that word I'll find it for sure -- it was political ( ) the word was a negative. I even posted an OP here of the book's summary account in GD and I can't even find that. He was definitely not American so getting warmer but I think it was early 1900s. He explains the dysfunction in the system quite well.

Second reply in case of a missed edit but I highly recommend this book for myself as well

Political decay was the word I was I looking for though the book is fairly recent 1989 and guy is a born American. I don't know why I was so off, not just off but way off but anyway this is the book I was thinking of.

Francis Fukuyama’s ‘Political Order and Political Decay’

<snip>

Perhaps Fukuyama’s most interesting section is his discussion of the United States, which is used to illustrate the interaction of democracy and state building. Up through the 19th century, he notes, the United States had a weak, corrupt and patrimonial state. From the end of the 19th to the middle of the 20th century, however, the American state was transformed into a strong and effective independent actor, first by the Progressives and then by the New Deal. This change was driven by “a social revolution brought about by industrialization, which mobilized a host of new political actors with no interest in the old clientelist system.” The American example shows that democracies can indeed build strong states, but that doing so, Fukuyama argues, requires a lot of effort over a long time by powerful players not tied to the older order.

Yet if the United States illustrates how democratic states can develop, it also illustrates how they can decline. Drawing on Huntington again, Fukuyama reminds us that “all political systems — past and present — are liable to decay,” as older institutional structures fail to evolve to meet the needs of a changing world. “The fact that a system once was a successful and stable liberal democracy does not mean that it will remain so in perpetuity,” and he warns that even the United States has no permanent immunity from institutional decline.

Over the past few decades, American political development has gone into reverse, Fukuyama says, as its state has become weaker, less efficient and more corrupt. One cause is growing economic inequality and concentration of wealth, which has allowed elites to purchase immense political power and manipulate the system to further their own interests. Another cause is the permeability of American political institutions to interest groups, allowing an array of factions that “are collectively unrepresentative of the public as a whole” to exercise disproportionate influence on government. The result is a vicious cycle in which the American state deals poorly with major challenges, which reinforces the public’s distrust of the state, which leads to the state’s being starved of resources and authority, which leads to even poorer performance.

Where this cycle leads even the vastly knowledgeable Fukuyama can’t predict, but suffice to say it is nowhere good. And he fears that America’s problems may increasingly come to characterize other liberal democracies as well, including those of Europe, where “the growth of the European Union and the shift of policy making away from national capitals to Brussels” has made “the European system as a whole . . . resemble that of the United States to an increasing degree.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/books/review/francis-fukuyamas-political-order-and-political-decay.html

On edit -- his other work interests me too

Fukuyama remembers. He believes that the Iraq War was being blundered. "All of my friends had taken leave of reality."[25] He has not spoken to Paul Wolfowitz (previously a good friend) since.[25]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Fukuyama

Looks like a very good read!

everywhere

the national mythology of democracy, but money controls elections now.

And therefore policy is dying. And I tend not to celebrate destructive shit, in any case.

but when I read Cali's post, I interpreted it as applying to the US as a form of government, not to the concept of itself. As re: the USA, Jimmy Carter nailed it several years ago when he said we're no longer a democracy, something I find overwhelmingly sad, not to mention frightening.

Particularly when used as a stand alone comment. What I said in the op is hardly a novel thought. Many political scientists see the control of our elections by big money as destroying the democratic process.

I vote now mainly out of force of habit and having the hope that the pebble-in-pond against the establishment may have an effect some day.

I've had it.

We have it in our power to change how our government works. If we don't do that, then we send the message that we're more or less OK with things as they are. For myself, I'll continue getting out the vote and campaigning for candidates I support. You will do as you choose, of course.

And that must be maintained by the TV election show...which now runs all the time.

in futility. Maintaining the illusion prevents the masses from waking up all together in unison and storming the castle as united mob.

It replaced the circus a while ago.

and Michael Glennon's "National Security and Double Government." They are chilling beyond words. The People haven't run anything meaningful in this country for 35 years and maybe longer.

fine with the status quo or afraid of change. HRC isn't about to change a system that has made her wealthy and famous. Yes she will support some social justice changes but can't see her telling Wall Street to stop stealing the wealth of the 99%. After all, "it's not personal, it's just business."

I am curious what power you think we have. Millions of Americans can't vote. Of those that can, they find a system loaded against them. And even when they get to vote, elections have been stolen with nothing we can do about it. And then look at the candidates we get to chose from. Citizens United and the billionaires will determine who the general election candidates are. In 2008 progressives thought they elected a progressive in candidate Obama. Pres Obama couldn't wait until after inauguration to kick us in the teeth. Another win for the Oligarchs.

Do you disagree with the Princeton study that said we no longer live in a Democratic Republic but instead live in an oligarchy?

One of our biggest enemies is the denial that the Powers That Be and their propaganda machine push on Americans.

There are two ways to go, 1) keep drinking kool-aid and smiling as we continue our path into total poverty and tyranny, or 2) as cali mentions, Do Not Go Quietly.

love it, but those millions in poverty don't.

60% of their time pandering for money so they can spend 40% of their time campaigning for a job so they spend 60% of their time begging for money.

Maybe you need to elect better ones where you live. Where I live, we elect progressives and turn out 60% of our registered voters. If that's not the case where you live, then you have work to do.

My congressional representative is Betty McCollum. I have enthusiastically campaigned for all three.

Now, who are yours?

Combined, according to olensecrets.org, your pols had 59 fundraisers.

Mine are Warner, Kaine and Brat. Combined they had 53 fundraisers.

board to describe how the Dem national orgs totally ignored the Dem candidate running against Brat (and against Cantor before him), sent NO money or help, so that neither Dem could even produce yard signs for people who wanted them (like me). It's not a matter of your everyday dem not wanting to get these RWers out, it's a matter of the Dem strategic planners not giving a shit, for some reason. We yokels out here have begun to think that they are all cut from the same cloth.

get over yourself

Not interested in that at all. I have one of my own.

We are very proactive about voter participation....

Pawlenty - but states like ours are rather scarce. It is not working for a lot of states and rather we like it or not what they do does effect us.

For me Hillary will be the end of my concern for this countries democracy. IMO the rich will have completed the takeover of our government. The boiled frogs and their legs won't see it coming until they are on the dinner table of the rich.

in the future elections. This election will then be the last of my political involvement.

and for good local people like Keith Ellison, but mostly out of a sense of habit and obligation.