Why Are We This Way?

Obviously, when the Republicans are out of power, they still rule. When we are out of power, we vanish. When we are in power, we ask the Republicans permission to govern, to breathe, to exist. What is our problem?

I think it's greater than that we were told to share our toys; or we actually use our brains from time to time unlike those drones; or we would like to see a united nation, etc. Obama is the President and leader of the free world. But Obama doesn't have a clue how to lead the Democratic Party. Our politicians are afraid of everybody, except their own base. They cater to everyone but their own base. We say we have a big tent. But I think all we have is a three-ring clown act. I look at LBJ and remember how he took his own party by the neck with one hand and the Repukes by the throat with the other. The spotlight is now on the Ring Master. We will never get out individual acts together until the whip cracks. There is something in our DNA that keeps standing in our own way.

. . . it's basic canine pack hierarchy. The repukes right now are the alphas, Dems the betas.
Sure we won the election, but the problem is that they weren't held down by the throat long enough to submit. They got up too soon and resumed their alpha position while the dems have essentially rolled belly up and submitted through trying to appease, reconcile, and via "bipartisanship". It's weak, ineffective, and will ultimately destroy any small gains made by getting Obama elected. Unless of course the democratic party grows some and starts fighting back 10 times harder than they are being attacked - betting the reperves by the neck and holding them down till they start whimpering and fully go into submission.

nets that are much more universal and powerful. Survival of the species has made Fear the most reliable and all pervasive set of connectors in human biology. The last ones to be eroded by disease, for example, after Love, Joy, Curiousity, Jealousy, all other emotions, the last remaining response left in a damaged nervous system is Fear.

What keeps standing in our way is that we refuse to rape the autonomous intellects of others by programming (through generalization and association) them for Fear.

the problem is that there are too many $$$$s to be made by appeasing the repukes and corporate masters. I see the problem as corruption of both parties. If we could remove the corporate $$ and influence of our politicians, I think it would go a long way in solving our political problems.

But your thread deserves a thousand recs.


And why is it that repubs with 50+1 get away with murder while dems with 60 can't do shit?

and no, it's not because they're assholes.

Which is to support the president and the administration instead of tearing it down like we see on here constantly. Maybe if they could put their personals aside and gather around instead of casting aside there would be some coherence in the dem party. Right now it's the doomsdayers vs the we can wins.

I get tired of watching rightwing propaganda put up on here like it's gospel. Every time some bs comes along it's trumped as omg this is going to happen. No it isn't. So far the naysayers have been wrong every time, but they can't quit downing the president. I know some didn't want him, but he's there, a reality. So either you buck up or you keep on whining about why he's going to fail.

Nevermind you are projecting failure.


ps...this rant isn't all for you op, it's the general drift of the forum anymore.

He's spending a hell of a lot of time and energy catering to his enemy.

The base supports. The siderails demand. It all takes time, it takes wrangling and letting the right weenie up and the legislative process happen. The right is hanging itself, let it happen.

That is laughable.

I've seen whet the United States does to a "free world". It takes it, for free. Where ever free and democratic leaders have been elected in third world countries the U.S. topples those leader and installs it's own dictators. Free indeed.

None of those things matter to the GOP.

It is not just now, historically it goes back to FDR (maybe further, I don't know) when the republicans refused to call him by name or title but referred to him as "that man in the White House". They were just as nasty then as now.

Also remember the civil war? Things got out of hand then and basically "started" when Lincoln was elected with the South saying if he was elected President they would secede. And they did. Kinda surprised they did say it this time with Obama! The parties have switched in many ways. The dems were the conservatives then, at least in terms of preserving the southern way of life (translate: slavery).

I want to win but I hope we can do it without resorting to their tactics. If not, I'll get into the gutter but I will try everything else first. Maybe we need another civil war except this time we let them go. Except then they would become the terrorists attacking us. Mess.

When the South said "bu-bye", Lincoln said "read my finger" and sent armies to stop them. Now we say "welll, tell us what you want and we will get it for you and we will put it on a nice silver platter and we will hand deliver it to you"! Obama studies Lincoln. Now, we will find out if he learned anything.

why do we have a two party system instead of a multi-party system?
why do we have political parties at all when those who designed our government feared "factions" and their potential influence on governmental policy?
why are we a representative democracy rather than a true democracy?
the framers of our constitution wanted a conservative governmental structure and they built in a variety of measures to insure that the common man would not gain control of policy.
the electoral college is a prime example of a mechanism designed to thwart the will of the majority.
everyone recognizes the anti-democratic nature of the college but no one in congress ever suggests abandoning it.
suppose that the government was not really designed to meet the needs of the people but only to appear to address these needs?
what is the job of the government? is the "stated" role of government the same as the actual role of the government?
are the needs of the citizenry and the needs of the government the same?
does the government exist to serve the needs of the people or do the people exist to serve the needs of the government?
what if voting democrats and republicans are really both just "party members" and the non-voting majority aren't really represented at all? what if most of us are no-counts?
is it the role of government to perpetuate the status-quo or to change it?
both parties prefer legislation that is designed to produce what can be called "noble failures", policies and programs that appear generous and helpful but have built in mechanisms that insure that the basic economic and social structures don't change.
the "public option" is one such proposal. whatever guidelines a public option (if passed) would apply would insure that benefits were less generous (or appeared to be less generous) than the for profit plans most party members currently enjoy.
no buy-in.
no success.
a noble failure.
far too many americans are under-educated (and proud of it), self-indulgent, arrogant, immature bullies.
might is right.
america's wealth was acquired by dispossessing others of their wealth.
many of us base our beliefs and behaviors on little understood mythologies spun by backwoods preachers and hollywood producers. as a consequence, we are filled with a jumble of beliefs that are inconsistent with a single set of moral precepts or ethics.
unexamined, internal conflict leads to confusion. who knows what to believe?
again, what is the real job of the government?
to meet the needs of the citizenry? to maintain internal peace and security at the borders?
to control us with as little force as is necessary?
my guess is that the government is doing its job well. we have so much faith in its value that we have ransomed the wealth of generations to support its mechanisms.

The Democratic Party is the problem. Half or more of them are owned by corporate interests. As such, the Democratic Party is finding it very hard to get anything done that actually benefits the people. I can't blame this on the Republicans. The problem is with the Democratic Party, itself.

:dem:

-Laelth

or it could be the citizenry.
ultimately, our government gets away with what we let it get away with.
so one might ask questions like: what about us, as individuals and communities, makes us so passive, so willing to take one more lash from the corporate whip?
harriet tubman said toward the end of her life, "i led thousands of slaves to freedom, could have led thousands more too, if they'd a known they were slaves" (actually paraphrased).
there are many mechanisms that keep us from demanding from our government what it is supposed to deliver.
in my opinion, insecurity has been a primary tool used by the american uber-class to control the citizenry. insecurity, in all its forms, keeps us at each other's throats and clinging to familiar structures as safe havens.
are we really free?
does our share of the national debt make us debt peons? are our children born slaves, $80,000 in debt the moment their birth certificate is filed?
when the banking industry, which our children's treasure just bailed out, was asked to reveal how they spent the money we gave them and who got the money, they argued, in court, that if the public were to know how the money was spent the world's financial system would collapse.
guess we better not know then.
maybe we can't tweak a system as rotten as ours?
maybe we need to start from scratch?

Just take a look at the famous picture of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.



There are no poor people there. No women there. No non-white people there. This is a nation founded by wealthy, white men. For a long time, the United States was a nation completely controlled by wealthy white men. Slowly, women and non-white people have gained some power, but it always has been and remains of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich.

Ever so slowly, the middle and lower classes of our society have eaten away at the power of the ruling class. The internet has given people of ordinary means the ability to monitor and interact with our rulers in a more effective way than ever before. Barack Obama was elected by collecting small sums of money from millions of individual voters. That, in and of itself, speaks volumes about the new and very real power of the people to effect the political landscape in the United States.

Over time, I believe we will be able to live up to our founding ideals and become, in truth, an nation of, by, and for the people (meaning all people, not just the rich ones). We are getting closer.

But we delude ourselves if we believe the Democratic Party has ever served anyone other than their own wealthy interests. I hope that, in time, we can turn it into a real party of the people. If we can't, I will have to find another party.

:dem:

-Laelth

and i admire and envy your optimism.
american people can all work together to make this country what we want it to be but they have to want to do the work. and it is work to participate in democracy. work that even those we elect to do the job don't have the interest, the energy, or the time to do. they, like most americans let others tell them what is best to think and how to act.
to do the work of democracy a citizen must not only have access to honest information but an interest in pursuing that information. a citizen must have an interest in and knowledge of a variety of topics in order to be able to think critically about how how one policy or decision might impact other policies. a citizen must be able to appreciate all elements of and individuals in the society in which they enjoy citizenship so that they can promote the health of the society as a whole through their democratic activities and discourse.
a good citizen must be both a teacher and a student.
i believe we could all become this sort of democratic beings but i also realize it is highly unlikely that it will happen any time soon.
nearly every institution, religious and secular, corporation, small business, fraternal organization, club, gang, family, etc. provides a model for unequal social structure and promotes respect for hierarchy and authority. these structures do not encourage democratic participation, except perhaps on a rotating basis, and that participation is designed to maintain the status-quo, to preform and preserve the traditions and rituals of the organization, not to make radical changes in organizational structure and responsibility.
we have a two tiered educational model that teaches "citizenship skills" (the rules of the plantation, how to avoid being whipped, what is the appropriate door to use when delivering goods or services to the big house) in the universal system and teaches leadership skills to those few who can afford to attend a university.
but even there, students must "specialize" their skills and focus their educations and get themselves into the job market, as quickly as possible, to begin paying the obscene debt they accrued to matriculate.
most of these, the elite, aren't well equipped to participate in democracy either.
this is the environment in which honest, informed, democratic participation has to flower.

and the escalation of the war in Vietnam happened.

It's not as simple as having the President become some sort of dictator.