Letters to the Editor
-
Ignorant like the people who actually thought the Dems would end the war when they won in 06?
At the moment, they think Ron Paul will save them, perhaps because he's as ignorant and dyspeptic as they are.
Or perhaps not. Ignorant compared to whom, the people who voted for the Dems in 06 and expected the war to end, expected impeachment, or expected change? LOL. That smacks of ignorance to me, since it was obvious to anyone who isn't a partisan True Believer that none of those things were going to happen, and that it would be business as usual. But tell me, how do you define "ignorant"?
I doubt that many of them will vote -- not, at least, for Ron Paul.
Do you doubt they will vote because you are assuming they are like the rest of the US population? You wish. And just who are they going to vote for? You think that his supporters are registering as Republicans, canvasing, donating, and dedicating their time to him to not show up to the primary? Why? Because you say so? Perhaps they are lazy, like the general population, and expect someone else to go and vote in the primary for them? Just like they expect people to donate money to the candidate for them, volunteer for them, and get their man recognized and elected for them. That is how 99% of the people in the country behave, and they will have an awakening when Paul supporters swarm the primaries and caucuses.
Still, even if they don't eventually turn into the crowd hysterically cheering some new Hitler on to his chosen world cataclysm, they're far too disaffected at this point to help anyone approach the real disasters that will soon be upon us.
And you end your rant by validating Goodwin's Law. Well done, and welcome to the Internets. I guess we need Hillary Clinton or some other career bureaucrat, with their "neat ideas" and gaggle of career bureaucrat advisors, to save us from these cataclysms?
-
@RBL
Yes, they have all kinds of institutional advantages now -- media, money and the White House being the most prominent. But that doesn't conflict with my point that Democrats can't win by kicking their base in the teeth.
-- Reality-based Liberal
I'm making an educated guess here, and things do change, albeit slowly, but because of the current political atmosphere and the EC, Dems can't play to their base for presidential elections. In fact, I think they have to triangulate, to moderate. It would be great if it was the other way around and the GOP had to do that but it's not.
IOW, you would have to move all the dirty fucking hippies and urban dwellers to Utah and move the fly over people to the cities and urban centers on the coasts but keep the number of reps, the way EC votes are apportioned, the same in each state after you changed the political alignment of each state from red to blue.
Maybe I'm wrong but this is how Bill got elected. Before that it was... Carter in 1976. Republicans can do lots of damage with another 4 to 8 to 12 years in the WH, and the current crop makes Reagan or Bush I look good by comparison. Difficult to believe, but...
-
What Disease?
You mean the "not being an establishment pundit who questions party leadership" disease? It's catching on.
-
Nulla Sallus -- not saying you don't have the right to leave
But I disagree with, "only an idiot would stand up to a tsunami on principle."
Among the "idiots" in world history, who defied seemingly insuperable odds: Thoreau, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Alexander Solzenitsyn, Gary Kasparov, untold thousand of monks in Burma, and others who joined political movements fighting for justice and human rights. In our present day media: Phil Donahue, fired for airing dissenting views on the U.S. invasion; Bilal Hussein, A.P. photographer who simply photographed a war, and countless others, jailed, tortured or killed for simply being journalists who reported the truth. Many have been beaten, killed and imprisoned.
I don't have a problem with your wanting to go where you live in a less dysfunctional society. But bear in mind, every country has political conflict and ignorance, and political corruption knows no national boundaries.
I am reminded of a recent interview I heard with Gary Kasparov, who is leading fellow Russians in opposing the rising authoritarianism of the Russian government. He was asked by the interviewer why he didn't stay in the U.S., and wasn't he in danger in Russia. He replied modestly that yes, he felt in some danger in Russia, but that that was his country and he felt compelled to do whatever he could to oppose the current regime. He has made a courageous choice, to stay and continue the struggle. That you have chosen to do otherwise is not grounds to belittle people such as Gary Kasporov and countless others who feel compelled work for change, no matter how overwhelming the odds against them. They are not idiots; they possess a courage that the rest of us may only aspire to. You have chosen differently. Fine. To each his own.
-
Sigh....
Chris, you weren't listening, but then you never do. Like Miles said, take the horn out' your mouth. You'll never hear the cedar waxwings over that din.
-
@ Reality-based Liberal
Lots of crap came out before the 110th and the 110th didn't do jack about it -- just like it doesn't appear to be doing jack about the CIA tapes.
You prove my point about the craving for instant gratification. It is going to take time and a lot of investigations to bring all of this out. The dems who have been in pursuit of the truth have been obstructed on all sides, including by their own.
WT is correct that this will take a lot of hard work. What does your "reality-based" view suggest should be done in place of that? We are all for speeding up the process wherever possible, but cataclysmic corrections of the sort we all recognize are needed are probably not in our near future.
I also disagree with your timelines. Bush destroyed an unimaginable amount of things in just six years (could argue he did most of the damage within three years).
Yes, the destruction has been mind-boggling. But for you to ignore the years and years of groundwork patiently laid by the Republican propaganda machine prior to King George's coronation, which was critical to enabling it, is kinda dishonest, no?
If we are to succeed in our efforts to turn all of this around then we, too, must be willing to to do the long hard work that it will take.