You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #: Thanks. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-10-13 01:01 PM
Original message
Edited on Sat Aug-10-13 01:22 PM by No Elephants
Many of those things--and so many more--were clear after he appointed Bush's Secretary of Defense(formerly CIA and NSA) Gates, Kissinger's protege and former head of the Wall Street Fed, Geithner, et al.--and re-appointed Bernanke.

And all that right after the global economic collapse of the Fall of 2008, and while the US was still very much enmired in Iraq and Afghanistan and the "WOT," to boot.

And those who did not come out of the Bush to Bush administration or Wall Street were Reaganites or Clintonites, Bubba being, policywise, much more of a Reaganite wannabe and Carroll Quigley wannabe, than a Kennedyite wannabe, Bubba's personal narrative to the contrary.

I hope that I never again see "change" like the "change" I saw after the election of 2008,, but, sadly, I'm pretty sure I will. Exactly like it, in fact.

Bus and. Clinton, yeaayyyy!

Liz Cheney is well into her attempt to stab her father's long time friend in the back. And Chelsea Clinton, who was somehow immune from questioning while she campaigned for Hillary in 2008, is now a public figure in her own right.

The more things change, the more they stay the same, indeed.

Mercifully, Nancy apparently had no personal desire to hold office.

Wonder when Ronnie's grandkids or great grandkids will get around to running? And odds are, we have't seen the last of the many handsome Romney men, either. (Did Mitt's run for the Senate in 1994 begain a 100 year and counting Udall-like reign?)

We need some new names in government. Maybe the Adams men set a really lousy precedent back in the day, but there were a lot fewer people eligible to run back then.

In the category of "What are things I never thought I would say, Alex?" I'm with Barbara Bush. A few families have no business (in any sense of the word) taking turns with elective offices.

And, maybe even more so, we need to stop re-appointing the same cons and neocons, administration after administration. Senator Graham said, "Elections have consequences." I don't know about that, but I do know that elections sure as hell should have consequences. And shame on any official, especially a President, who tries to ensure that the most significant change is doubling down on the policies of the prior officeholders(s), especially the very two whom he ran against.

But, I digress.

Anyhooooo, I think I have enough info about the problem.

Now, I'd love to start getting info about possible solutions. And, by that, I don't mean delusions about the impact of signing internet petitions or calling my Rep, or my ability to somehow buck the entire Party, its donors and the system to primary from the left, etc. I mean something that actually has some shot of happening someday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC