A sickening prediction from an anonymous ally on the right.

[pnwmom]

http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2007/09/11/dean/index1.html

From John Dean's new book, BROKEN GOVERNMENT

As I was writing this closing section an old friend from the Nixon White House called. Now retired, he is a lifelong Republican who told me that he voted for Bush and Cheney twice, because he knows them both personally. He asked how my new book was coming, and when I told him the title, he remarked, "I'll say the government's broken." After we discussed it, he asked how I planned to end the book, since the election was still a good distance away. I told him I was contemplating ending midsentence and immediately fading to black -- the way HBO did in the final episode of the Sopranos, but that I would settle for a nice quote from him, on the record. He explained that he constantly has to bite his tongue, and the reason he does not speak out more is because one of his sons is in an important (nonpolitical) government post, and we both know that Republicans will seek revenge wherever they can find it. How about an off-the-record comment? I asked. That he agreed to.


"Just tell your readers that you have a source who knows a lot about the Republican party from long experience, that he knows all the key movers and shakers, and he has a bit of advice: People should not vote for any Republican, because they're dangerous, dishonest and self-serving. While I once believed that Governor George Wallace had it right, that there was not a dime's worth of difference in the parties; that is not longer true. I have come to realize the Democrats really do care about people who most need help from government; Republicans care most about those who will only get richer because of government help. The government is truly broken, particularly in dealing with national security, and another four years, and heaven forbid not eight years, under the Republicans, and our grandchildren will have to build a new government, because the one we have will be unrecognizable and unworkable."

These comments summed up our current situation -- and our possible future -- as eloquently as anything I could have wished.

[babylonsister]

1. Rec'd. Frightening. nt

[Hydra]

95. Not frightening

Do we really like the system we have so much that none of us could envision a better one, or is it because we are frightened of what it will take to build a new one?

[Olney Blue]

2. "Our grandchildren will have to build a new government"

Oh my.

K/R

[populistdriven]

13. Hopefully that means we get to watch the current one get destroyed, that would be worth it.

:popcorn:

[asthmaticeog]

80. Not at all.

The fallout would be widespread starvation, an end to our access to potable water, probably heating fuel and electricity as well. Government is closely tied to infrastructure. I don't want to die slowly and horribly for the sake of watching a perfectly fixable system collapse.

Though if that's what you want, I encourage you to follow your bliss. :patriot:

[Hydra]

96. Newsflash

Many of us are already slowly strangling in this system. Are we supposed to hold off replacing a system that doesn't work because it is currently working well enough for you to survive?

[asthmaticeog]

105. I didn't realize you were starving and without electricity, sorry.

Neat trick getting on the 'net, though.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[asthmaticeog]

113. I'm truly sorry you're having so much trouble.

But advocating the complete destruction of the infrastructure of civilization, thus plunging EVERYONE into far worse circumstances than those you describe, is reprehensible.

And the name calling is against DU rules.

[dickbearton]

120. Oh, Boo Hoo...

Name calling is against DU rules. I have a couple of names for
you.

[asthmaticeog]

130. Call me them, then.

I'm supposed to be so awful? I seem to be the only one being civil, here.

[Hydra]

123. You assumed something incorrectly and insultingly

and you don't really care, as long as you're cozy in your home and well fed.

Don't worry, it doesn't bother me as much as it used to. Poor people are invisible and worthless, despite their education and abilities.

That goes the other way, you know. If this gov't falls apart, and you fight to keep it in place for your own survival, don't expect any sympathy from me.

[asthmaticeog]

129. You chide me for making assumptions, yet you do the same.

You don't know shit about my life or my income, why do you assume I'm so affluent? Because I'm not.

The point is you're either advocating for the destruction of all civilization's infrastructure to satisfy your petulant emotions toward the current system or you're not. Are you advocating revolution or no? Because flawed though this system is, I believe it's fixable, and the satisfaction you're taking in the idea of its total destruction is repulsive.

[Hydra]

132. I don't see it as fixable

And you obviously have enough if you are assuming that poor people can't post. Or need I remind you of your insulting comment earlier?

Hehe...you really think the current system is interested in providing infrastructure, and that a change in government would destroy that? Only if we had to do it the hard way.. and I assume you would be fighting to keep it in place for the sake of the(non-existent) order they bring us?

Is our government, with its policy of disappearing people and destroying its critics really worth what you think it is? Is the idea of something better than what we have "repulsive" to you?

Of course, I don't think it will happen that way. Bush will suspend elections, and people will talk about "preserving the system." We will attack Iran on flimsy pretenses, and people will not care. "Traitors" will be declared of people speaking out, and they will be held without charges, except the one on Faux news and CNN. People like me will die trying to help their loves ones in a failing economy. Diseases will spread like wildfire as people can't get medical care without taking out a loan.

And you know what will happen? Nothing. Already, so much has happened that has become accepted that should never have been.

Flawed??? Your precious system was built to do this, and will continue to do this. But like so many others, you see the system as being "good" while the people who know better have no voice, and die without recognition.

Enjoy your good fortune while you can.

[asthmaticeog]

135. You're making no fucking sense.

"And you obviously have enough if you are assuming that poor people can't post."

"Poor" is a relative term. You eat food every day? You can get on the 'net? Tell the people who live in garbage dumps in Manila that you're poor. Poverty does not confer moral authority, by the way, so you can shitcan the imperious tone you're taking.



"Is the idea of something better than what we have 'repulsive' to you?"

I expressed a desire for something better. You advocate for destruction.



"Bush will suspend elections, and people will talk about 'preserving the system.'"

If I had a dollar for every psycho on DU who insisted that Bush would suspend elections, I'd buy you a house. Let's see, 2002, 2004 and 2006 have gone by without martial law being declared.

[Hydra]

138. Ah, the cheap tricks continue

But at least I know where you're coming from now.

You think I'm supporting the idea of wrecking the system. That was someone else's post. I was responding to your selfish rhetoric in your first response:

I don't want to die slowly and horribly for the sake of watching a perfectly fixable system collapse.

That is currently happening to people like me here in America, but as I've pointed out many times already, you're ok with that as long as it isn't you...I find that attitude highly repugnant and it is the type of thinking that is keeping things the same in the world.

I could reiterate why I think the system is unfixable, and how we need to have a new constitutional convention among other things, but you don't care. You opted to snipe in your first response to me, and report my rebuttal, and then rephrase the original context in a way that redirected from your less than stellar behavior.

:shrug:

[asthmaticeog]

139. OK, all I thought is hereby confirmed.

Beacuse I don't agree with you about what needs to be done in every detail, I "don't care as long as it isn't (me)?" A bigger false binary, I haven't seen in awhile, even on the internet. I salute you. You have NO IDEA what I believe or do with regard to poverty, you just assume that I don't care - because I believe this system can be fixed? One of the fixes that's needed is that we need to stop treating poverty like a disease and the homeless like aliens, but you don't actually care what I think - you just want to smug at me. You called me sanctimonious! Go bum some change for a mirror - or a pot & kettle.

AGAIN: professed poverty does not confer moral authority.

[EstimatedProphet]

109. Replacing the nonworking system doesn't have to be the same...

as destroying the current one. That is going to have disastrous effects for everyone. That was the OP's point, I believe.

[Hydra]

114. Ok, tell me what is in place that will keep this from happening again

I don't think this is an aberration. I think this is the logical conclusion of the system we adopted. Even if we do a through housecleaning, we'll probably have the same problems again in 30 years.

Not that anyone cares as long as they're warm and cozy in their homes, and well fed. No matter. In 2 years, I hope to see most of you living on the streets with me. Perhaps then we'll reach a consensus on the true nature of the problem we have here.

[EstimatedProphet]

117. OK

Where we are stems directly from where we have been. However, I do think that the point that demolishing what we have is going to cause hurt too, should not be ignored. If we can change things without destroying everything, I would say we should. there's no point in increasing misery for the sake of increasing it.

2¢, no change...

[Hydra]

118. You're welcome to your opinion

But our system WILL NOT change peacefully. The system his declared its desire to eat us alive.

That being the case, delay is undesirable. Remember when you posted to my first journal entry, saying that I was not acknowledging the efforts that were being made and what could possibly change soon? How much positive good has been done since then?

Demolishing our system does not have to mean widespread famine or civil war, but it probably will, since the people with something to lose will probably fight the process.

[EstimatedProphet]

119. Help me out here...when did I post to your journal?

[Hydra]

121. here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1431740#1443350

[Hawkowl]

116. Katrina

Picture the aftermath of Katrina as a microcosim, a foreshadowing, of what is coming if we can't fix our goverment fast.

[asthmaticeog]

131. Good point. nt

[Demeter]

90. The Building Has to Start NOW

or we won't HAVE any grandchildren! We do not have the luxury of time any more.

[sufrommich]

3. Wise words

Hopefully we will all take them to heart. I'm voting for whichever Democrat wins the nomination.

[tom_paine]

4. Is there a SINGLE "warning light on the dash" that ISN'T BLINKING RED?

In spite of the relative lack of personal physical danger, this may well be one of the most dangerous times in American History.

[FREEWILL56]

5. "and our possible future"

The future is now as it will take decades to undo what has already been done and that's IF we only have dems in office. To quote somebody: "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"

[CreekDog]

6. Colin Powell?

[pacalo]

9. The "I once thought Gov. Wallace had it right" quote rules him out, but that was a good guess.

[CreekDog]

10. Duh. Of course you are right.

[zalinda]

11. Now we know where Nader learned about

the two parties. "While I once believed that Governor George Wallace had it right, that there was not a dime's worth of difference in the parties; that is not longer true." Surprising it comes from a repub source.

zalinda

[pnwmom]

14. Maybe Nader's problem, aside from his ego, is that his opinions were formed

a few decades ago and never changed. He can't see that the world has changed around him.

The Republican party is no longer the party of Eisenhower and Rockefeller. It's the party of thugs like Cheney and toadies like Gonzales.

[Vincardog]

97. Governor George Wallace had it right, that there was not a dime's worth of difference in the parties

that there was not a dime's worth of difference in the parties

Was what he used to believe GW had right.

[gorekerrydreamticket]

137. Why does that rule him out?

It was a well-known quote...

[pacalo]

7. As someone who paid attention to Watergate, then learned about the cast of characters

in the Nixon era, I'm wondering who gave John Dean that quote. He voted for Bush & Cheney twice because he knows them both personally -- ouch -- yet now that they can't run again, he admits the government so broken that our grandchildren will have to build a new government. Could this mean that there are many other Republicans in high places that have seen the light but are afraid to speak out? I do wonder.

[pnwmom]

12. I think there are probably many more.

And they're not speaking out because they're afraid of retaliation. Think of how easy it would be -- jobs could be lost, the I.R.S. could be sent after them, the Justice Department could bring false prosecutions. We have a former Governor in Alabama who is a political prisoner! Any Republican who speaks out now risks becoming a martyr.

John Dean is a brave man. I wish there were more like him.

[DavidDvorkin]

8. And yet he voted for BushCheney twice, because he knows them?

While seeing what they were doing to the country?

Because he knows them?!

[rucky]

15. And when it's just one guy in a booth with a touchscreen...

there's no excuse for not voting your conscience.

[flashl]

69. Maybe he trying to tell us they KNOW how we vote. n/t

[harun]

16. You would of thought the "knows them part" would have helped him

make a better pick.

:shrug:

Great comment though, I completely agree with his assessment. The Republican party has gone astray and is not coming back.

[Skittles]

19. that caught my eye too

this is a man who cannot be trusted even when he tells the truth

[JHB]

88. "this is a man who cannot be trusted even when he tells the truth"

Well, at least that corroborates that he was part of the Nixon administration.

If there was ever a phrase that fit the Nixies, that's it.

[pnwmom]

25. Who knows what straw finally broke this elephant's back?

I assume that his change of heart came sometime AFTER his 2004 vote.

But I agree, voting for someone because you know them . . . sounds inane to me.

[krkaufman]

35. Yeah, between that and the "keeping silent to protect my son's job" ...

... I'm none too impressed with Mr. Dean's friend.

[RaleighNCDUer]

49. Knowing the level of vindictiveness of Bushco, it may not be just

a job he believes he is protecting.

[pnwmom]

64. When they can put a former Governor in prison

for accepting a donation to the State's lottery fund -- they could prosecute anyone.

[pnwmom]

63. I would have trouble speaking out if I thought it would hurt my child. n/t

[NJCher]

71. that's what jumped out to me

Republicans are so literal. He voted for the "devil he knew."



Cher

[peacetalksforall]

77. What bothered me is me - I go into a spin when I hear Iran-Contra. If this

guy is in the know, he knows the banking scandals, he knows Watergate, he knows the CIA and State Dept manuever to get rid of Carter, he knows the CIA and State Dept massacres and deaths coming from our plans for regime changes. He knows about all the assassinations. Now, he's questioning?

I'm not bothered about his choice not to speak up. I'm bothered about his eyesight and hearing.

I feel I am demeaning John Dean because he shared this with us and I and others are making it into a boomerang on him. I don't want that. But, what kept that guy so loyal from the most recent (in decades) beginning of all this with the same players going in and out of death, theft, destructions, and legislation against the people - the beginning being the corporate push to take SE Asia and the 1963 assassination. Where was this guy?

Dean took a big leap off their boat by questioning Nixon. Maybe we didn't have all the aftersight about what had all happened in the 60's.

But, where was this guy and the others like him?

[truedelphi]

93. That is my reaction also - So who cares if you know someone or not?

Do you vote for vile inhumanity with its duplicity and lying war mongering greed because you know them??

[proud patriot]

17. wow , just wow

:wow:

[Roland99]

18. And until the majority of the Democratic Party recognizes this...

we'll be stuck with crap like "impeachment is off the table".

And be railroaded with emergency re-authorizations of warrantless wiretapping legislation.

And be shouldered with additional debt from further deficit-spending warmongering.

And.....

[blm]

20. and more excuses for CONTINUING the coverups

as we heard in the 90s after all THOSE investigations of Poppy's criminal operations were downplayed and swept under the rug. That really helped them regroup and come back even stronger with the psychopath son leading the charge this time.

[sandnsea]

21. The Republican *Party*

Meaning simply going after Bush will not be enough to truly change course in this country. I honestly don't know, but maybe the Dem leadership wants to just hang Bush/Cheney right around the neck of the entire Party, make it crystal clear that they vote with Bush because they believe the same as he does. It won't do any good to impeach because we'll just get another one, same as we will if another one is elected in 2008. At the executive level, they are all the same.

[Liberal Lassie]

22. My stickers are btgger than yours!

[Roland99]

23. :-)

:toast:

[comtec]

44. I bet they are Bigger too ;) [nt]

[in_cog_ni_to]

24. Now that is scary! When a Lifelong repuke sees what we see and ADMITS IT,

things really are as bad as they seem! They are dangerous and it's good to see MORE repukes coming forward to say so.

People should not vote for any Republican, because they're dangerous, dishonest and self-serving.

[dickbearton]

124. Argeed...

The Republican Party is rotten to the core. It has been rotten
for quite awhile; but now they are a bunch of Nazi enablers.
The question is can America be saved or has their rot already
destroyed this country.

[illinoisprogressive]

26. Vic Gold. Why and who is he?

This guy use to be part of goldwater's staff and a true believer. he use to be a speechwriter for Bush sr.
He is a party insider to the max and been around over 40 years.
bush jr and Cheney got him so pissed off he repudiated them and wrote a scathing book about them and the gop today. How they betrayed Goldwater and his principals. Got in bed with the religious right and used it to divide the nation, took it to an unjust war.
He despises Bush Jr. and Cheney and all of them and the neocons.
the book came out last year.

[pnwmom]

28. That sounds like a good book to read, but I doubt he's this Repub

because this guy is afraid to speak out, except anonymously.

[Senator]

27. K&R&I (Impeach)

[DirtyDawg]

29. Like I Said...

...my rallying cry for '08...Just Say No To Republicans!

[iaviate1]

30. I'd say we have some dems to worry about too...

Some of these people are no better than average Republicans in many respects.

[comtec]

46. Even our WORST Dem (HRC?) is better than their best

I know she's not had the best record as a Senator, but NY seems happy enough with her (elected twice) and on many issues she's on the correct side. The thing to remember is that politics is a constant game of back scratching. I'm not exactly trying to excuse HRC's actions, but I believe she has voted her conscious many times, and held her nose even more. The war was of course her worst mistake ever. She must have had access to better information (through Bill) and probably her corporate masters told her to vote for it anyway.

Mind you I'm going to vote DK in the primary. I finally decided that after reading his positions (NOT crazy about many of his stands, but he's the most populist on the issues) that I would vote for him, partially because the M$M says he cant win, and because I want my opinion to be very loud and clear, DK is on the right track, and I expect them to pick up where he will have to leave off.

Of course i want to REELECT GORE.... but I accept that he's not going to run, which is a crusher, but oh well, what can you do. You can't MAKE the man run. You can try to DRAFT GORE... but the reality is that it's HIS CHOICE (I'm also pro-choice ;) ) to run or not. I cant blame him really. He KNEW this would all happen, he KNEW IT! But his handlers would not let him be himself. Only occasionally they would slip and the REAL Al Gore would come out.. .and OMFG... he really is a dynamic speaker.

But I cn't dwell on that. I have known repugs who hate this government. They say this is NOT how the repugs should be running the country. They completely do NOT represent the ideals of the repug party. I don't have the heart to tell him that yes, yes they do. (He was an old retired client of mine years ago).

The old ones are the most heart broken. They believed in the gop for decades. Once maybe they might have been wiser, but not since Eisenhower.

The way '08 will go will be, sadly, par for the course. Americans hire Democrats to fix the country, to get things strong and working well, then when everything is going (too) well, they hire a repug to break it. A history teacher pointed this out, and it's the traditional way things have always gone in this country. Dems fix and do miracles with America, and repugs break it.

[iaviate1]

141. Clinton was fooled by Bush.

That's a fatal mistake for something as important as war if you want to be President. At least fatal for my vote.

On edit: DK is my candidate too. I agree with him on everything that seems to be important.

[pnwmom]

66. It is that kind of attitude that sent 95,000 Florida voters to Nader in 2000.

Nader, the guy who claimed that Bush and Gore were "Tweedledee and Tweedledum." He knew better, but he was willing to lie because he wanted to prove he was powerful enough to punish the Dems and affect the election.

Even someone like Ben Nelson, a conservative Democrat in a red state, helps the Democrats by providing the majority we need to control the Committee chairmanships.

And among the Presidential candidates, there is no comparison between any of the Dems and any of the Repubs. The day of the Eisenhower-Rockeller Republicans is long past.

[ejbr]

87. I disagree

Unmitigated stupidity sent 95000 voters to Nader. If they saw the same person in Gore that they saw in Bush, then they're stupid. Period, end of sentence, don't pass go, do not collect $200.

A friend of mine who lived in Florida voted for Nader in 2000. When the Supreme Court selected Bush, he apologized. This is important to note because he would not have apologized for Bush, Sr. nor Reagan nor even Dole had he won. He apologized for Bush, Jr. because everyone, with half a brain, knew he was an evil pile of shit back then. If he thought they were the same, he would have no need to apologize.

This friend has a Phd. from Brown University and I nevertheless consider him an idiot for making a political statement during this pivotal election. Sure, he has the right to vote for whomever he wants, but by not voting for Gore, he is partially responsible for all the death and mayhem of the Bush regime. Nader voters and those who did not vote at all share some of the blame, while Bush voters share most of the blame. Yes, I am being presumptuous about how Gore might have governed.

But I digress... if Bush/Cheney are not impeached, then I see little difference between the two parties as this is a sign of tacit approval of their endless criminal behavior.

(However, with the exception of Ron Paul, you are dead on about the presidential candidates!!):kick:

[pnwmom]

99. I don't see it as a sign of tacit approval.

I think they are counting votes in the Senate for conviction. We only have a bare majority there, not the 2/3 required for conviction. To Bush/Cheney, an impeachment without a conviction would be only a slap on the wrist. They would compare themselves to Clinton, who received the same thing. And much of the public would think it was all just partisan politics, just like it had been with Clinton.

[ejbr]

108. With all due respect

Approve: to give something official agreement or acceptance: to give formal confirmation that something is satisfactory
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

tacit: implied but not expressed: understood or implied without being stated openly
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.


If a mother sees her son running amok in a store, but does nothing to attempt to stop this behavior, is she not responsible? Silently wishing that he stops does not remove her culpability. Would we consider her foolish to attempt to stop this behavior even though she knows he will continue once her back is turned? No, we would understand that she does not approve of his actions. If we see this same mother ignore her son's behavior, then we would rightly assume she finds it acceptable. Pelosi and Conyers, by not even attempting to do what is right, tacitly approve Bush and Cheney's behavior because they do not even want to attempt to deter it. Their criminal behavior is acceptable to Pelosi and Conyers because not enough people find it unacceptable. Unacceptable has a very strict definition in my book: you do any and everything to combat what is unacceptable or, by inaction, it is therefore acceptable, or approved.

I would get into the national ramifications of not even attempting to impeach in creating future tyrants, but I have already gone on too long.

[iaviate1]

142. I guess it is.

And if Clinton is the Democratic candidate, I still won't vote for her.

[redqueen]

75. Oh, is that so?

What makes you say that?

IMO our worst DINO is lightyears better than the best repuke.

[iaviate1]

143. At least you know what you're getting with the repukes.

And that gives people comfort, so they get votes. I don't know WTF we're getting into if Clinton is elected. Will she get us out of Iraq? Will gays be able to openly serve? Will she defend our ports? I don't really know where she stands and I don't trust her one bit. Again, she will not get my vote even if she is the Dem candidate. Kucinich or Gravel are the only ones unless Gore changes his mind.

[orleans]

31. wow--but the ethics of this guy dean quoted? what the fuck is WRONG with him

when he voted for the poison pill knowingly??

he's as bad as the rest of them. obviously

[pnwmom]

68. My theory is that his change of heart came sometime more recently --

after the 2004 election. Think about all that has transpired since then. A lot of minds were changed because of Katrina alone.

[jhrobbins]

32. Your friend's son needs to get another job - this is WAY too important

for this guy to keep quiet. If he loves this country as much as you seem to think he does, he needs to take the high road and COME OUT! As one who 'came out' a long time ago, let me tell him how liberating it is.

[Justitia]

33. I always say: Never Trust A Republican -eom

[krkaufman]

34. Nice that that fella is looking out for his son's job ...

... at the expense of those dying in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere, under Bush's thumb.

His actions sorta muffle the spirit of his words. (Though he really *is* demonstrating his Republican roots. "Yeah, our government's totally broken, but I'm gonna pass the problem down to my grandchildren.")

[Scriptor Ignotus]

73. exactly what I was thinking...

[opihimoimoi]

36. Yup...K&R

[libodem]

37. Man,

there is nothing left to say. That says it all. Sheesh. I'm blown away.

[bjobotts]

38. Excellent Post. Love to read John Dean...now. The only good republican

is pushing up daisies. When I first heard someone say that I thought it was stupid. Now after years of involvement with repubs I now see the truth behind the saying. It's been my experience that many of the young republicans I meet are total assholes while still others are totally mis guided and ill informed. Greed seems to be a unifying factor...Greed and self interest, with a bit of cruelty mixed in. Many can be reached through calm and open dialogue as long as it is truthful but for the most part...how can you expect to make government work when you don't believe in it. If they spent as much time trying to make government more efficient as a unifying agent and protector of human rights as they do trying to profiteer from it then they would be of benefit...but they have made the old saying true..They tell you that government doesn't work and then get elected to prove it. They have become self-centered elitist and hypocrites thanks to the Christian Right's bigotry.

I can see the truth in Dean's republican friend's observations...can't you?
The truth often has its own ring to it that when you hear it you just know.

[c2farr]

39. The Mindless Fuck who occupies our White House

will be the last Republican president of the U.S. There was a last Whig. There will be a last Republican. "All stem no brain" George is that person. I predict this because of the changing demographics of the U.S. population. Hillary Clinton will win two terms. Barack Obama will succeed her with two terms. By then, in 2024, the demographic shift will be set. The Republican Party will be laid to rest on the ash heap of history.

When the most powerful nation on earth falls under the authority of a malignant tumor like Bush, we find ourselves suspended in a bizarre slow-motion animation of horror that feels like an endless loop. We will get to the end of it...if the tumor does not trigger another 9/11.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

79. Really?

They can create another 9/ll. They can steal another election.

I'd say there's a pretty good chance of that happening.

[trashcanistanista]

115. They can create another 9/11 but at this

point I don't think the majority of Americans will buy it. Don't underestimate the intelligence of the average American. Bush is lucky to get a 29% approval nowadays. Many have seen the light. It won't be easy, but we have only begun to fight to take our country back. We have got to remain optimistic. ... and welcome to DU! Great post.:hi:

[Major Hogwash]

40. This comment comes from within their own ranks, someone who used to believe in them.

There are a lot of disillusioned Republicans wandering lost in the wilderness today just like Dean's old friend.

The letters to the editor section of the Idaho Statesman have been filled with them for the last few weeks.

One woman wrote the following letter to the editor -

"Time to switch parties"

I've been a Republican for some 50 years-plus, however, I'd like to think they will miss my one vote since I'm joining the Democrat party. Too many "Little Gods" in the Republican Party - just think of all the wonderful things Sen. Craig has done for Idaho! (No skeletons in your family closet?)


And there's dozens more like that letter printed almost every day.
They've had enough of the hypocrisy, the lying, and the outright arrogance of those whom they thought represented them.

[gateley]

41. K&R

[CaliforniaPeggy]

42. My parents just joined the Democratic Party....Have a look!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x6923934

K&R

[pnwmom]

100. Congratulations to your parents! Happy voting! n/t

[natrat]

43. tell me something i dont know

[Hersheygirl]

45. I recognized that the republican party changed

back in the 80's. That's why I changed parties. Republicans were becoming something ugly and I didn't want to be part of that. What I don't understand is why more people don't see this and get out. That is why I say Americans are so blind they can't see what is in front of them. Or is it just stupidity?

[BanzaiBonnie]

58. My parents called it

They told me that the local REpublican party had been taken over by radical RRs. But they continued to vote Republican. Eeeeeee

[SharonAnn]

91. Me too, that's when I changed. The GOP got bigoted, greedy, etc.

May be that was always there, but those bad traits didn't drive the total agenda before Reagan.

[whistle]

47. Selfish, self-centered, greedy, dishonest, self-serving, self-righteous

...and a thousand other character flaws would not complete the description of todays republicans.

But go ahead, add to the list please so that we may all gain clarity.

[Emerald]

50. For six years or so,

young people were aligning themselves with the GOP, buying into the false patriotism and condescending social attitudes it fostered. But young folks generally have a large streak of idealism, and even in my red state, that trend is shifting. They are rejecting the divisive and hypocritical policies of the Republican party, and rejecting the scandals, swindles and smears that have characterized the modern GOP.

I see hope for our nation as it rejects the right wing talk radio mediots and holier-than-thou GOP strategists. Has the damage been so deep that we cannot recover our representative republic? I think younger voters will help lead the way out of this dark time, and those of us who watched it happen must help ensure our rights and liberties are never again compromised by marketeers and corporate enablers.

[whistle]

98. I have not been "RW Talk Show free" since July 1, 2007

...I have taken deliberate action to avoid RW talk radio in my car, office, home and even where public areas such as convenience stores, barber shops, lunch diners, employee cafeterias, medical centers, etc. I go out of my way to avoid exposure to the toxic sound wave bombardments from these types of broadcasts. In Orlando FL there is no choice because virtually 24/7 the AM bandwidths are right wing dominated as is the FM PBS 90.7 so I just do not listen to any of them. As a result my mental and emotional states have become far calmer and tolerant.

[tom_paine]

48. Kicked...again...for the ultimate warning

These same two paragraphs, almost word for word, could have come from a book about the rise of the Nazis, merely substituting Republicans for Nazis

He explained that he constantly has to bite his tongue, and the reason he does not speak out more is because one of his sons is in an important (nonpolitical) government post, and we both know that Nazis will seek revenge wherever they can find it.

The government is truly broken, particularly in dealing with national security, and another four years, and heaven forbid not eight years, under the Nazis, and our grandchildren will have to build a new government, because the one we have will be unrecognizable and unworkable.

This man should know, and he is warning us, just as happened before.

WAKE UP, PEOPLE. THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN COMPARING BUSHIES TO THE NAZIS ARE LOOKING MORE CORRECT EVERY DAY! HEED THIS MAN'S WORDS AND THE EVIDENCE OF YOUR OWN EYES AND EARS.

This is just another of the thousands of "little signs" we have gotten, that something truly terrible is brewing beneath the surface here in Imperial Amerika.

Wake up and see it. While no one can predict what the Final Solutions of the Bushies will look like, or even if they will be mass murderous, like previous Final Solutions or if they will be kinder and gentler Final Solutions, the shadows of Bush-Totalitarianism is looming large on the horizon.

[tomp]

51. ah, yes, the democrats have nothing to do with this "brokenness"

right. the democrats really care about people and the republicans don't. that's all it is. no collusion betwen the parties at all. nothing "broken" on the democratic side. just elect democrats and everything will be fine. right.

and he didn't figure this out until AFTER 2004. not much of a recommendation for his political acumen or insight capabilities.

[loudsue]

57. I agree: his statement confirms who he is, as a "life-long" republican.

He's the personality type that is THE SAME problem he describes as being wrong with the whole party.

:kick:

[tomp]

65. the source is one thing, the content is another.

the democratic party has played a role in breaking the government.

the point is this guy is still playing the two party game. the republicans are bad, vote for democrats and everything will be fine. nonsense.

[pnwmom]

101. For a life-long active Republican, a change like that is very hard to make.

But I think Katrina opened a lot of people's eyes. And that was after 2004.

[tomp]

136. i think you missed the point.

he went from repubs are better than dems to dems are better than repubs. he is now saying elect dems and everything will be fine, a very easy premise for many on du to accept, but one which doesn't recognize the fundamental participation of the dems in what has led to our broken government.

[Sweet Freedom]

52. And true to republican form

this chicken shit would rather protect himself from the wrath of the republican party than speak out on the record and protect everyone else. An anonymous quote does nothing in the real world. Show it to a republican and they'll say it's made up.

[Broadslidin]

53. Tis only natural for our specie, for each Imperial Empire to have its Ghoulish Caligula.

:hide:

[jobycom]

54. I wouldn't be surprised if it were Poppy Bush, frankly.

Not that I'd bet money on it, but he's made a couple of comments here and there that imply he's disgusted by this presidency. He's never had a great deal of approval for his son, anyway, and half of his son's motivation seems to be trying to prove he's better than Daddy.

"One of his sons is in an important (nonpolitical) government post..." Since Bush can't run again, his post could almost be nonpolitical...

[liberalhistorian]

89. That wouldn't be a bad guess,

except that Poppy really wasn't as "in" with the Nixonites as some of the other possibilities, and he wasn't all that crazy about Wallace, either. My guesses would be Pat Buchanan, Chuck Colson or G. Gordon Liddy. Buchanan and Colson were heavily involved in the Nixon WH, especially Buchanan, as a speechwriter. If I'm not mistaken, one of Liddy's sons does, indeed, work in a "nonpolitical" governmental position and if anyone is in the position to know about repub vengeance tactics it would be Liddy.

I narrow it down, however, as more likely being Colson or Liddy. Buchanan hasn't hesitated to speak out against repubs and their policies, he's hardly "biting his tongue." I know that Dean didn't care all that much for Liddy, calling him "crazy" in "Blind Ambition", after serving some prison time with him. And I do know that Dean became friends with Colson when they were both serving prison time together, and that friendship has continued throughout the years. So, my guess is that it's Colson.

[jobycom]

94. Maybe, but Colson's not exactly retired

He still writes a column and does work for his Christian group. And Dean just says it was a "friend," which doesn't have to mean he's close to him.

Still could be him. I'm sure Dean would hide the identity with some misdirection.

The Bush suggestion wasn't completely serious, in that I'm not seriously arguing that's who it was. But he would fit the description. He worked for Nixon, whether they were close or not. He knows all the movers and shakers in the party. Certainly Dean wouldn't say "A former president in the Republican Party told me..." He would hide it with a more vague description.

As for Liddy, that just doesn't like anything Liddy would say. Liddy's a rabid dog conservative. He might turn against the Republicans, maybe, but it would be because they were too "moderate," unless he's changed in the last couple of years.

I agree on Buchanan. He would just say it. He's proven he doesn't care about his ties to the Republican Party. I almost respect his integrity, even if I can't get past his racism. There were times when Ron Paul's role of "lovable Republican" was filled by Buchanan around here. Yeah, hard to stomach, but true.

[wicket]

55. Wow

:wow:

K & R

[Aviation Pro]

56. Over 100

...

[Postman]

59. Two words.....................No Shit.

anyone who votes for any republican or Joe Lieberman democrats is an idiot.

[Forrest Greene]

60. This Is News?

nt

[pnwmom]

62. It is to people who consider people like HRC and Obama to be "Bush-lite"

[L0oniX]

61. Well it will be interesting to see how long Hillary takes to get us out of Iraq too

[Vilis Veritas]

70. .............

.........Your point is quite valid.......

I do not see us leaving the Middle East for at least a Century...to many indicators. Hope I am wrong...

Peace.

[pnwmom]

81. None of the Democrats would have instigated the attack on Iraq.

That is Bush's baby. But we're going to be the ones left cleaning up the mess, and it won't be easy.

[Vilis Veritas]

67. Never really a question about voting for a Democrat...

The question is...Will It Count?

Teach your daughters and sons well...their task will be mighty.

Peace.

[IDemo]

72. "another four years, and heaven forbid not eight years, under the Republicans"

-and our grandchildren will have to build a new government, because the one we have will be unrecognizable and unworkable."

I'd say we are seven years too late on that one.

[peacetalksforall]

74. Just one problem - the way it looks today - Wallace and Nader

were both right about no difference when it comes to authorizing war - is there anything more important than the imperialist march? with all the death-destruction?

On the subject of invading (read IRAN) and the subject of having invaded Iraq - the only difference between them is :

Kucinich and all the rest.

Let's make the Kucinich list longer.

Then we can say there is progress.

The division is 'for' and 'against' invasion, death, prisons, human humilitation, and self-deceiving superiority.

The truth hurts and some Dems can't just handle the truth.

[pnwmom]

82. None of the Democrats authorized Bush to go into war when he did.

None of the Democrats authorized Bush to kick out the UN weapons inspectors and go to war without finding weapons of mass destruction. That was Bush, acting in his imperial Presidency. He ignored the language in the IWR which was written to prevent him from attacking as he did.

[RaleighNCDUer]

85. The problem is, those congressional democrats who were 'fooled'

(when so few of us out here were not) did not turn around and slap him down for overreaching his authority.

They might have been playing chess while * was playing checkers, but why did so few turn around and say, as Edwards did, "I was wrong" and repudiate what * did?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

111. You just keep on telling...

yourself that honey, if it makes you feel better. :eyes:

[paparush]

76. Dad?

[byronius]

78. Love that John Dean. Randi interviews him all the time.

[Catchawave]

104. So does Olbermann :)

I hope this becomes the Big Story soon. It's an important message for the 60-something per cent who "don't support" Bush.

[Roland99]

83. John Dean is *SO* pre-9/11 thinking. He doesn't get it.

:sarcasm:

[ejbr]

84. I disagree

I have come to realize the Democrats really do care about people who most need help from government...

The people of this country need the help of the Democrats to put impeachment back on the table and to attempt to remove these criminals in order to thwart future tyrants, yet they refuse. Until they do what is required to save our republic, I find the Dems not much better than repubs. All the good work that the Dems have done or will try to do will mean nothing when our country is in tatters. And then, the people who most need help from the govt. will be on their own.

[pnwmom]

103. Impeachment would not remove these people from office,

only conviction would. And we aren't even close to having the 2/3 vote in the Senate which is necessary for doing that.

Bush/Cheney would just laugh at impeachment w/out a conviction, say it was a partisan matter and compare themselves to Bill Clinton. I don't see how that would help us.

[ejbr]

140. Your view is myopic

Your claim that not having enough votes in the senate, Bush being compared to Bill Clinton, Bush and Cheney laughing at our attempt and not seeing how this would help us is a cynically myopic view.

1) not having 2/3 vote in the Senate: there are two reasons that this refusal to attempt to impeach lacks credibility. a) without presenting evidence of what has transpired over the past 7 years (refusal to allow a 9/11 investigation, for example) would not only expose what they did or didn't do to the senate, but also to the portion of the population who think this administration did enough to avoid 9/11. Even with the knowledge that Bush ignored the August 6th memo on bin laden, there is more to the story that the public needs to know. And we are JUST talking about 9/11! That 2/3 vote would sure get closer to realization. EVEN IF there never is the 2/3 vote, an attempt at impeachment is NECESSARY because future presidents will see that Congress takes the rule of law seriously, not as a politically expedient matter.

2)Bush being compared to Bill Clinton: at the moment, without any investigations, 50% of the public want these two criminals impeached. Bill Clinton's approval rating was 73% during his impeachment hearings, and after hearing all the evidence only http://www.democrats.com/clinton-impeachment-polls">26% favored impeaching Clinton. Bush's approvals remain in the thirties. There is no comparison.

3)Bush and Cheney laughing at us: who cares? You think they aren't laughing at us for NOT impeaching them?

4)Not seeing how this would help us: then let me explain how this would "help us". Future generations will know that Congress will stand up to a president who blatantly breaks the law, even without the votes. Future presidents will think twice about breaking the law because no president wants impeachment hearings to be part of their legacy. To only concern ourselves with the next election is like not seeing the forest for the trees. Sure, we should have concern for the next four years, but what about the next forty?

If Conyers and Pelosi do not attempt to impeach, then they not only are tacitly approving criminal behavior, regardless of their idiotic vote counting, but will also be culpable for any future president who decides to break the law, believing there will be no consequences.

[Cha]

86. Things we knew..

Wonder how broken down our corporatemediawhores are? Be nice to build a free press while they're at it.

[truedelphi]

92. I don't thinkit is our GRANDCHILDREN who willhave to build a new government

IT is US!!

[Uncle Joe]

102. Eight more years of Republican rule and the only thing left to build a new government

will be Borg.

[BrklynLiberal]

107. What does Ralph Nader have to say?

[Major Hogwash]

144. "42% of the people who represent 25% of the people who live in 1/3rd of the country 17% above the

poverty line have expressed desires 62% of the time for support for 28% of the Republicans who have assured that 71% of the money given to the fat cat corporations through 50% tax cuts passed by a 75% margin by Congress just in time for areas that have larger concentrations than more than 12% of the country's average population base, not including the 82% of the top 11% of those people who have not been represented at the state level for years that can not afford to make deductions as large as 30% for their overall income 90% of the time, based on recent studies that 40% of all economists agree on at a rate of 83% most of the time. The Democrats and the Republicans are the same party."

[liberal N proud]

110. I have assumed this all along

"Democrats really do care about people who most need help from government; Republicans care most about those who will only get richer because of government help"

It is why I could never vote R, NEVER!

[Carrieyazel]

112. Yes, the Repukes have broken a lot of things, but their incompetence has limited the damage

Just think if these criminals were actually competent. Their despicable presence has hurt, but these clowns don't know what the hell they're doing so often, and a Dem in the White House with Dem majorites can clean up their messes soon enough.

[EVDebs]

122. Marx and Norquist have a lot in common

Marx predicted the 'withering away of the state', too bad guys like Grover Norquist and the neocons are seeing to it that they can 'drown it in the bathtub'

What went around came around I guess.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

125. THE PURPOSE OF THE REPUBS IS TO DESTROY FEDERAL GOVT

PERIOR.

ALWAYS HAS BEEN, ALWAYS WILL BE.

[Tab]

126. I don't disbelieve it

Once upon a time, the differences were nuanced, and I would have trusted either a Democrat or a Republican to run the country. We' ve now moved to where we get stuff like the stupid "purple heart" bandaids. That, for me, was the total low point - mocking of a veteran's service by people who never set foot in a recruitment office. Regardless of what I think of Kerry, and I have some objections, there is no way in hell I would mock the purple hearts like these people were doing.



I am not by nature a mean-spirited person, but these people can rot in hell for all I care.

I do note that there are some previously-proclaimed Republicans that are "seeing the light" and rethinking their alignment. I'm okay with that.

I think most are disgusted with where there party is going. If I was one of them, I'd be too.

[yurbud]

127. kick

[yurbud]

128. when lifelong republicans and Nixon insiders see revolution coming--get ready.

it's almost here.

Note to NSA: I mean that only as an observer. I'm too lazy to actually do anything.

[orleans]

133. i'm kicking this. i think this is something else...and important for people

to read (again)

[pnwmom]

134. Thanks, Orleans.

I think I'm going to have to get that book of Dean's, too.

Good for him for sticking his neck out.

[orleans]

145. one last time--to end the week. (i linked to this in another post

and thought i'd send it up one last time for good measure.)

"people should not vote for any republican, because they're dangerous, dishonest and self-serving."

DON'T ANYONE FORGET--AND DON'T LET THEM FORGET EITHER