Different methods, yes; but identical results. And you STILL believe there's any real difference?

[JFN1]

Despite pride, despite ego, despite fear, despite angry denial: At some point, we need to get real.

I'm not going to rattle off the endless lists which demonstrate this point, as I firmly believe you are already quite aware - you know the score, even if it is difficult to look at, and even harder to admit.

But if we are going to salvage any kind of future for ourselves and our loved ones, we need to face facts.

Little meaningful difference remains between the Republican Party establishment/leadership/goals, and the Democratic Party establishment/leadership/goals.

Yes, the Republicans brazenly call their shots, use strong-arm tactics, unbridled fear mongering, and general hysteria, to win their points. They openly lie when it suits their purposes, and make no bones about their ultimate goals.

Yes, Democrats appear to stand up to Republican thuggery, using strong language and passionate debate/rhetoric/theatrics to demonstrate their diametric opposition to Republican governing chicannery...only to...sob...

CAVE. AND CAVE. AND CAVE. THEY CAVE IN. THEY CAVE UP. THEY CAVE DOWN. THEY CAVE AROUND, and AROUND, and AROUND. Did I mention they CAVE? Constantly?

And regardless of the different paths taken, both (R) and (D) roads lead to the exact same place.

A place where war crimes and austerity and enormous wealth for a privilaged few and poverty and neglect for everyone else, are the new norm, and the Constitution is no longer a sacred document, but a thing already discarded by those trusted to wield OUR POWER in OUR NAMES.

So - wakey, wakey - and grab a tissue if you need it to sop up your tears born of this massive betrayal by both Parties, and then get fucking mad, goddammitt!! Isn't it well past time to start having some serious conversations about this, folks? Because if we hand OUR POWER over to these same two D.C. insider groups, even one more time, I am sorry to say, we are well and truly fucked.

This is not mere speculation on my part - do the math and admit it - D.C. politics is a zero sum game, and there is no end in sight, if WE THE PEOPLE allow these "honorable personages" to continue.

And one more thing to chew on: What exactly IS America? Is it wealth? Or is it People?

Better decide this one quick, before the matter is settled on our behalf...

[Taverner]

1. Well said

[CelticThunder]

2. k&r

[OffWithTheirHeads]

3. Good Cop, Bad Cop

whenever I say I can't tell the difference between the parties anymore, someone always chimes in with the old argument "but, but, but, are you saying that you would rather have McCain/Palin in office?" It's the old lesser of two evils argument but here is how I see it. The powers that be from both parties are just playing good cop, bad cop on us. If faced with the choice between dealing with the cop that beats you or the cop that offers you ciggaretts and coffee, you are always going to prefer the good cop but the fact of the matter is that neither one has your best interests in mind. Both of them work for "the man" and they both, ultimatly, whant to bust your ass.

[RandomThoughts]

4. You did not watch good will hunting.

"I will take the wrench"

Because I am due beer and travel money, and the world should be more just and compassionate, and some 'nice' cop is not going to get me to give up on what is just and compassionate. If that nice cop is only trying to say I wont be hit by a bad cop, if I give up on what can be shown better.


and once you got the wrench, you take the rest of the tools, then fix things.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

8. Actually, I did but I try not to let Hollywood set my values.

It is all fantasy after all. I must confess, I'm not sure what your point is but, as I understand it, the gist is that I shouldn't give up on my values. I haven't. I just don't see how a country of the rich, by the rich and for the rich is supposed to work for me. Virtually everyone in power is rich. Dems and pukes alike. They are not sharing the sacrifice and they ARE voting in their best interests. The fact is that the system is broken. We are, and maybe we always have been a country run by the priviliged elite. I don't know what the answer is other than outright revolt, all I know is that what we have been doing for the last 30 years does not work. If you can afford to buy a magic wrench, be my guest but I'm thinking that only the select few are even allowed totouch the toolbox.

[RandomThoughts]

11. I don't either.

Although that specific comment I agree with, and can explain from many perspectives.

They do not set my values, or I would not comment on small parts of movies in many contexts, there are many ways to see things. I do however agree that many things can get you to think on things.

To think that it is Hollywood setting values, is not understanding anything I have posted.


However I agree that the system needs to be fixed, and I believe that is occurring, although if you believe all the posts, then they are going the wrong direction.

Or since they have not sent the beer and travel money that is due to me, they are going the wrong direction.

And I do not like, nor think in terms of 'smashing people' to use there lingo, they are doing it to themselves, becuase I am due beer and travel money, and that has not arrived.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

16. O.K. well then, good luck with the beer etc.

[Bluenorthwest]

29. Just off topic and for shits and giggles, Good Will Hunting is a

film written far outside the Hollywood system, written by two very informed Progressives one of whom has parents who are professors of the sort of math old Will does so well. The director was a gay man known for films of great power and again, outside the system. The film is what is called 'art'. What you call 'fantasy' is called 'fiction'. Storytelling. The second oldest of our arts after the dance. So while no one should allow any outside individual or cultural creation 'set our values'- which no artist would ask of you, certainly not Gus VanSant whose films ask the very opposite of that- to refuse cultural dialog on such a basis is absurd. Gus' films say this 'think bravely for yourself, always'. Aside from Good Will Hunting, his most mainstream film so far was 'Milk'. The rest are films that most who think in terms of 'Hollywood' have never even heard of, much less seen. Great films, some of them are great films.
Harvey Milk was dedicated to gaining for his community the right to set our own damn values. The film was about how Straight society imposes their (your?) values on millions of Americans with the full force of law and an unrelenting fervor. If you are under the impression that Milk was a fantasy, that might explain some of the lingering idiocy in the straight community. Can not tell that which is real from that which is made up in your minds about 'God' and 'values' and 'the Sanctity of Marriage'.
So whose values do you, in the larger sense, wind up living by, and living with, and helping to enforce upon others? If one is silent in the face of 'values' they do not like, are the culpable? I say yes.

[Lorien]

37. All fantasy, eh? Sure, the character is fictional; what he's speaking about is not:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8rQNdBmPek&feature=player_embedded

[some guy]

6. bad cop, worse cop. n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

48. +1000. nt

[woo me with science]

74. I have often thought that there is no way

they could have gotten through these desecrations of our freedom and our Constitution under a Republican President. Democrats would have been too outraged.

[riderinthestorm]

5. +1. Too late to comment more but great OP. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

7. Then you're supporting a third party?

:shrug:

[JFN1]

10. I think we need to choose again.

Making the same choice over and over, believing the same promises even as the last round is being broken, winning for the sake of winning (ego) - these represent poor choices more indicitive of laziness and fear than any species of national concern.

I don't care what you call it - but we cannot depend, in any meaningful way, in establishment parties of any stripe, and expect any measurable change or improvement. Things will only get worse, if we continue to blindly believe.

[Tarheel_Dem]

15. I hear Cornel West, and some others have formed an Alliance? I guess

it's the left's equivalent of the Tea Party? As for me, I was born a Democrat, and will likely die that way. I've seen quite a bit of "advocating" here these past few weeks, but I couldn't believe that DU had gone that way. It's Skinner's playpen, and he calls the shots, but it used to be against the rules.

What about those of us who are happy to call the Democratic Party home? Do we just get dragged along for the ride? Sorry, but that's not likely to happen. This party will never be lead by a Kucinich style liberal, those days are gone. However, a very realistic scenario is the entire country becoming Wisconsin, and I don't think there are many Democrats willing to risk that, and you can count me among them.

You can't know how much it comforts me to know that DU is not the real world. :hi:

[JFN1]

17. "not the real world"

Can't argue with you on that point.

[Enthusiast]

51. This is the real world.

[pnorman]

63. Which Maddow broadcast was that?

I'm TV-free, and get all such stuff from the internet.

[Enthusiast]

66. It was a while back. Early Spring, maybe?

I bet it is on Youtube somewhere. Her point of emphasis was: Although people polled said their political leanings were moderate or even conservative, often their actual positions were that of what we would think of as 'liberal' as shown by the % in the picture.

[sabrina 1]

12. How about taking our own party out of the hands of the

Corporists. Let THEM find a third party, maybe the teaparty would suit them better. But the Democratic Party is OUR party and we are not pleased with the takeover and we are no longer going to play the game of 'we have no choice but to vote for the guy who is really a Repuke with 'D' after his name. I would rather have a real Republican than one pretending to be a democrat.

So, this time, no money to pacs that choose the candidates. All donations go directly to Progressive Democrats. Vote for the president, but don't waste time on campaigning for that office. He's going to win anyhow. It will be Progressive Democrats now who need our time, money and effort and that's what I will be doing.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

18. that's how I see it. corporate dems are as bad for us as corporate pigs.

[Donnachaidh]

36. they are WORSE -- they con people into voting, then flat out BETRAY those folks

Pukes are in your face about what they believe in. Corporate Dems make pretty speeches, while holding a dagger behind their back.

They are Snake Oil Salesmen in the worst possible way.

[midnight]

24. Agree.

[awoke_in_2003]

50. too bad replies...

can't be rec'ed :)

[Horse with no Name]

78. because then the people would know who to blame

if we keep electing republicans/blue dogs who are not helping advance a Democratic agenda...then the Democrats get blamed. Instead, let them elect a republican...then when it all goes to shit--maybe next time they will make the right choice.

[Larry Ogg]

38. Most Americans are voting for a third party no matter what and they don’t even know it.

Because a third party has taken over both republican and democratic parties, it’s called the Capitalist Party.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what's going, but it does require one to take the blinders all the way off.

Unfortunately, the natural human tendency is to block out the things that conflict with what you want to believe.

But once you take off the blinders you can see that the Republican Party and the Democratic Party is more like

the right arm beating up on the left arm so as the sheep never notice the beast that the two arms are connected to.

The beast is the Capitalist Party, and http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1313987&mesg_id=1314508">We need to abolish the Capitalist Party

[awoke_in_2003]

49. shit, we desperately need...

a second one (to steal from Jim Hightower)

[MilesColtrane]

9. The arc of political history is long.

The hole we find ourselves in now is directly traceable to Ronald Reagan and Bush, Sr.'s Supreme Court appointees.

It is clear to me that a President John McCain wouldn't have appointed Kagen or Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.

You may argue that that is the only "real" difference between Democrats and Republicans left.

Even if that is true, it is a enormously important difference, and one worthy of deciding which of the two parties in our two party system to vote for.

[JFN1]

13. Important - yes. Meaningful?

Nope. In what way has this difference contributed in a meaningful way to our country? Pride in a short term political victory doesn't count...

[OffWithTheirHeads]

19. Sorry, the hole we are sliding into is not partisan.

it;s class warfare and supporting rich, white pasty persons only encourages rich white pasty persons to rule us. they are winning,

[Mojorabbit]

60. and it is global and intensifying as we speak nt

[emilyg]

14. knr

[TheWraith]

20. Utter fucking ridiculous bullshit of the highest order.

Seriously, if right now--at a time when there is more difference between the political parties than there has been in at least 60 years--you seriously think that there's any similarity in outcomes, tactics, or paths, then you need to get your head out of the cloud of bullshit that is the internet echo chamber, and take a good hard look at politics in the real world.

[JFN1]

22. Please, educate me on these vast differences..

Because I'm just not seeing them anymore.

[sendero]

26. Well..

... if you are impressed by TALK, the Dems are much better than the Reps. They SAY the right things.

When it comes to actions, well that is a different story.

If the right is going to crash America, and they are well on their way and with little resistance from Dems, well I'd just as soon get on with it because once Americans see the result there will be a New New Deal that will REALLY piss off TPTB.

[theFrankFactor]

39. Democrats are their own worst enemies. See above.

Barack = pretty talk.

After that it's all about accepting cowardly sell-out and compromise as some kind of brave victory made in the face of the powerful onslaught of a Republican minority/majority.

If more Democrats believed as the OP does imagine the real progress we would have!

Rather we have these tepid, apologists that enable the slide further and further away from real Progressive gains and every farther into the Republicanism of the 70's.

[2banon]

61. Did you listen to Democraticy Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid today on News Hour?

have a listen and remember that this is the Democratic Party Senate Leader speaking and is essentially parroting a Democratic President who we voted for. It isn't Fisk parroting dubya.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBkWx22c3a4&feature=player_embedded

I heard this today, as often before, I ask myself: how in the hell did that person ever become Majority Leader?

I mean, Who the hell are these people?

[Raine]

21. On point! nt

:thumbsup:

[slay]

23. K&R

i am quite concerned as well.

[sendero]

25. Yes.

.... that about covers it.

[GeorgeGist]

27. What exactly IS America?

It's the spoils of the holocaust against the native 'americans'.

[ret5hd]

30. yep.

[placton]

28. what we can do

1. VOTE if there is a Dem primary opponent of a DINO
2. VOTE for one Dem in the general to show that you WILL be a voter when the ballots are counted)
3. VOTE Green for the rest of the ballot

[dangin]

31. SCOTUS SCOTUS SCOTUS

If Ginsburg dies and gets replaced by a republican pick, we're so screwed. Moderates, liberals, progressives. LGBT, separation of church and state, women's reproductive rights. SCREWED.

Thats the difference.

Repeat after me. It's the SCOTUS stupid.

[EstimatedProphet]

35. This

[JFN1]

42. You assume.

This is not an assumption I feel is smart - or safe - to continue making. There is no guarantee a Dem justice will make any more difference than a Republican. Hoping it will be so does NOTHING to make it so, and if you hadn't noticed, political guarantees aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

[Motown_Johnny]

44. based on the 2 that Pres. Obama has appointed already it seems like

a reasonable assumption.

When you add in the assholes that W. appointed it makes even more sense.


We clearly need a (D) picking Supreme Court Justices for as long as possible, through 2016 at the very least.

[bluestate10]

54. Your claim is wrong.

The two Bush Presidents and Reagan packed the federal bench with so many rabid conservatives that democrats will have to hold the presidency through 2028 to have all of them die off without reaching the high court.

[FailureToCommunicate]

59. Yes! And that's just for the BIG issues! Anyone who survived Nixon, Reagan,

Bush1 and 2 knows there is a LOT of difference. I suspect that those who see little difference between D and R Presidents -when Congresses doesn't block them -

must be fairly well off financially.

[neoralme]

32. Dupe

[el_bryanto]

33. I thought America was a band - they did Horse With No Name

And Ventura Blvd.

Bryant

[RevStPatrick]

34. I can't believe we're still talking about this in 2011

I remember when Gore was running for president, saying that there is one political party in this country - the Corporate Party. The left wing of the party may be for a woman's right to choose while the right wing may be more militaristic, but it's one party, and it's the party of money.

Why are we still having this discussion?

OK, I realize that people pay attention at different times, it takes some people a bit longer to see what's going on, younger people may not have the experience to understand what's going on... etc.

The fact of the matter is, except for a few (mostly deluded) true-believers on both sides, it's mostly theatrics. And it's theatrics with the intention of making money for those at the top who are already wealthy. There is no "caving" going on, it's all the same agenda.

And - don't you understand yet - those at the top who are already wealthy view us - you and me - as nothing more than cash cows who should die before we end up costing them a single penny.

Have we figured this out yet? Or are we still in denial? What are we gonna do about it?

[sunnystarr]

40. That well depends on how hungry we get in USA! (nt)

[StarsInHerHair]

41. http://fdrdemocrats.org/

we do need REAL change, TURN LEFT!

[Motown_Johnny]

43. THIS IS THE THINKING THAT GOT US BUSH INSTEAD OF GORE!!!

You are just so F___ing wrong I am shaking in anger!

You don't get to just "get real" once and change the world.

If you are serious about real change then you need to show up for every f___ing election in your life and vote for the most progressive candidate with a viable chance of winning every f___ing time.

The cumulative effect of the many many votes will help move politics to the left.


Your "I Want It All Right Now" attitude is childish, selfish and self defeating.


Democratic politicians cave because liberals abandon them. They have no choice but to try to win elections by winning moderate voters.



Deal with reality, you don't just get it all by stamping your feet and making false equivalency accusations. Al Gore would not have been the same as George W. Bush and whatever conservative wins next because of the childish attitude of voters like you won't be the same as whatever (D) was up against him/her.


The Republicans are brazenly calling the shots because they don't need moderate voters to vote for them. Conservative voters show up and vote for scumbags like Vitters just because he is the conservative one. Until liberals start doing the same thing there won't ever be a level playing field for anyone to forward our agenda.


Deal with it.

[Edweird]

46. Yeah, good luck selling that crap.

[Motown_Johnny]

71. How young are you? Can you not remember 2000?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SA4XeYU4gQ&playnext=1&list=PLD5A4D448C770D809


just watch the very beginning of that video


Bill Maher was just one of many progressive voices claiming that the parties were to much alike and so he didn't vote for Gore. He also spent months on his show telling others to not vote for Gore either, but to vote for Nader.


The false equivalency is the enemy.


President Obama has made some advancements on issues that any Republican would not only not have made, but would have tried to move things in the opposite direction.


A few examples are:

Two great choices for Supreme Court.

The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

The Matthew Shepard Hates Crimes Prevention Act (which they said could not be done)

Children's Health Insurance

Tobacco Regulation

Credit Card Reform

Student Loan Reform

The Stimulus (including the largest tax cut ever, the largest investment in clean energy ever, the single largest investment in education in our country ever)

Health Reform

Wall Street Reform

The New G.I. Bill

The Food Safety Modernization Act (the most expansive food reform bill since the 1930s)

The Don't Ask Don't Tell Repeal

The New Start Treaty (even when the (R)s said he would never be able to get it passed)

Locking up over half the loose nuclear material in the world in less than half of his first term, something most (R)s thought impossible.




Most of that list is from The Rachel Maddow Show and is included in this clip
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#4077 ...

In that clip she also estimates that ~85% of what President Obama said he wanted to accomplish in his first term had been accomplished in the first half of his first term.




And just as of yesterday


http://www.gazette.com/articles/rights-120021-backs-time.html

^snip^

UN group backs gay rights for the 1st time ever
Comments 0
June 17, 2011 12:45 PM
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

GENEVA — The United Nations endorsed the rights of gay, lesbian and transgender people for the first time ever Friday, passing a resolution hailed as historic by the U.S. and other backers and decried by African and Islamic countries.

The declaration was cautiously worded, expressing "grave concern" about abuses suffered by people because of their sexual orientation, and commissioning a global report on discrimination of gays. But activists called it a remarkable shift on an issue that has divided the global body for decades, and credited the Obama administration's push for gay rights at home and abroad with helping win support for the resolution.

"This represents a historic moment to highlight the human rights abuses and violations that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people face around the world based solely on who they are and whom they love," U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said in a statement.

Following tense negotiations, members of the Geneva-based U.N. Human Rights Council narrowly voted in favor of the declaration put forward by South Africa, with 23 votes in favor and 19 against.





The idea that the parties are the same is insane. Yes, on some issues the (D)s are to far to the right but voters abandoning them won't help. It only hurts in the long run. We need to keep as many right wingers out of party as possible. If that means keeping some moderate Democrats in office until more liberal ones can beat them in a primary then that is what needs to be done.

[JFN1]

72. There are many, many, many more similarities than there are differences.

And I did not say there were absolutely no differences - I said, repeatedly, "little meaningful difference remains..."

If you believe getting the list you liad out is worth the price we are paying in EVERY other way, I think you should spend some time hanging out at an unemployment office for a couple of hours, and see just a small portion of the cost of these victorious "differences" for yourself.

Do I think insuring children, DADT, financial and health reforms, are unimportant? No - they are vital to our future.

However - giving someone a brand new shiney computer monitor and then destroying their desk, and electrical outlets, and phone lines, and then their computer, and as a final collateral act, throwing them out on the street with only the clothes on their back and that shiney new monitor, doesn't make that new monitor seem worth receiving, if these latter items are the trade off.

Does it?

[Motown_Johnny]

73. your analogy makes no sense at all

Can we please try to speak literally instead of implying a shiny new monitor is the equivalent of every social and environmental issue in the country while fiscal issues are the equivalent of electrical outlets and phone lines and a computer to boot.


My point is that to abandon the progressive candidates is self defeating. We need to support the most progressive viable candidate in every election consistently for any change to occur. By reducing the impact of the progressive vote, by voting for inviable candidates or not voting at all, we set ourselves back.


The more reliable the voters the more reliable the politicians can be.

In 2000 progressives voted for Nader instead of Gore and we ended up with Bush. I don't blame Ralph Nader for this, he has a right to run and to get his message out, but voters need to vote wisely and allowing Bush to win (or come so close to winning that he could steal) the 2000 election was a setback of monumental proportions.

We need to learn from that mistake and work consistently for incremental change. We won't get anywhere from abandoning the only defense we have against the right wing agenda.

[JFN1]

76. Ummm...not implying - using a "met-a-phore"

Often employed as a useful way to illustrate a point; and it appears the point I was making, has been lost on you.

You speak of progressive candidaes. Is there a way to seperate these true progressives out from the corporate owned ones who claim they are progressives? If so, please enlighten.

Also - do we have enough actual progressive candidates to win our party back?

Seems to me we cannot trust any of these beltway insiders at all, and if they're all we've got, believing they are true progressives is the best we can do?

I think not.

Like it or not, it is time to choose again. If we trust ANY of these insiders again, we're going to get what our apathy and gullibility lead us to - more of the same, and worse.

See, i can give you one single guarantee in all of this, and I seriously doubt you can offer any guarantees at all.

I GUARANTEE if we trust this same group of establishment Dems, knowing the same group of Republicans are certain to be there after 2012, things are going to slide downhill for Americans of all political stripes, faster - and farther - than most are currently willing to believe.

I'm sorry, but I can no longer trust that Lucy is going to actually hold the football this time, because the next time she pulls the ball, we ain't gettin' back up...

[rpannier]

53. If you say so

[bluestate10]

55. Exactly. But the people that voted for Nader in 2000 don't want clear logic. nt

[bertman]

80. Shake on, Motown_Johnny! You are living in la la land. The "liberals" have NEVER

abandoned the Democratic party. The party abandoned us liberals.

I've been a Democrat since I was "converted" from hard-core Republican in Vietnam in 1969 and I'm sick to death of the Corporate control of the Democratic party.



Talk about shaking mad. That makes me shaking mad.

[bhikkhu]

45. If you're talking about 2012, then its about the economy

...and you couldn't be more wrong about there being no difference.

Reagan was a disaster for the deficit, for wages, for the working poor, the unions - everything. Wealth migrated to the "top tier". HW was no better, and at least he reaped what his boss sowed and was a one-termer.

Clinton was better. He got the budget under control, inequality was at least stable, the economy flourished, trade flourished, the budget was balanced, etc.

Then Bush years were a complete disaster for the deficit, inequality hit record highs as wealth flowed only upward, trade stagnated, jobs disappeared, manufacturing crashed, the banks crashed, housing crashed, etc, etc.

Obama turned around an economy in mid-disaster. Bush created a net zero jobs in 8 years, Obama has created 2 million jobs so far. Manufacturing output is on a historic upswing, economic growth is at a steady pace, trade is healthy.

People would say we need to go back to republican policies because we don't need steady economic growth - we need a massive upswing, and we don't need healthy trade, we need booming trade, and we don't need stable job growth, we need massive job growth...but being realistic about a goal is sometimes a good thing, if we are at least heading in a good direction. I think the recent past of historic bubbles and rampant one-thing-or-the-other has created some ridiculous expectations and impatience.

[bluestate10]

56. I am amazed. The 2010 midterms and the social conservatives legislation

that has come out of the republican House should be proof enough that there is a difference between democrats and republicans. Yet the Nader adherents still are blind to the obvious.

[JFN1]

70. Yes, it is amazing, so many political "co-dependents" remain blind

to the socially conservative agenda being exercised by Democrats like POTUS.

- Bush tax cut extensions
- No public option
- No prosecution of war criminals
- No prosecution of Wall Street crooks
- Massive financial payouts (bailouts) to banks
- No sustained assistance for long term unemployed
- No sustained assistance for Americans hurt by Wall Street CRIMES
- Patriot Act renewal
- Gitmo - still open!!!!
- Iraq - still there!!!
- Afghanistan - still there!!!
- Libya - now we're there!!!
- Bradley Manning - no Constitutional rights for him
- Budget cuts affecting thousands of programs and millions of Americans
- No tax increases for the wealthiest even considered
- Billions for big business
- Bush wiretapping program, expanded by Obama

Lots more where this came from, too.

How can anyone say, and actually fucking mean it, that there is a meaningful difference between Dems and Repubs, with just the list I've made above? The list sounds like a Republican wet dream and a Democratic nightmare - yet it is DEMOCRATS WHO ARE DOING IT!!!!

I wish people would stop feeling sorry for themselves.

I wish people would quit with the clinging to what they want to be the truth (Krusty is coming, Krusty is coming, Krusty is coming), so they do not have to face the ghastly facts we are faced with...

It is what it is. And now we have to decide to do something about it - you know, other than believing the same lies from the same group of puppets OCCUPYING our government.

[awoke_in_2003]

47. They both listen to the real bosses...

Wall Street. Democracy in this country is a Potemkin Village- the scene in DC is a facade to make us think that we matter. We do not matter one iota to 98% of politicians.

[Stinky The Clown]

52. rec

[swilton]

57. Great rant!

Now that Weiner's gone I bet there will be a lot, lot less (to use your words) 'standing up to Republican thuggery, using passionate debate...' etc., etc. Other than Kucinich, I can hardly think of another passionate, progressive Democratic Party member...They're all gone. And as you note, rhetoric or not the results are cave, cave and more caving in.

Thank you for so eloquently expressing what many of us feel! And also for so cleverly getting it through the DU censorship.

[timmymoff]

58. Our worst enemy is complacency

I think the tech age has actually weakened our voices with congressmen. A bunch of letters (handwritten and snail-mailed) may be what our elected officials need to see. We know longer have to show up to protests etc, when all you have to do is click a button. I'm one of the worst about this, so do not take this as preaching. If we, as citizens, want to move America forward, we need to end complacency. This is going to be a tough election coming up with known voter suppression tactics. Somehow we need to make sure everyone eligible to vote will vote. Friends, family, acquaintances, somehow we need to make the push. I don't know how exactly just some ideas.

[mistertrickster]

62. Good post, JFN nt

[lonestarnot]

64. Pugs are running monkies, theiving rats, and unemployed millionaires (200 million) so unless you can

show me someone better than Mr. President that can win the election, I'll be voting for him in 2012. So yeah.

[Blecht]

65. Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours

Well, here's a kick anyway.

[timtom]

67. Yeah!

Here's a kick from me, as well!

(Wish I'd seen this earlier...)

[OBotModel54]

68. Nope, No Difference at all as long

as the BlueDogs are allowed to call themselves Dems.

No matter what anyone says, Bluedogs ARE not Dems in anyway shape or form, including the current POTUS.

Until a Purge of the BlueDogs happens the Democratic party will be PubLite and we all know what Truman said about voting for Dems pretending to be Pubs.

I hope the current POTUS has the smarts to understand Truman's this very simple statement of fact other wise the POTUS in 12 will have a R after their name.

[Thaddeus Kosciuszko]

69. "if WE THE PEOPLE allow these "honorable personages" to continue."

Well, we keep voting for the same representatives, so it will continue.

[fivepennies]

75. Too late to rec

so I'll just kick your thread like us little guys have been kicked to the curb by the corporatist party hacks at the top of the pyramid.

The system might have worked for us, the way it was set up, if the candidates for both parties weren't pre-vetted, co-opted and compromised by the corporatists before anyone's name gets put on a ballot.

It has ever been thus, and in every generation there have been a few who saw through it. You have good eyes, JFN1.

[DeSwiss]

77. Sorry I didn't see this before it was too late to rec......

...but you're saying what I've been saying for years now. This political paradigm we've become entrapped within will enslave us in the end if we let it. It is time to dispense with them all.

"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a
new model that makes the existing model obsolete." ~Richard Buckminster Fuller

[truth2power]

79. Too late to recommend. But my own personal recommend, anyway.

[Odious justice]

81. agreed nt

[felix_numinous]

82. Political/ideological movements have changed parties from within-

From the civil rights and women's movement. labor movement --and unfortunately the tea party movement. In my opinion. we should start an ANTI-CORPORATE movement, or some such, within the Democratic Party, since this key would get the ball rolling toward reform. To be more positive--we could call this a People Power movement.

We do not hav to tear down the party or change parties. I know there is a progressive movement, but we need to get more SPECIFIC and more focused, since FOCUS seems to be a challenge on the left.

This system is trying to box people into categories that makes it easier for them to play the good cop/bad cop game, so we have to bust out of this game.

THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX, IN ORDER TO BUST OUT OF THE BOX.

[Le Taz Hot]

83. Too late to Rec.

but I can kick.