« Random Things I Love AT 57... | stillidealistic's Blog | A RANT - Stilli Style! (or...a case of the ass) »
Different Party, Same Crap...Whodathunk?
I can't begin to tell you how heartsick, frustrated and downright pissed I am over the wussy behavior of the Democratic Party. I switched parties to show the Republicans how pissed off I was that they screwed the country for 8 years. So what do I do now, switch back? As least with the Repubs I expected to get screwed...What in the world possessed me to think the dems were any better? I can't believe I fell for it. I knew they were all a bunch of republicrats...the only difference between them was the name.
But somehow I let myself believe...I let myself believe that everything I used to think about the Democrats was not true. Senator Obama made me believe it. He made me believe that given a chance, the Democrats would do the right thing...Well, now they have the chance, and what are they doing? Cowering like a bunch of children in a thunderstorm, that's what! If they can't do the right thing NOW, when will they?
They have a golden opportunity RIGHT NOW. They can stuff the Republican agenda where the sun don't shine if they want to. What the %^$#%^**&^%$#@ are they waiting for?
They can give all Americans health care if they want to. I can't think of one single thing that is more important than that. Yet they are, instead, kowtowing to the pharma/medical/insurance lobbyists, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if affordable health care for all dies yet again.
They can reform the financial institutions and get regulations in place that will keep us from ever having to experience the near fatal collapse of the financial system we just went through, if they wanted to. But instead, more quickly that I EVER would have imagined, things are returning to to "normal," like nothing ever happened. The big boys are back to their old tricks, mortgage companies are telling people who are supposed to be benefiting from the new programs to pound sand, and all the Goldman Sachs alumni are preparing to laugh their way to the bank once again.
They could quickly dispense of "don't ask, don't tell" if they wanted to, but hell, why not lose another couple of hundred great folks who are continuing to get bounced out of the military first...what's the rush?
I just don't get it...if the Democrats weren't going to do anything with the power they have, why did they want it so bad? What the hell was the point of electing President Obama if we were just going to continue to live in the world the Republicans built for us?
I know, Rome wasn't built in a day...but come on! Surely we should be seeing SOME momentum building by now. Surely our representatives shouldn't be attempting to lower our expectations already.
I KNOW we can take advantage of this unprecedented opportunity, but we can't do it without our Senators and Representatives...Why are they shaking in their boots and hiding under the tables? Why aren't they getting out there and MAKING what we voted for happen? And why do WE have to MAKE them do the right thing?
But somehow I let myself believe...I let myself believe that everything I used to think about the Democrats was not true. Senator Obama made me believe it. He made me believe that given a chance, the Democrats would do the right thing...Well, now they have the chance, and what are they doing? Cowering like a bunch of children in a thunderstorm, that's what! If they can't do the right thing NOW, when will they?
They have a golden opportunity RIGHT NOW. They can stuff the Republican agenda where the sun don't shine if they want to. What the %^$#%^**&^%$#@ are they waiting for?
They can give all Americans health care if they want to. I can't think of one single thing that is more important than that. Yet they are, instead, kowtowing to the pharma/medical/insurance lobbyists, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if affordable health care for all dies yet again.
They can reform the financial institutions and get regulations in place that will keep us from ever having to experience the near fatal collapse of the financial system we just went through, if they wanted to. But instead, more quickly that I EVER would have imagined, things are returning to to "normal," like nothing ever happened. The big boys are back to their old tricks, mortgage companies are telling people who are supposed to be benefiting from the new programs to pound sand, and all the Goldman Sachs alumni are preparing to laugh their way to the bank once again.
They could quickly dispense of "don't ask, don't tell" if they wanted to, but hell, why not lose another couple of hundred great folks who are continuing to get bounced out of the military first...what's the rush?
I just don't get it...if the Democrats weren't going to do anything with the power they have, why did they want it so bad? What the hell was the point of electing President Obama if we were just going to continue to live in the world the Republicans built for us?
I know, Rome wasn't built in a day...but come on! Surely we should be seeing SOME momentum building by now. Surely our representatives shouldn't be attempting to lower our expectations already.
I KNOW we can take advantage of this unprecedented opportunity, but we can't do it without our Senators and Representatives...Why are they shaking in their boots and hiding under the tables? Why aren't they getting out there and MAKING what we voted for happen? And why do WE have to MAKE them do the right thing?
Advertisement
Because they're all slimy politicians. All they care about is raising lots of money to get re-elected.
June 30, 2009 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bill, I can't recall the last time we agreed on anything...but here we are. So what are we going to do about it?
June 30, 2009 10:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like I've said on other blogs, the Liberals out there should throw their own version of a tea party in the name of single-payer. If that's what you care about, then get down to Washington and do it. (I sincerely hope we don't have a single-payer system but I am hearing such a voice on here for it that people must take to the airwaves so they can be shown on the network news marching in front of the capitol).
Republicans cared a lot about taxes and they decided to try a demonstration (ie a teaparty) and I think the Liberals should do the same thing in the name of healthcare. Harry Reid might not read TPM but he certainly looks out his office window.
June 30, 2009 10:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
the only reason anyone even heard about those ridiculous tea baggers is that the Repuglican Media Wing hyped them endlessly.
Dean's gathering... not so interesting to the likes of o'reilly, hannity and the faux news machine.
but i agree with your main premise that the time is ripe for demonstrations and public outpourings of support and outrage in support of meaningful healthcare reform.
and, yes, meaningful healthcare reform means single payer or at a minimum the public option. the ONLY reason congress is not moving forward with one of these two demonstrably superior options is they are bought and paid for by the insurance and healthcare profiteers.
July 1, 2009 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
no exit,
the only thing that gets the Congress critters attention is a threat to their seats. We need to figure out a way to show them that threat.
Maybe more publicity about how much each is getting from the Industries that own them would be a start.
July 1, 2009 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
JW1141,
As I have said before I will pay the filing fee to ANYONE that will challenge an incumbent Democratic Senator in a PRIMARY. The person might lose but I assure you it will get the attention of the DINO that is currently hiding behind the need for CONSENSUS. This is the worst kind of dereliction by any Democratic office holder.
IT IS TIME to step on the throats of these worthless pieces of shit, and make them sit up and take notice.
I defy anyone to defend not being in favor of at the VERY least a public option. Because when they do, it invariably starts with It would hurt private Insurers, and that argument will get them beat in a primary. Baucus, Lieberman, Conrad, Nelson etc... don't have one testicle between the bunch... let alone a brain.
July 1, 2009 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
True Health Care reform YES, Government health care NO. You can always tell when they try and shove something bad down our throat they opt themselves out of it.
July 1, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I could reform health care in a meaningful way without a government-run plan.
Single payer isn't a panacea to our problems for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that not a single country in the world has 320 million citizens on a single-payer plan. Medicare/Medicaid isn't healthy enough to scale to that size. We need to stop debating this issue as if all solutions are either this or that, but never the other thing or God forbid a combination of fixes to change things over time.
All or nothing propositions usually end of as nothing.
July 1, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, not while trying to maintain a profit margin you cannot.
July 1, 2009 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Never said a profit margin was one of the goals.
July 1, 2009 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, but pretty much everyone with the capability to assist in such an effort -- other than the nation itself -- will.
Lay down some specifics or at least generalities.
July 1, 2009 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought I already offered an alternative.
I would see the health insurance industry regulated to within an inch of its life. If they can still drive a profit in an environment that doesn't allow them to kill their clients, so be it. If not, we offer them an out by designating a new nonprofit code for health insurance.
All of that with little more than a twitch of setting standards from the federal government
July 1, 2009 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
And they would presumably be overjoyed to go non-profit?
Monitoring the disparate actors in the insurance game for regulation compliance is obviously going to be a walk in the park.
Seems an awful complicated, fragile (and in my opinion, completely implausible) way to avoid the simple one. Why is it that Medicare -- or more to the point, the "congressional healthcare plan" -- would not scale anyway?
July 1, 2009 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because it currently provides coverage for 40 million people and only offers 70% reimbursement, Medicare would need significant restructuring to provide 100% coverage for 320 million people.
No, I don't think insurance companies would be happy to convert to a nonprofit model. It isn't about creating an environment they would support. It is about creating a solution the silent majority would support, on both sides of the political divide.
At the end of the day, it is about having standards of care and enforcing those standards. It is about not letting insurance companies pick and choose who they will cover. The "public option" should be a re-imagined Medicare and Medicaid that is sufficient to the demands placed upon it.
I try not to argue this or that solutions to hugely complex problems with diverse interests at stake.
July 1, 2009 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Something tells me you might be a doctor, or, at least that you have health insurance. Probably a decent income too.
There is, as you say, more than one way to skin a cat. We don't necessarily have to scale Medicare. And your glib argument that no other country with 320m people has single payer is proof of nothing. In fact, health care would benefit from economies of scale.
July 1, 2009 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have health care insurance that is sub-par through my wife's employer and could never actually account for our needs should it become necessary to use it.
The simple fact of the matter is that Medicare is insufficient to its existing mandate, let alone a mandate to cover the entire country. If I was enacting health care insurance reform, I would regulate the industry so heavily that making a profit would be impossible. Then, I would offer them a tax code to make their business viable as a non-profit entity that enables our long-term strategies as a country rather than enabling the short-term desires of Wall Street.
I guess your knee-jerk reaction to an alluded solution is just as accurate.
July 1, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess I've missed it. I am really, really interested in your plan. I don't want you to have to start all over again, and like I said, I've missed it. So please, feel free to cut & paste. I want to know how you propose to provide comprehensive health care to the citizens of our country that is affordable, and universal AND not profit-driven. (I am assuming that "meaningful" must also include "do-able, and successful, in terms of health outcomes, which we DON'T have with our insurance-based system).
I'm waiting, and I'm open to your ideas.
July 1, 2009 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have mentioned my ideas a couple of times. It is really very simple. Regulate health insurance to provide the outcomes we desire. If they can still drive a profit in that environment, so be it. If not, we provide a nonprofit designation that allows them to remain in business while still providing the returns we need.
The nonprofit sector has a long history of providing for social needs on shoestring budgets. We need to turn that paradigm to health care and energy and media and any number of industries with a public purpose currently running up against private interests. The beautiful part about this strategy is that it isn't a government-run solution. Government provides the mandates and private industry - albeit nonprofit industry - provides the actual services.
I could sell that shit to conservatives all day, every day.
July 1, 2009 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who cares how they heard about them?
I think the ridiculous liberals that want single-payer should be out there doing the same thing right on Congress' front lawn rather than wasting their time typing on blogs here.
July 1, 2009 9:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Call and fax them. You can go here to get contact info for at least 3 of the committees writing the bills: http://www.dgdemocrats.com/
Hit the healthcare contact info button.
July 1, 2009 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey...maybe I can get a part-time job renting out iceskates here in hell because it just froze over. I agree with MCB, too.
We really, really need to make a physical showing nation wide. Dean had the health care reform rally there in D.C. last week, but hardly a squeak was heard on the news. If I hadn't got the e-mail from the DFA, I wouldn't have known a thing about it. I mean, 400,000 signatures on a petition! Holy farking shit. If that didn't get attention, what will?
You know...enough of this "Make me do it" crap, too. Just do it, ya bunch of pantywaist dems.
June 30, 2009 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
40,000,000 and some marches. That gets into reelection territory.
June 30, 2009 11:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
"They have a golden opportunity RIGHT NOW. They can stuff the Republican agenda where the sun don't shine if they want to."
You are exactly right of course. There's only one problem: they DON'T want to. Nothing could be more clear at this point. If I thought there were any chance of a significant number following I'd do all I could to lead a revolution against the swine that get elected to office on our votes and then betray us at every turn.
June 30, 2009 10:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
It IS pretty obvious, isn't it? What the hell? I really don't know what to do with all this hostility I'm feeling...venting seems so inadequate, but the bottom line is, these iceholes (thank you, Flower) don't care. And we've got nowhere else to go. Vote for someone other than a Democrat, and you insure that the Republicans win.
No wonder so few people participate in the process.
June 30, 2009 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
We need a real progressive party.
July 1, 2009 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
A lot of Democratic senators appear to believe their job is to stand between the corporate rulers of the country and the ignorant mob (us) who threaten the rulers' prerogatives. That's how these pols collect the cash and support that keeps them in office. They sell themselves as the only ones who know how to distract and placate us enough to keep real change off the table.
July 1, 2009 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hmm
....because they don't believe us?
...because it's easier to blame 'them' then to get off our asses after an exhausting daywith more, always more to do and write and write and harass 'them?'
Yep, they be counting on it.
Just sayin'
Don't give up just yet....
June 30, 2009 11:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not giving up, Chicken, I'm just pissed. Everyday the Dems seem to get wimpier and wimpier... Never thought I'd see the day when I was to the left of frickin' Diane Feinstein. What a weenie she's turned into. Or was she always one?
June 30, 2009 11:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Always.
July 1, 2009 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bwakabakabwakabwakabwak!!!!!
Super Chicken!:)
Stilli they apparently respond to the power of numbers... that's why I feel we need to be more organized, focused... if we all came together we could come together under one umbrella, we could raise money and create a ruckus with big demonstrations that the media, congress, and press could not ignore.
July 1, 2009 2:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Because that's our job.
June 30, 2009 11:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
So then, they keep us so busy trying to keep our noses above water that we don't have time to babysit them, so they can do whatever the hell they want...Talk about having a sucky job!
June 30, 2009 11:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bread and circuses, yez.
June 30, 2009 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
It may be a sucky job, but when we don't do our part, there are plenty of arrogant and conniving power-hungry Karl Roves who are all too happy to step in and do it for us.
June 30, 2009 11:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
It just doesn't seem right somehow...we SCREAMED that we wanted wholesale change in the way Washington operates, now we have to threaten them into making the change...sometimes I HATE politics.
June 30, 2009 11:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, we have to hold them to it. Remember? Obama said that would be the case. I remember him saying it. So let's hold him to it as much as anyone.
And don't worry, we're not the only ones threatening. The lobbies have been doing plenty of threatening behind closed doors in Washington for weeks now. They have the money, they have the clout, they have the access. We don't.
All we have is our voices. We the people have to throw a loud screaming tantrum in the streets, in the blogosphere, in the inboxes/fax machines/voicemail of our wishy-washy representatives in Congress. It's just another form of voting. So go ahead and get pissed and let 'er rip, stilli! I'm right there with you!
July 1, 2009 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, his "I'm going to lean to the right but if you get enough people I may topple to the left" stance. Anything wrong with defaulting to the left for a change?
July 1, 2009 4:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course there's nothing wrong with it, but I have always argued Obama has never really leaned that way, and he'll certainly never topple to the left. That's too radical for him. I'm sure I'll get some argument for saying this, but Obama has a long history that supports his current status quo positions. The only thing to be disappointed in is that he was never a very liberal Democrat to begin with. No big surprises here.
That said, he has repeatedly advocated and encouraged participation, and I think he means it. In the same breath, meanwhile, he's careful to never claim we'll get what everything we want in the end.
July 1, 2009 8:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
An interview of a fellow student at Harvard who was African American was of interest and very revealing. He said that he was under the impression, as were most of his friends, that Obama was a Republican.
July 1, 2009 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
But not a pejorative republican. If every republican was of Obama's caliber, with a bunch of Wellstone's on the left, this country would be doing great.
July 1, 2009 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heh, but politics is human interaction. And by definition we here at TPM are political or news junkies. We LOVE this stuff, right?
I've contacted my rep/Senators once, but only got one reply (an immediate reply, which was kind of strange, and one that actually sortof directly answered my health care question). I think it's time to do so again. And more.
What I hate is when they don't do what we elected them to do.
July 1, 2009 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think I understand. I feel like I've lived with similar feelings all my life. The only time in my life I've seen a politician make a bold prescription for change was this.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carter/filmmore/ps_crisis.html
We faced as a nation a defining moment with two very different paths and when we chose to follow the false promises of Reagan I saw this moment, where we are now, in the midst of the oil wars with a failing economy. I've carried a bit of bitterness and anger since that day.
I'm a bleeding heart liberal and I wear that heart on my sleeve. I'm always shedding a tear over this song or that video or movie. I don't try to stop it. When I first saw this I felt my heart open up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY
But I wouldn't let myself cry, to feel hope, to be inspired. Not for a politician. I would never allow myself to trust there. I hardened my heart and continued to work for Hillary until the bitter end. I'm not trying to refight the primary. I'd likely to be just as disappointed today in Hillary had she won.
But, you know, I did have hope, if only a fool's hope. Cynicism and bitterness is not a fun place to be even if its only my relationship to my government. I wanted to believe he would be different, that it was more than speeches and words.
Never let a crisis go to waste, its said. Obama had the biggest crisis served to him with no blame attached. With the threat of another great depression he could have done anything and the people would have gone along. A bold prescription for change, ask the people to sacrifice, to work together for a new paradigm, to fix bush's mess.
Instead he used his political capital to prop up the status quo and to pay off those who had precipitated and profited from the crisis. I knew then we would come away with nothing.
I still remember this though.
nothing can stand in the way of the power of millions of voices calling for change.
I have no hope but I wish to god and with all my heart that millions would converge on Washington chanting
We want change.
June 30, 2009 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Silly me, that's what I THOUGHT we said with our votes in November...I mean, do they think we were just kidding? We're just pretending we want change?
Really, we just want the same old, same old, but with different faces?
June 30, 2009 11:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
maybe we're just pretending our votes can change things.
July 1, 2009 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I aint given up Stilli. I just aint.
We are just getting started.
A lot has been accomplished. Iraqis are now dancing in the streets of bagdad and other cities
We will get health care with a public option
legislation helping the rights of women have been signed sealed and delivered.
I do not have the list at my finger tips.
But more good was accomplished in 150 days than than the last eight years.
And we started in a hole.
June 30, 2009 11:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm trying to stay optimistic, Arthur, but w/ DiFi tellin' everyone where they can stick their threats, and Claire McCaskill telling us not to expect much, I'm getting more and more concerned that the Dems just don't have the balls to get it done...
Every day they are looking more and more like Repubs. It's making me sick.
June 30, 2009 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Deep breaths and realistic thoughts, still. We will never be completely happy -or even, perhaps, marginally- with our duly elected officials.
I'm disappointed, too. Yet the Democrats are not a railroad line, and I'm not sure I'd like them to march in lock-step. That's one of the things that made me scream when the Republicans were in power.
This time, let's scream because we hate the decisions individuals make - not because they're finally making some.
July 1, 2009 12:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm trying to breathe...trying to avoid getting riled up. But it isn't easy. I don't think it is unrealistic to expect that when you vote in huge numbers for change, you will get change. I don't think it is unrealistic to expect that when you elect a president with a mandate for change, that our elected officials would support and facilitate that change.
I still have enormous respect for our President. I don't see him doing everything I'd like him to do, but I continue to think he is working behind the scenes. My primary beef is with the Congress...they appear to be weak at a time when strength is called for. I fear that their inaction will result in another decade or more of too many people going without health care, a return to "business as usual" in the financial markets, and the continuation of the stranglehold that lobbyists have over our government. I expected better.
July 1, 2009 12:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stilli, I think it is important to recognize two things about the state of affairs pertaining to the Administration's policies and the Democratic congress. First off, there is a lot of damage to repaired and it will take time and second the tone has been set by the President (to keep consistent with the major narrative in his campaign) for presenting his agenda in a moderate and bridge building way. These two things should clearly establish in all our minds that change will come in increments or rather strategically timed bursts. President Obama has chosen a pragmatic style that emulates most all of his 20th century predecessor's modes of operation.(G.W. Bush started off this century with a far more partisan idealistic approach that Obama is loathe to duplicate) For disaffected Republicans and staunch progressives it is painful to watch the careful dance of incremental pragmatism because we've been through so much but we must be mindful of the possible ramifications of our impatience. In the nineteen nineties the country had similarly high hopes for progressive government that ended up being moderate and eventually was forced to become much more conservative (and quite so on certain domestic policies. Eventually the incrementalism of Clinton became intolerable to many of his former supporters and many did not show up to vote in 2000 causing a close election and the Bush V. Gore Supreme Court decision that gave us the eight year nightmare. What we must do is continue to push as hard as we can for our issues and accept what we can get. For the next eight years it's either Obama and the Dems or something much worse (Palin, Gingrich et al) and we don't want to know that hell. Hang in there.
July 1, 2009 1:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
You make some good points, Prof...and I think you are probably right. One of the things I like the best about the President is his pragmatism. I guess I fooled myself into believing that he would get more support from the dems in the House and Senate.
They talk the talk, but they aren't walkin' it. I see them over and over again dancin' to the lobbyists tunes. I still want to believe that the Dems goals are better than those of the repubs...but it's hard in the face of the evidence to the contrary. And I'm not talkin' about regular folks like us...I'm talkin' about our representatives in the house and senate.
July 1, 2009 2:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said.
July 1, 2009 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sad to say that I think our belief in an overwhelming change was unrealistic, as was Obama's. He's hardened, accepted some of Bush's realities as his own. We're left with no choice but to scream at our Representatives and our Senators - and our President. No argument, still.
But Democrats are not like Republicans. Our fundamental beliefs are different, our outlook regarding the future could not be more opposite. In spite of of the current landscape, I believe that Democratic principles are prevailing.
As many have said prior to me, it takes a long time to make serious change. We're on the road, but it will take constant attention to avoid the pitfalls and the status quo that threaten the voyage.
July 1, 2009 1:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
So how do we make our representatives listen to us? Good ol' DiFi is mine, and she's pretty much said she doesn't care about out threats...
July 1, 2009 2:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, her statements kind of made it seem like we're getting under her skin. If she really didn't care, she would have completely ignored the pressure.
July 1, 2009 2:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I actually think republicans and democrats, at the grassroots, want essentially the same things. We have been fooled into thinking that differences over specific solutions to common problems mean we have to work at cross-purposes.
That politics has become a zero-sum game is as much the fault of We The People as it is the idiots in Congress. We allow ourselves to fall into this false ideological division generation after generation and wonder why nothing ever changes.
We get the government we allow to exist.
July 1, 2009 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
"We get the government we allow to exist."
That is true, Jason. I'm just so tired of having to stay on top of them. We shouldn't HAVE to riot in the streets to force change. We should be able to do it in the voting booth. I shudder to think that we are going to have to resort to violence to make the 2 parties work together to give "we the people" what we voted for. I mean the image of 1M people with pitchforks and burning torches surrounding Capitol Hill has its appeal (LOL) but come on, how many of us really have it in us to do that?
July 1, 2009 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
The key number is turnout percentages in the teens for most primary elections.
We don't need riots. We need new blood. That requires the same sort of turnout for every election as good (preferably better) than the paltry 64% we had for this last presidential election.
Educate one or two people who don't normally vote in primaries on why it is important and why the incumbent has failed. If you are in a republican district, register republicans and support progressive challengers. There is usually one or two for each election in both parties. They just can't get past the entrenched interests with the numbers we are seeing.
It is all about math. Too bad most people are too busy balancing their checkbook to realize how to change the balance of power.
July 1, 2009 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's not just "balancing checkbooks" Jason...it's figuring out where the next meal is coming from, in many cases. That trumps paying attention to politics, especially when it can be a frustration that many chosose not to subject themselves to.
July 1, 2009 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kind of like the frustration of breathing when one has a head cold. Sometimes we have to do things for survival that require extra effort.
July 1, 2009 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I TOTALLY get what you're saying, and agree with most of it. I just don't know how you get people to wake up and start participating when it seems like such a daunting task.
I live in an almost grown up free environment right now. The majority of my human interaction is w/ children under the age of 5. The few adults I interact with are either terminally uninvolved, ideaologically to the right of the John Birch Society, or already agree w/ me. So I vent to the blogosphere...
July 1, 2009 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have decided to do my part by taking at least one friend (if not two or three) who has never cared to every primary election.
As far as changing the hearts and minds of republicans, it will be tough to do as a democrat. I think you actually had more potential to affect that issue when you were still a republican, fighting with the inherent contradictions of the modern party. I am afraid the only people who can affect the republican party is its grassroots moderates finally speaking up.
The silent majorities in both parties have long been central to the solution, yet continue wallow in their perceived powerlessness. There is probably room to encourage someone who already agrees with you to actually get to EVERY election - from dog catcher to US senate. We all know people who only vote in the "real" election in November or else the primary turnout percentages wouldn't be so dismal.
This is going to be a decade-long effort at a minimum, so we need to take a longer view on this one.
July 1, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your grown up free environment gives you a blessing. You can touch the future. Teach the children.
July 1, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Amen!
July 1, 2009 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
See, we don't always come down on opposite sides. This is a wonderful distinction. Only kids have the requisite imagination untainted by years of disappointment and compromise.
July 1, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I remember correctly, we both like the occasional doobie.
July 1, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, two things in common. This is positively a revolution!
July 1, 2009 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
See? Finding the things that bind us instead of the ones that divide us...LOL!
July 1, 2009 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
'Children holding our future' and smoking pot as a common ground; maybe this will inspire one of our more prolific writers to bless us with some prose that we can hold closer to our hearts.
July 1, 2009 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I might be up to that challenge, though I have not been prolific of late.
July 1, 2009 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rich Lowry was on Mcgauthlin Group this week advocating for legalization. It was a good discussion and would be worth you're while to find the podcast. Legalization was in last segment, the rest of show was usual crap.
July 1, 2009 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
And believe me, I don't minimize the long term effect that will have. If I am able to contribute to raising 3 adults to be caring, compassionate, civic minded people, I will have made a meaningful contribution to society.
July 1, 2009 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
INDEED!
July 1, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's frankly bizarre how representatives opposing the will of 75% of the population get called 'moderates' or 'centrists'. These people are part of the radical right. They just happen to have a 'D' attached to their name. I wonder why there aren't more progressive challengers in primaries. This ball really needs to get rolling before the mid-terms...
July 1, 2009 7:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
The will of "75 percent of the population," Obey? Maybe 75 percent of the population of posters on TPMcafe. Single payer, retaliation against Wall Street, the destruction of the health insurance industry, war crime trials for the Bush administration, etc. are minority viewpoints in this country. On some of these topics we are making progress (and more than I thought possible, say three years ago) but we're not there yet.
In addition, the Obama administration and the Democratic leadership are govening pretty much as they promised to in the last election. The majority of people who voted for them, voted on that basis.
It takes time. Remember, it's not just that Rome wasn't built in a day, it's still being built right now.
July 1, 2009 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
In my opinion, congress is slow by design, to avoid the buzzword of the day becoming law of the land.
So I agree with many of the comments above, sustained and visible pressure is the only way to make politicians commit and act, that's the nature of politics.
That said, I think obey makes a key and central point that is too often ignored in discussions like this.
Our electoral districts have been gerrymandered like yo-yo by republicans and democrats alike to help a party in control retain power in a district - they no longer adequately represent the "mainstream" voter because of constant readjustment along party lines.
In other words, the reality of being elected in a gerrymandered district is causing many democrats to act as if they were conservative republicans (Gillibrand?) and many republicans to support Big Government (a bit like gov Christ in FL).
July 1, 2009 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
But in this case, Lalo, the gerrymandering isn't the problem (I don't think) because what we want is to replace Dems w/ Dems...ones that are not responsive to our wishes with ones who would be, at least until they figure out how Washington works (or doesn't work) and the lobbyists get their hooks into them. Or do the lobbyists already have the pols in their pockets by the time they get into National politics?
July 1, 2009 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think gerrymandering and lobbyists are two distinct issues that maybe amplify each other in the end, but they require different solutions.
Personally, I think gerrymandering is an issue.
Consider the effects of a 50-state strategy. It will inevitably create a situation where Democrats win in districts that have been heavily gerrymandered to favor republicans. Typically, they would win not because of ideology but as a result of republican problems - create a kind of an anomaly in a conservative district.
The only way to turn it from a relative accident to a permanent party charge would be for such Democrats to represent the views of their conservative district and try and change it over time.
That's the reason the Dem party is a little divided on the big-deal reform.
July 1, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
The other way to win would be to sell progressive policies to people who only think they are conservative. Democrats have to do what Reagan did and sell a message based on core beliefs. They are still trying to borrow the Republican message and nuance it. That's not the way to achieve political realignment.
The mistake we make is choosing amoral political hacks who will be anything you want them to be instead of developing a core group who actually believe in something.
What does Obama believe in? "Change". Yeah, right.
July 1, 2009 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oklahoma's one Dem in Congress represents a blue dog - scratch that - even more conservative than blue dog district. He's voting what the people in his district prefer. I understand why the blue dogs do it, but don't understand why they call themselves Dems.
July 1, 2009 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's why I think the appropriate response is for all moderate voters to become party agnostic, based on whatever peculiar make-up of your local district.
That way, new voices can get through the primary election independent of party mechanisms. If thousands of democrats become republicans for the primary to support moderate challengers to the incumbent, then the general election no longer matters quite so much. Same thing in democratic districts. Incumbents are (mostly) the disease and primaries are the cure.
Our labels keep us from focusing on solutions.
July 1, 2009 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Lalo for that comment. I often forget the gerrymandering input to our crazy system. When you get a district that looks like a stretched question mark, built for Republicans, and a Democrat wins, what can we expect? Slow incremental change.
July 1, 2009 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Switching is a pointless exercise of self-flagellation for the amusement of masochists.
July 1, 2009 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I add my voice to that of those who've said that money is the problem. Especially corporate money. Much of the same corporate money has bought both sides of the political isle. The choice between Democrats and Republicans has become one of selecting the lesser of two evils.
What is so frustrating is that much of the corruption/subversion and unethical behavior is completely legal. Outright bribe taking has, and, likely, always will exist. But that is a relatively small and rare problem. I believe that the solution to the far greater problem of legal corruption/subversion lay in some formulation based on the following points:
1. Public financing of federal elections.
2. Term limits (especially, for senators).
3. Five-year prohibition on regulators/bureaucrats being employed by the same industry which they had been regulating.
4. Make Civics class a requirement for earning a high-school diploma.
The problem is that the same elected officials whom such reform would constrain are also the ones who would need to approve it.
July 1, 2009 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps in addition to campaign financing there needs to be some "truth in advertising" provision, where ads have to be screened for truthfulness before airing...
How refreshing would it be if we actually KNEW what we were voting for instead of some sort of manipulation of reality? That is, if we were voting.
As for Civics...great idea, but we had it back in the day, and it didn't make me a better citizen. It would be nice if the cirriculum could be interesting enough that it made these young adults CARE about the grown up world they are entering.
July 1, 2009 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it would be great if we could depend on all advertising to speak only the truth. The problem becomes who determines what is the "truth" and how? It would be akin to that old election fraud truism, which is that you don't have to rig the ballots, you only have to rig the counting of the ballots.
In addition, you just know that any entity given that responsibility would become the prime target of subversive forces. Putting the government in charge would be a clear violation of the 1st amendment, I think. Can you imagine the Bush administration in charge, or how about a Tom Delay led Congress. Republicans would rightly have similar fears if reversed.
July 1, 2009 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
"As for Civics...great idea, but we had it back in the day, and it didn't make me a better citizen."
How do you know it didn't make you a better citizen? Your words exemplify what good citizenship is all about.
July 1, 2009 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
THIS WAS MEANT FOR STILLIDEALISTIC
July 1, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because for more years than I care to admit, I was oblivious...I thought I was a Republican, so I voted a straight Republican ticket in National elections. It took 8 years of HELL to realize I wasn't, then Obama woke me up to the probability that after all this time, I am actually a Dem at heart...
Anyway, better citizen now, trying to make up for lost time.
July 1, 2009 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's taken you eight years to wake up; give the sun a chance to rise.
July 1, 2009 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
But you are a terrific example of why the Democratic Party needs to work harder SELLING progressive policies. Unfortunately, the hacks are totally amoral and don't believe in "progressive" any more than they believe in "conservative" or "liberal".
Reagan SOLD conservatism. You have to SELL progressive. Two generations have been brainwashed already by Reaganism. Why does Fox exist? Why does Rush exist? To SELL a hard core right agenda.
I really believe there are plenty out there like you who can be converted if we can make the sale.
Too bad we are stuck with the dead weight of Liebermans, Feinsteins, Nelsons, Bayhs, .... what a mountain to move out of the way!
July 1, 2009 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
SI,
I completely understand, if there was ever a time for the emergence of a new party now is the time. Perhaps the American Citizen Party whose sole purpose would be to support the individual American to the exclusion of corporate interests.
I really don't know what else to do, the democratic party has become GOP lite. At least with the GOP you know that they will pick corporations over "persons" while the Democratic party is more worried about achieving consensus than achieving results.
We ALL know that if the GOP were in charge like the Democrats are, we'd all be working for $2.00 an hour and dying on the job. With the Dems its like they put an arm around your shoulder while they stick the thick end of a pool cue up your ass.
It is truly maddening and I am at a loss about what can be done.
July 1, 2009 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sign me up! I think a progressive populist message could even bring in some dissaffected Republicans. Hard not like a throw the bums out party.
We need a movement but we do also need a few courageous leaders and that's been a huge problem for the left.
I'd could go for drafting Howard Dean (I figure Americans are increasingly ready to screasm) but I don't expect he'd go for it. At least he genuinely cares about healthcare.
July 1, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep...
In fact I find that I agree with people like Jason Everett Miller more than I do with many rank and file D's. I find those rank and file D's are just as delusional as rank and file R's when it comes to blindly following their parties leaders (please see the people claiming Obama and our representatives in Congress have already brought a lot of the vaunted 'change we can believe in').
July 1, 2009 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know. Like how they believe we're getting out of Iraq. (Follow the money. It's not available for healthcare because it's in Iraq.)
July 1, 2009 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think if we really want change, we should rally for the restoration of the justice system. Forget about political parties.
Justice should be agnostic.
If we can get back to upholding the rule of law, we'd be on the road to recovering from a deeply corrupted system. We don't even have to make new laws. Just enforce the laws on the books.
Prosecute war crimes, massive global financial fraud, environmental crimes by the fossil fuels industry, health insurance company crimes, pharmaceutical company crimes, like bribes to the FDA, violations of civil liberties and right to privacy.
If I had to focus my energy on anything, it would be to restore the power of the judicial branch--no one, no one, should be allowed to blow off a subpoena. And everyone, Republican Democrat independent or Joe Lieberman should be held accountable.
There are so many perpetrators that have gotten away with murder-- think about Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, and there are probably democrats too. Doesn't matter.
Not only is there a reluctance to prosecute. There's a refusal to even get a truth commission going.
Enforce the law at all levels of government. And prosecute crimes.
July 1, 2009 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Until you get big money out of politics you're not going to be able to make major substantive reforms.
July 1, 2009 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
The first thing we have to do is to stop voting for the lesser of two evils. There are some good Democrats and they deserve a vote, but just stop voting for the ones who are marginally different from Republicans. It's not a single issue thing anymore. It's war, labor, human rights, civil rights, healthcare, financial regulation, ....
July 1, 2009 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Affordable health care for all died when they invented kidney dialysis.
July 1, 2009 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
???
July 1, 2009 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Too flippant, sorry.
I was just pointing out that increases in health care costs are tracking improvements in technology, training and care, and that the costs will continue to escalate under any "system" we impose, or under no system at all.
You get what you pay for. And health care for all simply is not affordable anymore.
July 2, 2009 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
CARE TO SOURCE ANY OF THIS
July 2, 2009 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink