Democrats

republicrats At Work

This entry was posted in Democrats Government Journalism Republicans on by

I’ve said it more than once and now the New York Times is catching on:

It was bad enough having a one-party government when Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. But the Democrats took over, and still the one-party system continues.

At best the differences between the democrats and republicans are minor points of emphasis when it comes to protecting your life, liberty and pursuit of happiness…they are not really interested in this. The differences are a bit larger when it comes to the constituencies whose votes they try to buy.
Unfortunately for all of us none of these critters represent even a majority of the citizens in their states or districts. If they did it might be more appropriate to call the United States a representative democracy and its government a government of the people. Today, our congress critters represent themselves, their parties, lobbyists, state corporate interests and government power. Their only interest in the citizens of this country is how to get enough votes to stay in office.
Kudos to the NYT for this editorial.
Where were they, though, during the lead up to the Iraq invasion? When the patriot act was being passed?
They have a lot more work to do to re-establish their position as the paper of record for the people of this country rather than whoever is currently pulling the strings from the Washington, D.C.
NB: Will chris dodd be able to survive as the independent he is playing?

Via Hullaballoo.

schwarzenegger Sends A Love Letter to bush, reid and pelosi

This entry was posted in California Democracy Democrats Iraq Republicans US Foreign Policy on by

schwarzenegger’s veto of legislation that would have allowed Californians an opportunity to vote on withdrawing the troops from Iraq is exactly wrong :

“There is no louder message Californians can send to Washington on the Iraq war than who should lead our nation,” he wrote. “Placing a non-binding resolution on Iraq on the same ballot, when it carries no weight or authority, would only further divide voters and shift attention from other critical issues that must be addressed.”

Excuse me but what issues can possibly be more important than Iraq?
As for messages about who should lead the nation, what bs. It should be pretty clear to one and all that the supposed end the Iraq debacle message of the last congressional election has been ignored by the republicrats.

A somewhat louder message might be a few million Californians (along with the rest of us) getting out on the street and tossing these folks out of office. Yes, including the governator.

party Power

This entry was posted in Democrats Republicans on by

So, you think the various political parties have your interests at heart? Think again.
Jonathon Schwartz explains why you shouldn’t

… expect too much from political parties, and certainly don’t expect them to change much in less than a generation.

The Iron Law:

…the people who control institutions care first and foremost about their power within the institution rather than the power of the institution itself.

And they sure don’t care about you beyond how they can use you to help maintain their power.
Schwartz does provide some thoughts on what it might take to change the democratic party* but does not explain why a changed party (pick your vision) would not still be subject to the Iron Law and all the other issues surrounding the corrosive nature of power.
Via Scats at American Coprophagia who notes:

The Iron Law also explains in part why republican government is at its core a fundamentally undemocratic sham.

All more good reasons to disintermediate coercive government as quickly as possible.
*NB: Same for those of you with utopian visions of the republican, green, libertarian, communist, etc., parties.