FirmhandKY
Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail
And who repealed glass-stegal? and who stood up and apologized to BP because we wanted them to pay to clean up their oil? and who plaintively cries that we need to deregulate corporations and give them free reign to plunder our society? who is ever spending military moneys and standing in the way of real and proper health care? and who voted down any reforms of campaign finance? And who is passing bills in the house to up ratpoison and mercury levels in our drinking water? And who....?
I havent liked republicans for quite some time because there haven't been any. What passes for republicans these days is decidedly not....
I dont see you howling how great any democrats are either.
Now, I did like some of Goldwater, Kemp, Buckley, Buchannan, McLauglin, and Rockefeller to name a few (note the use of the word some in there, not exactly lukewarm, but not exuberant either).
I am not huge on democrats for that matter but choosing between the two (I am left with those two choices in this country), I will take the lesser of the two evils at this point.
I've never claimed to be "non-partisan". But I don't think you'll find that I use the same type of denigrating and insulting terminology when I disagree, as you do.
There seems to be a real reservoir of negativity there, Ron. Past what might allow a more reasoned analysis of the causes and effects of our current difficulties.
I look for primary principles: I don't care if a person is a Democrat, Republican, or Anarchist. It just so happens that the majority of the principles I believe will lead to a more sane and healthy society are putatively espoused by the Republican Party, rather than the Democratic Party. But I'm not particularly enthused about the Republican Party itself.
I'm more a classic liberal, than anything else, with the additional belief that "pure" liberalism does not take into account the emotional, faith side of human nature.
To the extent that a political party, or an individual holds, espouses, acts on or legislates based on classical liberal principles, with an understanding of issues of "faith", then the more I tend to agree and will support them. The more they hold, espouse, act or legislate based on welfare liberal principles (based on statist principles), the less I tend to agree or support them.
Most of the Republicans you named as having "something" that you kinda liked, seem to be about the last generation of American politicians in which both parties consisted of politicians who hewed more to classical liberal principles than just about anything we see today. And I agree with you, for that generation of both Dems and Repubs, I remember many Dems that I liked.
We are not the first to make that observation. Partisans from the left blame it on Lee Atwater. Partisans on the right blame it on Alinsky (count me in that group when I'm wearing my pissed off partisan hat).
But I think the primarily reason is because of structural changes we, the American people, have allowed to be made to the governmental foundation, which has slowly, and then with increasing speed alienated the people from the politicians, and made the best way to continue to get elected is to buy votes. As a result, we have a "professional politician class" that use the power of our government to feed themselves and their friends ... just a little nip here, a little nip there. Pretty soon you're talking about real money and influence.
I don't think it's anything that a single election is going to change. I don't think either party is going to change it in the long run. The only thing that is going to change it in the long run is that we the people decide to correct the structural defects in our system that allows it to the extent that it has.
The OWS people are correct that something stinks in Denmark. I think they are blaming the effect, not the cause, but they realize that something is definitely out of whack.
The TEA parties place the blame on too much spending and too much government, and they are right, as far as that goes. They know that something stinks in Denmark, too. Winning elections with candidates who will take the hard positions will help.
For a while.
If they make the right choices.
If enough of them get elected.
If/when they succeed, they will give the governmental monster/crony capitalism system a little more breathing room and allow the system to stay on life support for a few more years, or maybe even decades. But they will quickly be thrown out by an electorate who have become a thousand small and not so small "interest groups", all eating at the public trough, and drugged on big government. So I'm not sure that any long term things will be changed.
It's a shame that the energy of the OWS movement, and the directed organizational abilities of the TEA parties won't meld, and become another "national revival" or "great awakening", because that is what we need to change our direction and our system with the least amount of pain (note: it would still not be painless).
One of the biggest reasons they won't join is the partisan hatred and blindness that so many practice, that has become ingrained in our political DNA. Lots of reasons for it, and lord knows I've done (and occasionally still do) my share.
But I do recognize that the problem has long passed being fixable based on the partisan divide and partisan positions.
I think the only way we might - maybe - perhaps - hope for a better result if some of the people who "hate", "detest" and "target" the other side wake up, and seek some common ground, before it is too late.
If it isn't already.
Firm
_____________________________
Some people are just idiots.
|
RE: Obamas New 'Christma Tree Tax' - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread