Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ulTRAX

Moral Cowardice Of Democratic Party

Recommended Posts

Dems are idiots. The far Right organized back in the 1970s and created a coordinated and disciplined strategy to turn America into Amerika. They planned to suppress the vote, create ALEC, turn the courts into the judicial branch of the GOP, destroy unions, defund the Democratic Party, expand corporate personhood, create massive debt through Starve The Beast etc... and what did the Dems do? They moved to the right and soon half of the Democratic Party was going after corporate money, shafting unions, and promoting free trade.

 

In politics if one isn't on the attack, they're losing ground and Dems always needed a counterattack but after 35 years they still don't even have an effective strategy to expose and counter Starve The Beast even if massive debt poses an existential threat to Dem safety net programs. The Dems also refused to reform our antidemocratic federal system even if it's clear it was increasingly getting a GOP bias as we've seen with the Bush and Trump Juntas. In the Senate Dems represent about 33 million more Americans than does the GOP but the GOP controls that as well. Any hope for a liberal-progressive agenda is held hostage to an antidemocratic system. But Dems never really cared about democracy enough to define it. Dems also failed to respond with a counterattack on corporate personhood.

 

Dems are losing ground because Dems have no vision of where to take this nation in 25-50 years. They foolishly think demographics will solve their problems... or that if they get a collection of smaller interest groups concerned about social issues, they can ignore the broader economic issues that unite the bottom 80%.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this reminds me of the George Carlin comparison of baseball and football. Where the Republicans are like football and the Dem's (shortened word on purpose) are more pastoral like baseball or maybe like badminton, well hey...

Fear works / hope is weak - oh but whyeee...

 

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there's then the old BF Skinner interesting piece on the behavioral thing that becomes more like a quagmire the more you might learn something about free will, or ... under certain controls you might not ever learn enough to get yourself out of a box.

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this reminds me of the George Carlin comparison of baseball and football. Where the Republicans are like football and the Dem's (shortened word on purpose) are more pastoral like baseball or maybe like badminton, well hey...

Fear works / hope is weak - oh but whyeee...

 

The far Right has utter contempt for democratic concepts. They could care less if they rig the system to the advantage of the top by hook or crook.

 

But that doesn't explain the inability to care so little about their own legacy... that after 40 years they STILL can't come up with an effective response. I think it has much to do with the Dems... even the most progressive ones, being on the conservative side when it comes to accepting antidemocratic government... and corporate power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dems are idiots. The far Right organized back in the 1970s and created a coordinated and disciplined strategy to turn America into Amerika. They planned to suppress the vote, create ALEC, turn the courts into the judicial branch of the GOP, destroy unions, defund the Democratic Party, expand corporate personhood, create massive debt through Starve The Beast etc... and what did the Dems do? They moved to the right and soon half of the Democratic Party was going after corporate money, shafting unions, and promoting free trade.

 

In politics if one isn't on the attack, they're losing ground and Dems always needed a counterattack but after 35 years they still don't even have an effective strategy to expose and counter Starve The Beast even if massive debt poses an existential threat to Dem safety net programs. The Dems also refused to reform our antidemocratic federal system even if it's clear it was increasingly getting a GOP bias as we've seen with the Bush and Trump Juntas.

 

At the bottom of most of this governmental dysfunction is corruption. Big Money Interests give legalized bribes to politicians in both parties in exchange for favorable legislation. The bribes usually come in the form of campaign contributions or money from lobbyists. Since candidates with the biggest war chests win elections about 90% of the time, politicians from either side of the aisle retain their seats while passing legislation that adds to the wealth of the Plutocracy and further diminishes the economic well-being of their constituents.

 

The main legislative difference between Congressional Republicans and Democrats is that Democrats usually vote for progressive social legislation which large corporations and the billionaires that own them, don't care about .... (LGBT rights .... Racial and ethnic justice .... Equality of the sexes .... Pro choice). There are exceptions. Republican legislators generally vote Conservative on social issues AND economic issues.

 

 

n the Senate Dems represent about 33 million more Americans than does the GOP but the GOP controls that as well. Any hope for a liberal-progressive agenda is held hostage to an antidemocratic system. But Dems never really cared about democracy enough to define it. Dems also failed to respond with a counterattack on corporate personhood.

 

Dems are losing ground because Dems have no vision of where to take this nation in 25-50 years. They foolishly think demographics will solve their problems... or that if they get a collection of smaller interest groups concerned about social issues, they can ignore the broader economic issues that unite the bottom 80%.

 

Since Democrats (as well as Republicans) both stay in office, no matter how they legislate, the system becomes increasingly reform-proof. Democrats have "no vision of where to take this Nation" because for many Democratic lawmakers, the vision of that dollar sign, at the end of the tunnel, obscures actual issues. Money becomes the most important thing and overrides even the possibility of party dissolution. Political corruption becomes more important than the economic well-being of constituents. And lobbyists often write their own legislation for passage into law.

 

To get back to policies that help the Nation and its people, we need to get money out of politics. Campaigning must be shortened, by law and payed for by public dollars. Lobbyists must be banned from the halls of Congress instead of give a free pass, as is done now. Lobbyists should have no more Congressional ingress than you or I. These are just first steps to restore sensible legislation that helps the Nation and its citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More gratuitous attacks on the Democratic party, America's only liberal party.

 

Are we sure this is "Liberals Only"?

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of being Liberal is searching for progressive solutions. Especially when one's party loses every branch of government and most state governorships and legislatures. Clinging to dogmatic orthodoxy is for Conservatives.

 

"If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of being Liberal is searching for progressive solutions. Especially when one's party loses every branch of government and most state governorships and legislatures. Clinging to dogmatic orthodoxy is for Conservatives.

 

"If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen"

 

The characterizations are false. Democrats (including myself) always search for progressive solutions. It is dogmatic socialists who insist that collectivism is the answer to every problem who are stuck in dogmatic orthodoxy.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The characterizations are false. Democrats (including myself) always search for progressive solutions. It is dogmatic socialists who insist that collectivism is the answer to every problem who are stuck in dogmatic orthodoxy.

 

Bill

 

Collectivism? Where did you get that idea? Ending "Citizens United" is collectivism. Requiring Democratic politicians not to take bribes from powerful interests in collectivism? Only a Conservative would come up with that.

 

Blind devotion a Conservative makes. They want the Democratic Party to stay exactly as it is and admire everything about it despite its recent defeats.... A sure prescription for failure.

 

We Democrats need to examine our party and seek reasons why it lost so badly in the last cycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Collectivism? Where did you get that idea? Ending "Citizens United" is collectivism. Requiring Democratic politicians not to take bribes from powerful interests in collectivism? Only a Conservative would come up with that.

 

Blind devotion a Conservative makes. They want the Democratic Party to stay exactly as it is and admire everything about it despite its recent defeats.... A sure prescription for failure.

 

We Democrats need to examine our party and seek reasons why it lost so badly in the last cycle.

 

 

No conservatives allowed

Post respectfully, personal attacks will not be tolerated

No more than five new threads a day

No trash talking about members and their kids

No porn, or links to porn

No gore pictures

No cursing in thread titles

No, 'outing' of members or their families; names, addresses, phone numbers, SSNs, etc.

No linking to other political forums

No solicitations

 

The constant jabs that falsely attempt to paint me as a conservative are offensive, disrespectful, and are personal attacks.

 

Please conform with board rules.

 

Charges of "blind devotion" sound pretty funny coming from the Bernie-can-do-no-wrong camp.

 

I'm for overturning Citizen United.

 

I know why "we" lost; it was perfidy on the left.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More gratuitous attacks on the Democratic party, America's only liberal party.

 

Are we sure this is "Liberals Only"?

 

 

"Liberal" is a relative term that says NOTHING of substance about real policy positions. In the US both the Dems and the GOP tend to have rather conservative aspects... on corporate power and whether democracy should be the basis of morally legitimate government. Having liberal social polices hardly makes one "liberal" on putting a chokechain on corporations or demanding reforms to finally make our system democratic. Libs live in a state perpetual cognitive dissonance. They wear democracy on their sleeves and care so little about it they don't even bother to define it. Once they did they'd confront the fact that they EXPLICITLY support our antidemocratic system. Bill... you seem to be the perfect example.

 

"Liberals" are merely the less conservative of the Since when can we consider liberal Dems to "liberal" when the Dem Party is rather conservative on the issue of corporate power and democracy itself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Liberal" is a relative term that says NOTHING of substance about real policy positions. In the US both the Dems and the GOP tend to have rather conservative aspects... on corporate power and whether democracy should be the basis of morally legitimate government. Having liberal social polices hardly makes one "liberal" on putting a chokechain on corporations or demanding reforms to finally make our system democratic. Libs live in a state perpetual cognitive dissonance. They wear democracy on their sleeves and care so little about it they don't even bother to define it. Once they did they'd confront the fact that they EXPLICITLY support our antidemocratic system. Bill... you seem to be the perfect example.

 

"Liberals" are merely the less conservative of the Since when can we consider liberal Dems to "liberal" when the Dem Party is rather conservative on the issue of corporate power and democracy itself?

 

What's with "Dems," and "Libs," and "Dem party"? And with's calling us "idiots?"

 

All your posts sink to name calling with nothing of substance.

 

This subforum is for liberals.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More gratuitous attacks on the Democratic party, America's only liberal party.

 

Are we sure this is "Liberals Only"?

 

Bill

 

Here's where SpyCar first makes the "non-Liberal" accusation. Before the above post, no one was accusing anyone else of anything

 

 

He loses big time, so he trots out his much overused moderator act (he's not a moderator).

 

 

 

No conservatives allowed

Post respectfully, personal attacks will not be tolerated

No more than five new threads a day

No trash talking about members and their kids

No porn, or links to porn

No gore pictures

No cursing in thread titles

No, 'outing' of members or their families; names, addresses, phone numbers, SSNs, etc.

No linking to other political forums

No solicitations

 

The constant jabs that falsely attempt to paint me as a conservative are offensive, disrespectful, and are personal attacks.

 

Please conform with board rules.

 

Charges of "blind devotion" sound pretty funny coming from the Bernie-can-do-no-wrong camp.

 

I'm for overturning Citizen United.

 

I know why "we" lost; it was perfidy on the left.

 

Bill

 

If one is to make a false accusation, they shouldn't expect to be treated with kid gloves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here's where SpyCar first makes the "non-Liberal" accusation. Before the above post, no one was accusing anyone else of anything

 

 

He loses big time, so he trots out his much overused moderator act (he's not a moderator).

 

 

If one is to make a false accusation, they shouldn't expect to be treated with kid gloves.

 

As a moderator who was suspended for abusing his authority, I wouldn't give myself too much credit if I were you.

 

I've made no false accusations. Unlike you.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More gratuitous attacks on the Democratic party, America's only liberal party.

 

Are we sure this is "Liberals Only"?

 

 

Are you going to show me WHAT in my OP was wrong or just make accusations that if someone doesn't agree with you they're not "pure" enough.

 

If you want to claim that the Dems were SMART not to realize the strategic threat they faced from the far right organizing... to not expose or counter it... to not push for democratic reforms or to regain control over corporate power... I await your analysis.

 

But from your posts so far I don't think you can think outside a narrow box of conventional thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As a moderator who was suspended for abusing his authority, I wouldn't give myself too much credit if I were you.

 

I've made no false accusations. Unlike you.

 

Bill

 

Please to stop prating rubbish.

 

I was never suspended for any reason ... No even for a minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Please to stop prating rubbish.

 

I was never suspended for any reason ... No even for a minute.

 

I wasn't here whenever.... but I'm detecting an odd vibe from Spy that must be central to his MO. What s/he/it's protecting is another matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​We have to make the choice between economic fairness and managing corporate capitalism. Managing the corporate economy involves a certain amount of regulation like cap and trade or requiring paid leave. But fairness means higher taxes on upper incomes and breaking up big banks and investment firms. It means living with ever growing corporations and financial markets or doing something about the size and power of corporations and markets. We must decide between living with capitalism as it is or making it work for the common good. This is the Democratic Party's dilemma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I wasn't here whenever.... but I'm detecting an odd vibe from Spy that must be central to his MO. What s/he/it's protecting is another matter.

 

I'm for protecting truth and rationality. Those things can be in short supply around here.

 

Bill

 

Please to stop prating rubbish.

 

I was never suspended for any reason ... No even for a minute.

 

You want to play semantic games?

 

You lost your moderating position for badly abusing your powers. That's the truth of the matter.

 

Now you are starting in again. Shape up.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm for protecting truth and rationality. Those things can be in short supply around here.

 

Bill

Is that what you're doing? :lol: Odd. I haven't seen many "truths" or a hell of a lot of rationality coming from your postings.

 

 

 

You want to play semantic games?

You lost your moderating position for badly abusing your powers. That's the truth of the matter.

Now you are starting in again. Shape up.

Bill

 

Are you under the (mistaken) assumption that you can be a rude as you choose to the moderators around here? The LO room has rules of civility. Do you think the forum rules don't apply to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that what you're doing? :lol: Odd. I haven't seen many "truths" or a hell of a lot of rationality coming from your postings.

 

 

Are you under the (mistaken) assumption that you can be a rude as you choose to the moderators around here? The LO room has rules of civility. Do you think the forum rules don't apply to you?

 

You are the guy who inserts :rolleyes: at the thought that credibility is important on the internet. The guy who argues there is no difference between Trump and Clinton (and therefore didn't vote) and who ignores the massive evidence that Tulsi Gabbard is a problem.

 

The rules clearly don't apply to me. Almost no one gets "moderated" for making personal attacks on me. BD does it himself and green dots those of others. Different rules because I don't worship at the cult of Bernie.

 

Anyone else have his/her account hacked by the "moderator"? Didn't think so.

 

There is a pretense of "civility" here that lasts only as long as one toes the party line.

 

Dare to question the dogma and the threats start up.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You are the guy who inserts :rolleyes: at the thought that credibility is important on the internet.

Credibility on the internet is overrated. You take this shit waaayyyy too seriously.

 

The guy who argues there is no difference between Trump and Clinton (and therefore didn't vote)

I've never argued there was no difference between them. There are quite a few differences between Trump and Clinton. I disliked both candidates for very different reasons:

 

Trump: wouldn't vote for him because he's inexperienced, reactionary, a major wingnut and is utterly insane.

 

Clinton: wouldn't vote for her because she's a liar, a corporate tool, a flip-flopper, and loves military intervention and regime change.

 

 

Anyone else have his/her account hacked by the "moderator"? Didn't think so.

No one "hacked" your account. Your posts were edited. There is a difference, y'know. It's ancient history. Why are you still whining about it? Why can't you move past any of this shit and participate in discussions of issues other than Clinton vs. Sanders?

 

 

 

There is a pretense of "civility" here that lasts only as long as one toes the party line.

 

Incorrect. There are quite a few HRC supporters here who don't act like you. Take laripu, for example. I might disagree with him sometimes, but he posts some really intelligent stuff and never fails to make me think about things. I respect him a LOT, despite the fact that I'm sure we see the 2016 election differently. He never attacks people personally or badgers them about their votes (like you do). I appreciate his opinions, whether or not they differ from mine.

 

The civility here has nothing to do with the "party line," imo. It's your delivery, which is often angry, aggressive, and more than a bit obsessive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Credibility on the internet is overrated. You take this shit waaayyyy too seriously.

 

I've never argued there was no difference between them. There are quite a few differences between Trump and Clinton. I disliked both candidates for very different reasons:

 

Trump: wouldn't vote for him because he's inexperienced, reactionary, a major wingnut and is utterly insane.

 

Clinton: wouldn't vote for her because she's a liar, a corporate tool, a flip-flopper, and loves military intervention and regime change.

 

 

No one "hacked" your account. Your posts were edited. There is a difference, y'know. It's ancient history. Why are you still whining about it? Why can't you move past any of this shit and participate in discussions of issues other than Clinton vs. Sanders?

 

 

 

Incorrect. There are quite a few HRC supporters here who don't act like you. Take laripu, for example. I might disagree with him sometimes, but he posts some really intelligent stuff and never fails to make me think about things. I respect him a LOT, despite the fact that I'm sure we see the 2016 election differently. He never attacks people personally or badgers them about their votes (like you do). I appreciate his opinions, whether or not they differ from mine.

 

The civility here has nothing to do with the "party line," imo. It's your delivery, which is often angry, aggressive, and more than a bit obsessive.

Only in your world is a couple weeks ago "ancient history" :rolleyes:

 

You are correct that I'm the only liberal on this subforum who stands up against attacks on liberals, liberalism, and the Democratic party.

 

The attacks are constant and shrill. You seem to think "enforced group-think" passes for civility. You are wrong about that.

 

And yes, I take it seriously when leftists engage in activities that help fascists like Trump come to power.

 

The far-right can't win without help from the far-left.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct that I'm the only liberal on this subforum who stand up against attacks on liberals, liberalism, and the Democratic party.

 

I AM a liberal, chuckles, so I have no reason to "attack" other liberals. I do criticize (and occasionally even condemn) behavior from those on my side of the aisle. Last I checked, the first amendment was still intact. However in LO, I try to only "attack" the issues and the candidates (not other posters, none of whom I've met).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I AM a liberal, chuckles, so I have no reason to "attack" other liberals. I do criticize (and occasionally even condemn) behavior from those on my side of the aisle. Last I checked, the first amendment was still intact. However in LO, I try to only "attack" the issues and the candidates (not other posters, none of whom I've met).

 

No RR, you have described yourself (direct quote) as being "as far to the left as it gets."

 

At least be honest about that.

 

And please stop the name calling, my name isn't "chuckles."

 

The only person whose free speech is threatened on this sub-forum is mine. Irony much?

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...