LGP Political Discussion Thread

[doublem]

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In what universe must someone be living to believe that the Democratic Party is controlled by "the Left," let alone "the furthest left elements" of the Party? As Ezra Klein says, the Left "ha gotten exactly nothing they wanted in recent months." The Left wanted a single-payer system, then settled for a public option, then an opt-out public option, then Medicare expansion -- only to get none of it, instead being handed a bill that forces every American to buy health insurance from the private insurance industry. Nor was it "the Left" -- but rather corporatist Democrats like Evan Bayh and Lanny Davis -- who cheered for the hated Wall Street bailout; blocked drug re-importation; are stopping genuine reform of the financial industry; prevented a larger stimulus package to lower unemployment; refuse to allow programs to help Americans with foreclosures; supported escalation in Afghanistan (twice); and favor the same Bush/Cheney terrorism policies of indefinite detention, military commissions, and state secrets.

The very idea that an administration run by Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel and staffed with centrists, Wall Street mavens, and former Bush officials -- and a Congress beholden to Blue Dogs and Lieberdems -- has been captive "to the Left" is so patently false that everyone should be too embarrassed to utter it. For better or worse, the Democratic strategy has long been and still is to steer clear of their leftist base and instead govern as "pragmatists" and centrists -- which means keeping the permanent Washington factions pleased.

All that said, and as horrible as the Democrats have been all year, the most amazing -- and depressing -- aspect of all of this is how Americans have so quickly forgotten how thoroughly the Republicans, during their eight-year reign, destroyed the country. Whatever the source of our national woes are, re-empowering that faction cannot possibly be the answer to anything.

[AlexPKeaton]

Doublem I agree with everything you posted there. I have no faith in either political party and I have no confidence in the US Congress ever doing anything good ever again. The best you can hope for is gridlock.

[Geezer]

Doublem I agree with everything you posted there. I have no faith in either political party and I have no confidence in the US Congress ever doing anything good ever again. The best you can hope for is gridlock.

I don't believe in the Republicans only part. Didn't the Dems control Congress for 6 of the 8 years? As far as a pox on both parties I'm with you. I'm a believer in whichever seems to be the lesser of 2 evils. I usually enjoy gridlock because it's basically a case of the less they do the less they can screw things up. The thing I enjoyed about Brown's victory is that it came from the independents. The republicans should get their heads out of their butts and develop / or sell their ideas to the center right of this nation if they want to have much of a voice in the country's future. Regarding someone's earlier comment about American's voting the most liberal congress; they basically "voted the bums out" because they were ticked off. The Dems took that as some massive shift to the left. The polls I've seen show this to be a center right nation with many people mixed on various issues. This administration and the Pelosi crowd took the past election as an endorsement of their far left agenda which is being proven wrong.
The Dems made this mistake when Clinton took office and over-reached.
Newt & friends over-reached when they won the house and threw away their gains.
Bush had broad support after 911 but blew it with his Iraq mistakes.
I think the Dems are experiencing groundhog's day and are going to get fried in the November elections unless the Republicans screw up their advantage going into November. And theyr'e prefectly capable of that.

[pittsoccer33]

The very idea that an administration run by Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel and staffed with centrists, Wall Street mavens, and former Bush officials -- and a Congress beholden to Blue Dogs and Lieberdems -- has been captive "to the Left" is so patently false that everyone should be too embarrassed to utter it.

What do you make of the Carol Browners, Cass Sunsteins, Kevin Jennings, Van Jones', Valerie Jarrets etc? These are the people largely in unelected, unconfirmed, and unaccountable positions. These are the people Obama has grown up and he shares their ideologies much closer than to anyone on main street.

[doublem]

The very idea that an administration run by Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel and staffed with centrists, Wall Street mavens, and former Bush officials -- and a Congress beholden to Blue Dogs and Lieberdems -- has been captive "to the Left" is so patently false that everyone should be too embarrassed to utter it.

What do you make of the Carol Browners, Cass Sunsteins, Kevin Jennings, Van Jones', Valerie Jarrets etc? These are the people largely in unelected, unconfirmed, and unaccountable positions. These are the people Obama has grown up and he shares their ideologies much closer than to anyone on main street.

If it says anything about the "Left" Van Jones was fired? So, if Obama shares his "views" he must be waiting for the secret take over attempt and jump out surprise everyone. If Obama is so left wing why wouldn't he get some type of health care passed or a single payer, or even a public option instead of doing nothing? I really don't know what is so radical about those people you mentioned?

[shafnutz05]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... +Stories)5

More examples of political correctness gone amok. God forbid we even imply that the religion of peace could have had anything to do with Fort Hood. This is so stupid it's pathetic.

[shafnutz05]

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/presi ... id=9611222

"People are angry and they are frustrated. Not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years, but what's happened over the last eight years."

When is the Boy King going to realize that the old tried and true strategy of blaming Bush for every single thing under the sun is no longer credible with the voting public? Does he really think that people are still feeling sorry for him (aside from his most loyal idolizers)? I have never heard so much pissing and moaning coming from a president...he is CONSTANTLY crying about how rough he has it and how nothing is his fault. He is such an empty suit its ridiculous.

[Samsdog]

I'm sorry, but a statement that essentially says "Hey! Don't look at what we're doing to the country right now, keep voting for us because this idiot that we're taking to be a representative of every member of his party screwed up and was made a scapegoat for larger gaffes a few years ago" is totally asinine.

That said I'm not a fan of what either party is doing or has done, Republican though I am. I'd rather vote for people on the basis of their individual qualifications rather than their party (which I generally do) but the current system has made it impossible for that to be an effective strategy in society at large.

And whether or not you agree with putting Republicans back in power, the Democratic leadership is not taking into consideration that the American public does not want this bill to pass. If they would stop trying to ram a piece of legislation that most people do not agree with down people's throats then they wouldn't have to worry about Republicans taking seats in primarily Democratic districts.

[HomerPenguin]

I don't believe in the Republicans only part. Didn't the Dems control Congress for 6 of the 8 years?

Only 2, 07-09. They had a one-vote control of the Senate from mid-01 until the next Congress was seated in 03.

[HomerPenguin]

Your hatred of anything religious shines through beautifully in this ridiculous statement. Most of America is socially more liberal these days.

Right. Just ask any homosexual who wants to get married and doesn't live in New Hampshire, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, or DC. And I'd be surprised if a couple of those states didn't roll things back in the near future.

Just because someone is pro-life doesn't make them a "shady Christian fundamentalist". Maybe they just think that the murder of unborn children is wrong? Same with cloning, etc....opposition to such things does not have to be on religious grounds.

OK. When did I mention abortion or cloning?

In 2008, America elected the most liberal Congress in moder history.

Right. A Democratic-majority Congress where the balance of power is held by socially conservative Democrats in both chambers and whose membership includes all of one atheist and all of about 4 or 5 non-Judeo-Christians. And look at all the radical socially liberal things they've been doing! They, um, there was, er, that one, no, wait...something will come to me...

Yeah, those shady Christian fundamentalists really have DC under their boot heel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fellow ... ization%29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[shafnutz05]

Time to abolish the National Day of Prayer........

Opposition to gay marriage isn't just some right-wing tenet....there are a lot of moderate people out there that oppose it (including a lot of homosexuals, believe it or not).

[doublem]

including a lot of homosexuals, believe it or not)

WHAT?

[slappybrown]

Time to abolish the National Day of Prayer........

Opposition to gay marriage isn't just some right-wing tenet....there are a lot of moderate people out there that oppose it (including a lot of homosexuals, believe it or not).

Mr. Tea Baggs can't be happy about your position on this issue.

[Guinness]

Maybe we could get government out of the marriage license business altogether?

[doublem]

Maybe we could get government out of the marriage license business altogether?

Good.

[shafnutz05]

Maybe we could get government out of the marriage license business altogether?

Good.

I'm fine with that.

[HomerPenguin]

Maybe we could get government out of the marriage license business altogether?

Fine. Call civil marriages something else, and give all of them the same protections under the law that my wife and I, who had a civil marriage only, enjoy, including benefits protections, inter-state recognition, tax benefits, and immigration status issues.

[HomerPenguin]

Here's an interesting idea:

http://www.thirty-thousand.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[slappybrown]

Here's an interesting idea:

http://www.thirty-thousand.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However, for the purpose of visualizing one practical concept — among many that could be suggested — thirty-thousand.org proposes the creation of additional federal cities. Imagine if four new federal cities were created in four distinct locations around the country (in addition to the one already established in Washington, D.C.). To the extent that assembly was required, it could take place within the regional federal capitol buildings, which could be further interconnected via video conferencing.

Guinness is going to FREAK out.

[Gaucho]

Time to abolish the National Day of Prayer........

Opposition to gay marriage isn't just some right-wing tenet....there are a lot of moderate people out there that oppose it (including a lot of homosexuals, believe it or not).

Ok, I decided to not believe it.

[RxBandit66]

Doublem I agree with everything you posted there. I have no faith in either political party and I have no confidence in the US Congress ever doing anything good ever again. The best you can hope for is gridlock.

Gridlock is not a bad thing. As a moderate Democrat, I'm glad that Coakley lost. Having a balance in the Congress is good because it forces both sides to reconcile a bit on each bill that's passed.

The Democrats and independents sent a message last night - they did not get the change they voted for. Brown was the better candidate, yeah yeah, both sides will try to spin it. But the bottom line is, independents proved they will throw out ANY party that is undeserving of power. Every member of Congress should have been saying a big collective "oh s**t" when Brown took the election so handily last night. Tea Party candidates pose a serious threat to any incumbent from any party in the primaries as well as in the general. The 2010 midterms will see many Democrats lose their seat, but the more interesting question will be how many incumbents will be defeated by their own party's voters in the primaries. That's where the first round of carnage will take place.

I guess the good news for Obama is, the voters still want change they can believe in!

[HomerPenguin]

Here's an interesting idea:

http://www.thirty-thousand.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However, for the purpose of visualizing one practical concept — among many that could be suggested — thirty-thousand.org proposes the creation of additional federal cities. Imagine if four new federal cities were created in four distinct locations around the country (in addition to the one already established in Washington, D.C.). To the extent that assembly was required, it could take place within the regional federal capitol buildings, which could be further interconnected via video conferencing.

Guinness is going to FREAK out.

Is he? Imagine how much more responsive to the electorate every House member would have to be if he or she were dealing with only 50,000 of them as opposed to (the average) 700,000. Imagine how much easier it would be to unseat incumbents.

Those offsite locations would actually keep those representatives closer to home and away from the DC environment and make it less practical for them to be bought off by large corporations.

[HomerPenguin]

Having a balance in the Congress is good because it forces both sides to reconcile a bit on each bill that's passed.

What's the reconciled position between "yes" and "no"?

[slappybrown]

Here's an interesting idea:

http://www.thirty-thousand.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However, for the purpose of visualizing one practical concept — among many that could be suggested — thirty-thousand.org proposes the creation of additional federal cities. Imagine if four new federal cities were created in four distinct locations around the country (in addition to the one already established in Washington, D.C.). To the extent that assembly was required, it could take place within the regional federal capitol buildings, which could be further interconnected via video conferencing.

Guinness is going to FREAK out.

Is he? Imagine how much more responsive to the electorate every House member would have to be if he or she were dealing with only 50,000 of them as opposed to (the average) 700,000. Imagine how much easier it would be to unseat incumbents.

Those offsite locations would actually keep those representatives closer to home and away from the DC environment and make it less practical for them to be bought off by large corporations.

Agreed on all of this, I think most everyone here would be supportive of a government that is more responsive and representative of its populace. I just mean the creation of "federal cities" in conjunction with that is something I think he would find particularly distasteful. It was a tongue in cheek comment.

[Guinness]

Guinness is going to FREAK out.

Is he? Imagine how much more responsive to the electorate every House member would have to be if he or she were dealing with only 50,000 of them as opposed to (the average) 700,000. Imagine how much easier it would be to unseat incumbents.

Those offsite locations would actually keep those representatives closer to home and away from the DC environment and make it less practical for them to be bought off by large corporations.

Agreed on all of this, I think most everyone here would be supportive of a government that is more responsive and representative of its populace. I just mean the creation of "federal cities" in conjunction with that is something I think he would find particularly distasteful. It was a tongue in cheek comment.

The premise is all wrong. The federal government would have hardly anything to do at all if it constrained itself within the proscribed limits of the Constitution.

If the states weren't de facto federal satellites, there'd be your "responsive" government.