NationStates Jolt Archive


A Call To Arms! To Arms!

Shalrirorchia
05-08-2006, 01:32
THE FLYING RAT: Political Commentary
Aug. 04, 2006

As we approach the 2006 midterm elections, those of us on the Democratic side of the aisle are beginning to feel the presence of an emotion that we have been deprived of for quite some time.

Hope.

Ironically, we in the Democratic community cannot claim responsibility for the G.O.P.'s current political woes. The truth is that the Republican Party is in trouble because their policies are not working. Their economic reforms have not enriched the average American. Their foreign policy has not brought order to Iraq, nor has it empowered us to catch Osama Bin Laden or his confederates. Their actions have weakened America abroad by sundering the close relations between America and American allies. Without the support of these allies, we cannot prosecute the global war on terror. Nor has the Bush Administration taken concrete steps to save the United States from its' crippling dependency on foreign oil. A great deal of America's oil is shipped from the very region (the Middle East) that is currently inflamed by war. Every time I fill up the gas tank of my car, I idly wonder how much of my money is going to end up in the hands of fundamentalists who in turn will give it to organizations like Hezbollah. Americans are indirectly supporting terrorism by putting money in the pockets of those who fund terrorism. As long as the United States relies on fossil fuels to run its' economy, American foreign policy will be hamstrung by our need to keep the oil barrels coming.

Democrats are not weak on national security by nature. They possess no inherent genetic flaw that makes them less likely to defend the nation. A Democratic President guided America through the horror of World War Two, when democracy and freedom were in far greater danger than they are today. Republicans do not have a monopoly on national security. And yet all the G.O.P. has left to run on is national security. They cannot go to the voters and tell them how well the economy is doing. They cannot claim to be architects of some grand political or social unity that has brought Americans closer together. They certainly cannot claim that they have brought morality to the government, as evidenced by scandals such as Abramoff's K-Street and Noe's Coingate scandals demonstrate. No, the only strategy left to the national Republicans is to accuse Democrats of being soft on terrorism...and pray that the voters do not make this a national referendum by drawing parallels between the scandals in Washington and the Republican politicians back home.

The effectiveness of this strategy is open to interpretation, but one thing is clear; Democrats have a better chance to shatter the Republican majority this year than they have had in many years prior. Many moderate Republicans, disgusted with the behavior of their party, may telegraph their displeasure on election day. Many Democrats, discouraged after John Kerry's defeat in 2004, have found their backbones again. It is about time...one should always speak his or her mind, even if one's voice shakes while doing it. For far too long Democrats have played the role of "silent minority".

Enough of that.

In some ways, this election is a second referendum on George W. Bush's presidency. Some who voted for him in 2004 have since voiced their concerns and even regrets. Bush has become the poster child for a Party that has swung hard-right, ignoring its' centrist wing in favor of playing the game of power politics. The Party itself has become a poster child for everything that an American political party should strive to avoid...the perception (or presence) of unwarranted priviledge, the exercising of unfettered political power, the use of the levers of government to silence opposition and reward allies. It is no coincidence that so many top Republican officers in Washington...from Randy Duke Cunningham and Scooter Libby, to Tom DeLay and David Safavian...have become targets of criminal probes. There is something deeply rotten at the core of the Party's culture, something that definitely needs to be fixed.

This is the year for the Democrats. Ultimately, the election is the Democrats' to lose or win. Democrats who were put down in 2004 must stand up, dust themselves off, and insist on participating in the political process again. They must argue, debate, contribute time or money, and most of all they must VOTE. If the past six years have demostrated anything, it is the capability of a group of highly motivated individuals to change the direction of our country (for good or ill). We need a strong statement from Democrats of all flavors and from Republicans of the moderate rank; "This is OUR country too. We demand accountablity in our government. We demand equality under the law. We demand protection...not only from the enemies without but also those within. We demand ethical standards and practices of our elected representatives...and if they refuse to comply, we'll vote them out of office."

The time has come for Americans to vote for and work for change. Electing honest Democrats and then making sure they STAY honest represents the hope of a fresh beginning after so many years of nothing but more of the same. It's a lot of work, but I think the American people are up to it...the price of freedom, after all, is eternal vigilance.
Eutrusca
05-08-2006, 01:45
A Democratic President guided America through the horror of World War Two ...
Reaching quite a ways back to find a decent Democrat, ain't ya?

The current crop of prospective Democratic candidates are definitely not yer gramma's Roosevelt!
CSW
05-08-2006, 01:51
Reaching quite a ways back to find a decent Democrat, ain't ya?

The current crop of prospective Democratic candidates are definitely not yer gramma's Roosevelt!
You'd have to go back to Lincoln to find a decent republican.


Suffice to say, both parties seem to lack decent leaders.
Intrepid Redshift
05-08-2006, 01:55
You'd have to go back to Lincoln to find a decent republican.

Aye, but correct me if I am wrong (I cant remember when the parties did the switch) but werent the Republicans of old actually (politically speaking) more Democrat-oriented back then?


Suffice to say, both parties seem to lack decent leaders.

Its a human condition really..
Our Earth
05-08-2006, 01:58
The American Electorate puts such a high premium on spotlessness that any intelligent, motivated, qualified individuals are removed during prescreening due to some blemish in their past. I don't put the blame enitrely on senseless people since these past faults are highlighted by the sensationalist media, but until we stop caring so much about largely insignificant things like "did he inhale" and start caring about things like "can he lead" then we can't really expect a truely good president from any party.
Big Jim P
05-08-2006, 02:09
You'd have to go back to Lincoln to find a decent republican.


Suffice to say, both parties seem to lack decent leaders.

I would say Reagan was a good republican.
Minaris
05-08-2006, 02:18
You'd have to go back to Lincoln to find a decent republican.


Suffice to say, both parties seem to lack decent leaders.

That is why I want a Liberationist Party (if this name is taken, does not fit it, or is horrible, let me know).

A party of mixing (worked for Romans).

Mixing Libertarian law (save $$$ on Law and Order), Socialist services (we need to double our life expectancy soon), high taxes on the uber wealthy and rich (maybe upper middle for extra $$$ in), and most of all...


NO PRISONS (Whaaaaaaaaaaat????!!!!:confused: )

Prisons cost $$$. Rather than having those guys sit there, sucking on beer and watching TV, they should be government workers: building stuff (tanks, houses, etc.). Of course, sentences would be much shorter, but it is best for capital crime...

That way, $$$ is going in for an advanced-tech military...


This is the theory of the Liberationists...
Eutrusca
05-08-2006, 02:25
I would say Reagan was a good republican.
And a good President, IMHO. :)
Desperate Measures
05-08-2006, 02:27
I would say Reagan was a good republican.
He would have been better if he had napped more often.
Our Earth
05-08-2006, 02:39
And a good President, IMHO. :)

I challenge you to present evidence supporting this belief.
Gun Manufacturers
05-08-2006, 06:32
That is why I want a Liberationist Party (if this name is taken, does not fit it, or is horrible, let me know).

A party of mixing (worked for Romans).

Mixing Libertarian law (save $$$ on Law and Order), Socialist services (we need to double our life expectancy soon), high taxes on the uber wealthy and rich (maybe upper middle for extra $$$ in), and most of all...


NO PRISONS (Whaaaaaaaaaaat????!!!!:confused: )

Prisons cost $$$. Rather than having those guys sit there, sucking on beer and watching TV, they should be government workers: building stuff (tanks, houses, etc.). Of course, sentences would be much shorter, but it is best for capital crime...

That way, $$$ is going in for an advanced-tech military...


This is the theory of the Liberationists...


I could be wrong on this, but I don't think prisoners get beer while in jail.
DesignatedMarksman
05-08-2006, 06:35
All Hail the Gipper, the Great Communicator, Ronald Reagan.

*Salutes*
DesignatedMarksman
05-08-2006, 06:40
I challenge you to present evidence supporting this belief.

Who are you, Mikhail Gorbachav?

The Free world Smoked Russia and it's commie friends...
DesignatedMarksman
05-08-2006, 06:41
And a good President, IMHO. :)

Yes...I was born during his presidency.

I miss the gipper :(
HotRodia
05-08-2006, 06:55
Who are you, Mikhail Gorbachav?

The Free world Smoked Russia and it's commie friends...

*snicker* OE is definitely not our old pal Gorbie.
Soheran
05-08-2006, 06:57
The current crop of prospective Democratic candidates are definitely not yer gramma's Roosevelt!

Yes, they are all significantly to his right. Are you advocating a Nader vote?
BackwoodsSquatches
05-08-2006, 07:01
The Democrats are absolutely obligated to come up with two important things for the next elections, and the presidential one the following year:

1. A plan.
A plan for national security, social security reform, healthcare reform, all of it.
It had better be solid, and feasible, and able to withstand scrutiny of the harshest kinds.

2. Backbones.

The next Democratic candidate for Potus, had better have a god-damn spine, and not yeild to harsh criticisms, or accusations.
If such a candidate cannot be brought forth, they way as well not even show up for the primaries.

If these two things can be done, we will have a Democratic President.
Rotovia-
05-08-2006, 07:04
Who are you, Mikhail Gorbachav?

The Free world Smoked Russia and it's commie friends...
I think we're taking differing veiws on Cold War history...