This article was created as a result of an inner reaction to a recent composition on this blog: Democrats Must Fight the Hate
————————————————————————————–
Though there are a very few exceptions in American politics, most of our elected officials have a misguided love:
-A love of ideology over accomplishment.
-A love of power over results.
-A love of position over keeping a promise.
-A love of personal benefits over those of the voters within their districts.
-A love of exploitation and opportunity over focus and purpose.
-A love of chaos and confusion over the expectation to be accountable.
Both major political parties are guilty of all of the above on a regular basis. The only variable is that they will use different fronts to disguise them. For instance, Democrats often wallow within the above items while seemingly “taking care of the less fortunate”. The Republicans will ingest their daily dose of the items on this list while “protecting the unborn”. This is not to say that there may not be a few members who may have a legitimate concern for those others mentioned. But even if there are, any effective means of putting their money where their mouths are get suffocated amidst the political folly.
Since the GOP are now the minority party, they are customarily doing any- thing they think they need to tip the scales back in their favor. They have officially stuck their collective fingers into their mouths, have pointed it upwards to determine the direction of the breeze, and have concluded that the best thing to do is to follow the Tea Party line and to inject words like “socialism” into their everyday jargon. After all, this kind of language is “hip” and if you are cool and recognize that a person’s efforts can somehow benefit your own, you might as well voice your approval. Particularly when it is politically expedient to do so. You have also become an expert at justifying the casting of stones since “sin” is a relative term.
Democrats are not as creative. They simply blow the dust off of their playbook and thumb to the pages where the words “racist” and “oppressor” are found. They carefully study the footnotes where they are told that these words have succeeded in scaring people away or, at the least, shutting them up, and how this strategy works best when the need to circumvent any questions pertaining to issues arise. What they fail to realize is that the book they are using was published in 1965 and that more and more people are refusing to let the scare tactics work. Panic is setting in because many among their own party are getting sick of it and are demanding substance. Of course, since there is none to offer, they are trying to rewrite the story on the fly.
It ain’t working.
Our representatives desperately need to fight the love. The love that is further estranging them from their own kind. The kind that are rising up in greater numbers daily. The numbers that are growing due to becoming fed up and for the purpose of telling these politicians to get a grip.
I would love for them to listen for a change.
Related posts:
{ 23 comments… read them below or add one }
See Drew, you can get in-depth and intelligent answers to your questions here.
Hmmm…guess Laura was wrong about that, huh?
Silver & Erik,
Thank you for the thoughtful replies. This is just the sort of answer I was looking for.
Swain, you beat me to the delivery room. I’ve been busy and awakened early to some mild labor, as the ideas have been taking form (gestating) while busy at work, making cocktails and practicing unliciensed psychotherapy.
You haven’t left much to say but I’ll have a hack at it.
Marxism is by nature and definition revolutionary. An examination of the 162 year history of Marxism reveals that it has been and remains a threat to any constituted government; especially one that is structured to support Capitalism.
Today’s Einstein Quote on iGoogle greeted and surprised me a bit and created an itch on my superstitious zone between the shoulder blades.
“A man must learn to understand the motives of human beings, their illusions, and their sufferings.”
The history of Marxism is one of failure, not only to realize the religious goal in a practical world of ‘self emancipation of the working class,’ but as a system capable of fostering prosperity ANYWHERE it has been brought about by either ‘concentrated force to overthrow concentrated force’ or ‘practical critique,’ ‘political action’ and ‘gradualism.’ It is a religion without a deity that advances, like other major religions, fueled by emotion and ignorance of what Herr Einstein was expressing above.
Natural motives of human beings and Marxism (revolutionary socialism) don’t mix. We are by nature, as demonstrated wherever the individual is left alone to be enterprising and SELF SERVING, a spieces that is resistant to bounds on our ambition and imagination.
Prosperity and vitality demonstrated in nations that protect and poster individuality and individual achievement will always have prosperity while ‘dictatorships of the proletariat’ are universally held together only by the bonds of fear and loathing of captive populations.
We have a governing document that is the antithesis of mindless anarchy, boundless religious fervor and kool aid. THAT is how Marxism has, can and will short-circuit ours and anybody else’s constitution.
I prefer champagne because it takes time patience and hard work to create and I don’t need to aspire to being a party boss to afford it.
Drew,
You and I have discussed most of these points before so I am not going to bore the others. However, regarding socialism, I would like to reiterate that the socialism (and Marxism for that matter) that the world leaders are trying to implement have a foundation of atheism. We are not talking about the biblical kind here where we should share our excess with our misfortunate brother. We are talking about the attempted end of organized religion as we know it and replacing it with a trust in the State and in the Earth.
I actually have a copy of The Communist Manifesto. Though I haven’t pored through it as much as I’d like, the general thought is that of above as well as disarming the public and confiscating all of our land. If you have noticed, there have already been sincere attempts to illegalize ALL public (sovereign, Constitutionally protected individuals) firearms and there has been an abuse of Eminent Domain.
I don’t have a problem with a “radical”, depending on what he/she is radical about. I have a problem with such people like Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, et al due to the fact that their radicalism caused mass deaths and/or imprisonment – and not necessarily behind bars.
Regarding S.S. bankruptcy dialogue: I heard it talked about all the time while Bush was in office. It was during his tenure when I started hearing for the first time how there was actually a remaining time period before running out of money.
I don’t have a problem with taxation in general since we must get our funding for projects from somewhere. I have a problem with income taxation since it was achieved in 1913 in an illegal manner. Also, I have a problem with the govt taxing its law-abiding citizens for the purpose of funding 3rd world tyrannies (money that they are never required to pay back, by the way) so that the Ruler can only abuse it and further enslave his countrymen. Does Rwanda ring a bell? (This applies to paragraph #2 regarding disarmament as well. The Rwandan govt had spent several years confiscating the peoples’ weapons so that when it came time to slaughter them with machetes, they had no way to defend themselves.)
Finally (since I don’t have the time to address more of the issues or the ones that I have already addressed in greater depth), more and more conservatives are separating themselves from the GOP (including yours truly) due to the fact that the Republicans are constantly dropping the ball. You see, that is one of the beauties of a blog such as this is that we have a good balance of political vantage points at our disposal which gives us all a better idea of others’ points of view. This is one of the reasons for the Tea Party movement (which I have several issues with, but that’s a different conversation for a different day) – people are getting fed up with govt in general and are quickly, and painfully starting to realize that the folly is clearly bipartisan.
Wish I could talk more but I have to take a train to Manhattan today.
Peace
Blue,
You start out your response quickly asserting………….
“How, specifically, does belief in Marxism poison the socio-political environment or short-circuit the Constitution?”
You really want me to “attempt” to address your points. Not to be too disagreeable, shall we start with the basics of a civics class, say 3rd grade level?
Do you need a history of EVERY nation where it has been implemented?
Do you want me to explain what you must surely have been taught and discarded like so much ideological garbage?
How bouts ya take a look-see at the bill of rights, restrictions on government. Perhaps a readers digest course in individual rights and responsibilities as laid down by founders who wanted a central government as small as possible, and primarily to defend boarders and insure no disruption in “free” trade between states.
You ask too much. Baby Steps are my advise for you. And don’t stick your for into outlets and not everything is good to put in your mouth, such as espousing the greatness of Marxian Theology.
“
So now I’m “bad company, ” Swain?
Flattering.
Do you think you could actually address any of my points though?
Laura,
I just posted my response to your 1st response. Now I read you second.
Me thinks I gave you too much credit. If you believe the pap Drew the Blue dishes out, you have left center field we reasonable people can meet and discuss options.
I know you to be a good and intelligent person, and I love your seekers mind, but Laura, Drew and D’F as playmates? Good character is corrupted by bad company.
I will always try to persuade you to move towards “what I believe” to be more politically sound directions, but short of shock therapy ( the kind of thing the Cubans and Chinese and Venezuelans could tell you about), I just increase the dosage of political Prozac I add to article and response, and keep looking into your eyes for signs of sanity. (Humor attempted more than insult)
L,
An intelligent response. I was actually taking stock of my response, and Eriks article as a whole.
Then I read your lackluster partner in thought D’Funzy again and to top off the re-inforcement Mr. “Don’t you make my brown eyes” Blue. And I am seeing red. Not anger of course, but the anti-capitalist direction you side of the spectrum would encourage.
1st of all, after I re-read your “very influencial” response, I re-read Eriks article. You may have noticed what your compatriots missed. This was not a hit piece of one party. While you seemed to address the point of the article with usual persuasion, your fellows are out in left field with catchers masks on, as usual.
Do you notice how they focus on RNC attacks? They are so partisan all they can do is go back to the “old and tired” RNC rich white racist lines.
You alone make some very valid points, “we elected them, we get what we vote for, Tea Partiers have the same Ideaology above accomplishment” and towards the end, “We have gotten exactly the government we have worked so hard through our apathy, laziness and ignorance to achieve”
Here’s the surprise, If you had left out all of the “your a whiner talk”, you would find that Erik, and Silverwun and I would have been in complete agreement with you on all those very important points.
However, Eriks article is not slanted. It is a call for the lazy electorate to think. It is a call to correct what you so rightly claim is wrong with us a a citizenry.
The difference being or course the perceived outcome between you and he (we). A call to promote citizens who have a demonstrated fervor to return to the principles of our founders, without the use of empty rhetoric and emotional persuasion, only to be followed up by dragging this country into a entitlement hole that we cannot recover from.
.
Eric,
It is so much easier to point fingers than to take responsibility and to do something. If there is guilt by association, if all Dems are guilty because a few are, then people like Ron Paul are guilty by association too. But instead of drawing a line in the sand, pointing fingers seems the standard response to a lot of GOP BS on here, rather than addressing the issue and calling it for what it is. That is integrity- but no, instead of saying its wrong, period, regardless of who is responsible for it it bocomes the “Well, the Dems did it too…” When did two wrongs ever make a right? THAT is what I am talking about in regard to whining.
You have claimed more than once that you belong to no party (much like another on here) with the exception of one out of 48 articles where you address a man that NO one but the most hardened GOP operative would defend, that was kicked out of office by his own party, you do nothing but consistently condemn Dems, in particular our president. All the while you say nothing about what the GOP is doing, even when offered their very own words on a platter. Crickets chirp…
You may say you are an independent, that you are beholden to no party line, but your words belie that. Either that, or you just hate whoever is in power, in which case you are a reactionary and have no guideposts of your own other than in standing in perpetual opposition-a personal party of NO. Which is it? Be honest with yourself and us. I have a feeling that if we were able to look back far enough, we wouldn’t find you speaking about Bush in the way you are about Obama and he pushed an agenda even more strongly than Obama.
Drew,
You aren’t going to get any answers to your questions. Your points are not going to be addressed- not by anyone on here. They are too honest and make too much sense. They are too reflective of the “openmindedness” that is claimed by people on here to be out and out attacked by anyone with intelligence and will not be debated because there is no reasonable or logical way to do it without exposing irrational bias for what it is.
If you are looking for answers I understand- but you are expecting too much… Be content with asking the questions and letting the readers answer them for themselves.
OK, so we all agree that politicians need to be a bit smarter than “the rest of us” and also that they need to be accountable. And we can all agree that the issue of failing to meet these expectations is not a problem owned by one particular party.
So, can we discuss some of the other items I see in several posts?
No one addressed my question:
How, specifically, does belief in Marxism poison the sociopolitical environment or short-circuit the Constitution?
Also, what is it about Radicalism that scares people so much? Obviously a radical who is promoting something negative is dangerous, that’s obvious. But the adjective “Radical” itself is hardly an indictment. It might be said that many of our civil liberties were gained by people in the past who were so concerned by the status-quo that they diligently pursued a political remedy, often to the point of being called radical.
Also, can we talk about that recently often used, rarely defined term; Socialism? Can those of you who lean toward the Red side of the spectrum please present a coherent definition and a compelling argument against?
Since I have worked in Social Services as an advocate for the disadvantaged, my perspective reflects a very positive experience with all sorts of social programs, which otherwise might be labeled Socialism – as if it were a negative word.
Social Security is not just Retirement income, but Medicaid, Disability, Unemployment, and Survivor Benefits. Now the most common argument I hear against S.S. is that it’s bankrupt. I don’t recall hearing a lot about this issue while Bush was in office, the last time was when Hillary tried to pass Health reform back in ’98 I think. I think the ‘bankrupt’ argument is interesting because it presupposes that by nature Social Security should not present an additional expenditure over the current budget. But this is an unrealistic view, with more families having kids later in life (or not at all), and with the average life expectancy increasing.
If you’ve ever embarked on a project to improve your home you may have gone over budget and depleted your savings. The result is perhaps that you need to borrow more money to complete the project. You can complain that you didn’t save enough, or that your wife SAID you’d have enough, or whatever, but the end result is that raising the needed money through an increase in monthly payments will result in a roof over your head.
To tie this analogy into S.S., America simply needs to reserve more money to pay for these programs. Now everyone says government programs can get more efficient, but I think any administration that seriously improved on the efficiency of S.S. would have a nice foot note in history, so I’m tending to believe that there really isn’t that much wiggle room, there are just a lot of old people to take care of and it costs money.
So the solution would be to raise taxes. Not just on the Rich, although I do believe in progressive taxation and so we should start there, but also on the middle class. These programs provide basic survival assistance to some of our nations most beloved demographics – our parents. They all get old and get sick and then die, and it costs society no matter how you slice it.
So in my opinion you can’t complain about raising taxes and call it socialism just because the percentage of income tax collected passes some imaginary marker in your head, and at the same time disparage Social Security or Welfare programs. These fundamental expenditures and social safety nets are what makes America one of the greatest countries in the world.
And I find it a bit disturbing that those who would call themselves conservatives overwhelmingly associate themselves with the Republican party who sapped trillions of dollars from the U.S. economy over the last decade to drop bombs on Iraq, while simultaneously decrying the call for a public expenditure on Health Care reform. I suppose we’re in the minority, but the Christian Liberals and Christian Democrats groups on FaceBook, although a minority among Christians, provide me with some hope. And I’ve even found reconciliation with the Catholic Church, who’s followers tend to be a bit more pragmatic in regard to the sort of approach they take to community service.
Thoughts?
Laura,
So is what I am reading right? You say that we deserve the inexperienced politician because we as voters don’t know what we are doing? So that means we deserve Obama since he is a 2 year senator that voted present more then up or down? You might have something there….
DFunzy,
“If all you want is a mud wrestling match, I shall take no part in that.”
I believe that I have shown how I would prefer to respond and that was in the form of a different article. No ‘mud wrestling’ is necessary.
I said that to Laura primarily due to the fact that she is claiming that I was “whining” when, in actuality, it appears that your article more resembles a whine than does mine. Also, you seem to conveniently ignore the several links that I supplied that show how the Democrats use hate speech just as frequently. It is just plain silly to even imply that only one party is guilty. If you want to refer to the “N” word, let’s talk about Robert Byrd, shall we? The point of my article is that the political folly transcends partisanship and hate isn’t something the Democrats must “fight”, unless it includes themselves.
“You are obviously only coming to the defense of DFunzy’s maniacal, slanted post and, therefore, are unable to see clearly while reading mine.
Erick,
Which post are you referring to? The one about the out and out hate and fear mongering, and racists statements from the core of the GOP, and from a founder of the Tea Party? And how is that post slanted? It is a post of a few hundred words on a specific topic. You fail to get the point of why that 72 page RNC memo is so damning and damnable. You fail to understand the significance of the use of the “N” word, and race baiting, by a leader of a political party, rather than just by someone on the sideline.
If all you want is a mud wrestling match, I shall take no part in that.
J Byron,
Thanks
Laura,
You are obviously only coming to the defense of DFunzy’s maniacal, slanted post and, therefore, are unable to see clearly while reading mine.
What makes you think I am not doing anything? If you really, honestly and truly want to step out onto your self-righteous limb and accuse me of whining, then you may as well delete about 90% of your articles from this blog (and comments, for that matter). If anything, this article was a response to a whine, not a whine itself.
Look at how we choose and elect our politicians. If we have primarily zealots and opportunists in office, we have no one but ourselves to blame.
And your first point “A love of ideology over accomplishment.” Isn’t that exactly what calling someone who is trying to compromise to get something done a RINO promoting? Isn’t promoting people with no experience, but who possess “ideological purity” (e.g the Tea Party) playing right into that?
Make up your mind Eric….No politician is perfect and we wouldn’t want them if they were. We’d hate them for it and fight them every step of the way under the mantra of “Who do you think you are? Do you think you’re better than us?” Damned if you do, dmaned if you don’t. No one in politics can win, so the ones who are best suited for the job look elsewhere to make a difference, which leaves us with the people who pursue agendas…We get exactly the caliber politician we ask for and vote for…
Those who don’t like that- don’t blame the messenger. As a voter, look at your part in it. Look at your neighbor’s part in it. Then start with local elections, which no one votes in, and do someting about it. Let the right people get the experience they need to be effective while under the understanding that they are going to be held directly accountable. As they become more experienced, then they can handle the responsibilities of higher office and be effective at discahrging their duties. Stop trying to put nobodies in the governor’s mansion and national office where they can screw up a whole state and federal government while learning on the job. Would you take a mail clerk and make him the CEO of a billion dollar business? I don’t think so. Show as much care about who is administering your local property taxes and who is on the bench settling parking tickets as you do who votes for abortion or gay marriage on a national level. That faulty property tax assessment rammed through by a politician no one voted for and so is accountable to no one but the local party machine affects you as much, if not more, than the cost of foreign aid to a third world country. Who do you think could be in the process of being groomed for higher office? Yet those people are beneath most American voters to waste their time voting on, unless they happen to be in the voting booth already for a presidential election. How many local candidates run unopposed?
We have gotten exactly the government we have worked so hard through our apathy, laziness and ignorance to achieve. Stop whining about it and do something about it. As the environmentalists say- think globally, act locally.
Drew,
Our politicians are not held to a higher standard. If you seek proof of that look at Charlie Rangel, Blago, etc, ad nausea. And from your comments I feel compelled to remind you that the Democrats are NO STRANGER to dirty pool in politics. They daily apply the lessons of my pal Saul Alinsky.
Compromise (true leadership) has died at the hands of party loyalty.
Erik,
What a wonderful surprise! Every now and then I have the privilege of reading a truly unique and original thought piece. Your balance and depth should give any Republican or Democrat pause, to think.
Silverwun,
How rare it is to find an employee that doesn’t feel he can run the company better than his boss, and how rare to find a child that doesn’t feel his parents are ignorant at best and not nearly as wise at least.
When you find one, they are usually the best employees or most promising children.
Our legislators forget they are the employees of we the people and children if you will of far wiser founding fathers.
Blue,
Our “representatives” are just that, the representatives of the people, not our Lords.
Yes, they should be exceptional “employees”, not the kind that think they know better than those they serve. Not impudent children ignoring the rules of the founding fathers.
Blue, have you ever noticed that Constitutionally Conservative citizens will be critical of their own, while the lost follow their leaders?
I have respect for the GOP. I don’t think they are living up to their obligations by politicizing every issue as if still in “Election Mode,” as some put it.
But I’m pretty confident that republicans who aren’t backed into the corner and reacting accordingly are every bit as capable of centrism and intelligence as much as their Blue counterparts. I think by nature, unless the political landscape shift dramatically, the Republican Party will always be the representatives of the Power while the Dems will continue to represent the People, but that’s just my swing. Corporate interests and capitalism need representation too.
But I’m rooting for the People above the Power, because, as Marx so poignantly put it; “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggle.” Since I believe that the meek will inherit the earth, I’m on the side of the common man… at least for now.
And yes, Erik, I know America is a Republic. A Democratic Republic, to be exact. For example, we didn’t invade Iraq to bring them our representative Republic, we did it, ostensibly, to bring them Democracy. In the proper context Democracy is just as accurate as Republic in describing our government.
Anyway if the Republicans (as a group) want, or feel obligated in the pursuit of winning, to play dirty through the whole game, it’s the fans that will likely suffer the most.
Do you really think that Republicans think Obama is a Socialist? No, that’s just part of the game. They’ve always played this sort of game well, it’s no surprise.
And Obama has pushed back a bit. If congress is overtaken by angst in November, Obama has made it know the veto gavel remains at hand.
Consti,
Thanks.
Drew,
This is not a Democracy but a Republic.
These leaders’ arrogance are not normally due to traits they have, but illusions of grandeur.
If you truly worship the government the way you are stating, I am surprised that you don’t do the same with the GOP. They are, after all, government too. I try to be consistent across the board. They are all equally guilty of what I have mentioned. Or, if I were to choose your perspective, they are all equally above error.
Pertaining to their successes and failures, I can only wish that it was more balanced. Their successes are seldom my success, but their failures are always my failures.
How, specifically, does belief in Marxism poison the socio-political environment or short-circuit the Constitution?
In the final analysis, I certainly hope our elected leaders are superior to the average American. In their own eyes and in reality.
I’m often reminded that our elected officials are held to a higher standard than “the rest of us”. I would think that the standard applies not only to their obligation to remain morally upright and just, but also to remain sensible, logical, and intelligent. I want my elected officials to be leaders in the realm of ethical issues, but I also want them to be leaders of intellect as well.
So, yes, by and large, I expect my representative leaders to be “superior in their own eyes ,” as well as superior in our eyes, on several levels.
Now in order to stand above the crowd, so to speak, in order to excel above the average, it is understood that the bar or normalcy is by nature lower than this benchmark of excellence we have elevated above the norm.
Therefore, it is inevitable that our elected leaders will appear occasionally smug, self-confident, and a bit superior to the average constituent. This is to be expected, you might even say ‘preferred’.
And if the constituents who elect these so-called ‘elite’ legislators act like children and speak like children, and find fault with those who are essentially better than them because of envy or jealousy, or resentment, or manufactured rage, that’s to some degree to be expected. I’ve participated in social groups and been employed by companies where this sort of sentiment toward one’s leaders is fairly typical and common. Par for the course.
So, how to rise above it all? This one’s going to be a challenge for many because they are simply not able, not capable. The solution is to BE the leader. Set the bar yourself. Know what it’s like to surround yourself with those who have not achieved as much as you and who have honored you for it, and carried you forward on their shoulders, only to drop you when the weight became tiresome.
But if you’re not capable of leadership. If you don’t have the necessary skill, diplomacy, intelligence, and general wherewithal to be a community leader, organizer, and ultimately a legislator, then that’s fine. Everyone in society has a role. Too many chefs spoil the stew, and not everyone can be a leader. So, be a good follower.
As constituents it is our role to revere those who have risen around us in our communities, and root for their success, honor their achievements. Their success is our success and their failures are our failures. This is, after all, a Democracy.
I could say more, but I’ll need my own article space I think…
God Bless America.
Erik,
Excellent visual about the playbook. Amazing as it is they always come back to the Rules for radicals approach. Well done!
SilverWun,
Thank you for the compliment and for taking the time to comment.
We can be pretty sure they are getting restless and taking cover because they are listening. The tragedy is they are also superior in their own eyes and complaints are taken as though they are from unruly children instead of their employers.
The public shows no courage to launch and support at least one new political party of Untouchables, representing a movement to return to respect for the individual and the ideals of protecting liberty instead of destroying it. Theologians and Marxists are poisoning the socio-political environment by trying to short-circuit the Constitution from both ends. We stand by like helpless children, watching it all and doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different outcomes.
Maybe they are right. We really are children who bow to the authority of a corrupt press and more corrupt government.
One of the best articles I’ve seen on this Erik.