I have an idea about how we can all help fix some of the damage that has been done...

[WilliamPitt]

(long post, flee now)

K.

Problem #1: The Executive Branch has accrued waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much power under the Bush administration, and because Congress and the courts haven't slapped them down, the power they've snatched remains unchallenged and is creeping towards becoming precedent, i.e. permanent.

Problem #2: (This needs to be staged...a-f is below)

a) Take it as a given that a Democrat is going to win in '08 (and do please take it as a given, because brawls about who will/won't/might/can't/shouldn't win is three entire atmospheres off the point at hand).

b) I am a Democrat, but I'm also a person who hasn't suffered the required amount of head trauma to make me believe this current crew of Democrats will be true servants of the people and the Constitution when the chips are down.

WHAT??

c) Super-quick truth about your country today: Santa Clara 1886 SCOTUS ruling creating corporate personhood + 1947 Truman Doctrine edict establishing permanent wartime economy + 1976 Buckley SCOTUS ruling saying millions in campaign bribery is free speech = super-citizens with 14th Amendment rights became enriched by a war-economy six decades along now (Vietman lasted 20 years, wars cost trillions, so someone got mega-paid for 365 x 20 days, and that was their profit-taking party, kinda what Iraq is, too) took all that free-speaking dough and bought the whole government bag and baggage, and then made sure their hired whores-on-the-Hill deregulated the rules for media ownership, and then those super-citizens bought out the news you never hear...etc...etc...etc...

d) And pretty much all of that shit went down way before I got into the game, and was done by people I've never met and didn't vote for...and now I live in the America they made. Maybe I'm soft, but I have troube getting wound up at modern-day Democrats for doing the shit they got hired to do. A pig is gonna grunt, and I may not like the sound, but I'd be a fool to be surprised by it.

e) If you know the name of a national/federal politician, odds are 99.9999% certain they're on board to some degree with the System outlined in (c)...yes, your candidate, too, and yours and yours and yours and yours as well. Deal with it. No politician in modern-day America can become nationally recognized unless they have Signed On The Line That Is Dotted. Most of them sign willingly, because they think they can still do some genuine good (and they do, see f. below). But signing means the charade has another advocate who will vote for wars and rumors of wars.

e, cont.) Because they signed, they will overwhelmingly approve every war-funding bill and every Pentagon budget swollen beyond absurdity with funds stolen from schools, hospitals, clinics, infrastructure, research, job training, eco-cleanup, and on and on again. Some will do so because they're just paid gunsels, others because major media outlets owned by certain "defense" profiteers (*koff* like how General Electric owns NBC, CNBC and MSNBC, and is one of the heaviest defense corporations on Earth) have the ability to destroy their political careers in less time than it takes to read a People Magazine article, and still others will do so because their voting base believes what GE-media feeds them. It's basically brilliant, seamless, a frictionless profit machine...and a breed of fascism new to humanity, too.

f) This is our common calamity, and the longer you deny it, the longer our calamity endures. No single election or candidate can undo this shit. Period. Your candndiate can't and/or won't, neither will yours or yours or yours or yours...hey...you there...you in the back...yeah, you...your candidate won't, either. Sorry. I didn't choose this, you didn't, and if we had ham, we could have ham and eggs, if we had eggs. Just because it absolutely sucks doesn't mean it's isn't absolute fact.

g) BUT BUT BUT another fact is that Democrats do help people, I mean real people like us and not 500 families you'll never meet, they help working people, help kids without insurance...Bill Clinton passed the Family Medical Leave Act so women aren't either annihilating their careers by having kids or forsaking motherhood to maintain their employment...and I've seen that one myself. It ain't perfect, and that specific anti-woman-what-a-stunner shamefulness isn't near to being fixed, but it's a long chalk better than it was before Bill put ink to that law. Have a baby, get months to recover and mother, Dad can be there for that whole time, too, by law...and both of their careers will be there when the leave is up. If that isn't Democrats helping real people, well, we should just chuck the whole thing.

g) HOW IN THE NAME OF CERTAIN LONG-WINDED JERKOFFS WHOSE PLUPERFECT ASSBAGGERY HASN'T LET THEM ARRIVE AT A SINGLE PERTINENT POINT...

...does all this get fixed by electing a new president?

It won't.

I'm not even going to bother explaining the rampage of lawlessness George and his Merry Ghouls have managed to lay on top of all this other crap. This is DU. Click a few links if you're not up to speed...yeah, except DUers have been totally "up to speed" for so long now that they crack off sonic booms whenever they blink...not that anyone here stops reading long enough to blink or anything... :P

AND.

No modern politician from either party is going to walk into the Oval and say, "You know, these insane imperial God-like powers my office gives me...they just aren't about me. Let's get the staff going on preparing some Executive Orders that will give all these crazy powers away once I sign the papers, OK? Can we do it by noon, maybe? Nice. Call me when they're ready. I'll be on the Truman Balcony waving hello to the junebugs and stuff. *giggle*"

Never. In. Hell.

(point incoming)

Fix: A 67-seat majority in the Senate. (and if your brow is furrowed, check the post title, which was supposed to be the topic or something, I guess, but that was like last week and stuff)

Consider it. It isn't likely (but still worth pursuing) that the Democrats will pick up enough '08 Senate seats to reach a 67-seat majority...but we are looking strong for 55 or more...and there's another 33 Senators running in '10, and 33 more in '12.

I. 67 = Veto-proof

II. 67 = Filibuster-proof

III 67 = A BRANCH THAT WILL BE STRONGER THAN WHOMEVER HAPPENS TO BE IN THE OVAL. Basically, that means it is not quite so important who wins the Oval once this happens...don't get me wrong, it is important as all Hell, but if we're also about salvaging Constitutional rule in America, we are going to have to stop kissing Executive ass and get beefed up in a different building.

That is the return of The Separation of Powers. Simply by dint of being able to crush any presidential veto, EVEN IN THEORY, the Senate will become with a 67-seat majority equal and/or superior to the president. The Legislative Branch can trump the berzerk powers of the modern Executive. Will it? I can't even speculate. But the law is the law, and a Legislative Branch that has the actual muscle to tell the Executive to get bent if it so chooses...wow...what a concept.

:)

Does this do anything immediately about Problem #2 a-f? Of course not...but it is sniffing along the right trail. (see g.) And it does a lot to fix #1.

So...who's up for winning a few more elections over the next four-six-eight-ten years?

:hi:

Just a thought. Thanks for slogging through it all. Someday...oh yes, someday...I will be able to locate my point without slaughtering so many words along the way.

Or not. ;)

[kpete]

1. k&r

for some positive thinking

[WilliamPitt]

2. Holy shit.

If that shit is what passes for "positive thinking" around here, we all need to get aerobically laid or something.

;)

[kpete]

5. Harriet Beecher Stowe

“When you get into a tight place and everything goes against you, till it seems as though you could not hold on a minute longer, never give up then, for that is just the place and time that the tide will turn.”

[WilliamPitt]

7. Some assbag

This is America. At bottom, America is a dream, an idea. You can take away all our roads, our crops, our people, our cities, our armies - you can take all of that away, and the idea will still be there as pure and great as anything conceived by the human mind. I do very much believe that the idea that is America stands as the last, best hope for this world. When used properly, it can work wonders.

That idea, that dream, is in mortal peril. You can still have all our roads, our crops, our people, our cities, our armies - you can have all of that, but if you murder the idea that is America, you have murdered America itself in a way that ten thousand September 11ths could never do. The men and women within this current administration are murdering the idea that is America with their Patriot Acts, their destruction of civil liberties, their lies, their daily undermining of even the most basic tenets of decency and freedom and justice that we have tried to live up to for 227 years.

That, and that alone, should be enough to get you on your feet with your fist in the air, whether or not you believe we have any chance of stopping all this. We may not win, but we damned well have to fight them. If we don't, we are the traitors some would say we are.

When you stare into the obsidian darkness of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington DC, it stares back at you. The stone of the monument is jet black, but polished so that you must face your own reflected eyes should you dare to read the names inscribed there. You are not alone in that place.

You stand shoulder to shoulder with the dead, and when those names shine out around and above and below the person you see in that stone, you become their graveyard. Your responsibility to those names, simply, is to remember.

Remember what that dream, that idea that is America, is supposed to be. Never forget it. Never let your children forget. Hand it down, generation after generation, because it is the most valuable heirloom we all possess. If we lose it, we have lost everything.

When all else fails, I fall back on the words of the extraordinary anti-war activist, Daniel Berrigan. A friend of Berrigan's, Mitchell Snyder, was for years an advocate and activist for the homeless in Washington DC. Snyder became despondent over the fact that his government could spend billions on bombs and planes and guns, but could not seem to find the money to help the homeless. Snyder became so despondent that he committed suicide. Daniel Berrigan penned these lines in memory of Snyder, and it is in these lines that I find my hope and strength when the darkness creeps too close.

Some stood up once, and sat down
Some walked a mile, and walked away
Some stood up twice, then sat down, "I've had it" they said,
Some walked two miles, then walked away. "It's too much," they cried.
Some stood and stood and stood.
They were taken for fools,
They were taken for being taken in.
Some walked and walked and walked.
They walked the earth,
They walked the waters,
They walked the air.
"Why do you stand," they were asked, "and why do you walk?"
"Because of the children," they said,
"And because of the heart,
"And because of the bread,"
"Because the cause is the heart's beat,
And the children born
And the risen bread."

The cause is the heart's beat. This cause is my heart's beat. It is yours. May it be there for all time, until that day comes when we can, once again, stand in awe and pride before our flag and our government and our nation, when we can once again revel in the rescued dream that is America.

Until then we are at the barricades, and on the streets, and in the faces of all those who would spend the precious blood of our men and women on lies and profit and greed. The obsidian darkness of that memorial demands this of us. The golden ideals of this nation demand this of us. The laws of our forefathers demand this of us. Most importantly, we demand this of ourselves.

They can take nothing from us that we are not willing to give, and we are not willing to give this great nation up.

Let them be warned.

We stand our ground.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/081003A.shtml

[demnan]

15. The day Kucinich brought Impeachment to the Floor

a very small group of us were standing outside the office where he was to make a press conference (little did we know at the time, that pandimonium had broken out on the floor of the House). There were 11 of us and 15 Capitol Hill Policemen surrounding us.

We all took out our Constitutions and started holding them high. I carry mine in my purse for such occasions.

[Laughing Mirror]

23. Thank you for representing us, demnan

Thank you for your bravery. That's a lot of police for the 11 of you. Somebody somewhere must be scared.

[kpete]

17. I cannot compete with your words

but I dream too, and I have a hard time editing as well


kpete "Separation"

[WilliamPitt]

21. Editing?

What does that mean?

:P

:hug:

Compete? You kick my whole ass, and that is truth.

[NMDemDist2]

24. here's where a 'nominate single post' option would come in handy

:yourock:

[madeline_con]

66. Just. Awesome.

:applause:

[rhett o rick]

74. well written. There are many in the world that have never know freedom.

They are easy to lead. But our heritage in this country has been freedom since the beginning. They shouldn't underestimate us. some of us have been lulled into apathy. But when those realize what is happening they will fight. Freedom is in our blood. It may take a while for the lazy and apathetic to wake up, but they will. We need to be working on a strategy.

Let those corporations that want to violate the Constitution know that we will not give them any of our money.

Take back the HOR. It is ours, the middle class. We need to stop electing wealthy representatives and hoping they will represent the middle class. We need to enforce our own term limits.

We need to take control of the local and state Democratic party organizations.

to be continued.

NGU

[OneGrassRoot]

19. Love that quote, kpete; love this intelligent ramble, Will. k&r n/t

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

6. Hey now!

I'd sign up for some of that stuff!

[WilliamPitt]

9. You just did.

;)

[demnan]

3. Marvelous Post!

By the way, meet my New Year's Resolution:


http://www.markwarner2008.com/?gclid=CLGJuInAuZACFQeSHgoddCE0Fw

[WilliamPitt]

4. Presidential candidate in 2016

Bank it.

Oh, and the very first time I hear the words "Senator" and "Democrat" and "VIRGINIA" in the same sentence...I am going to freak all the way out.

Kick ass.

:toast:

[demnan]

8. We did it last year

and we'll do it again.

[WilliamPitt]

11. Indeed

I forgot to mention the other word.

"Warner."

Meaning someone else.

Go go go.

:hug:

:toast:

[sazemisery]

10. K&R

[Hippo_Tron]

12. Couldn't have put it better myself Will

[meegbear]

13. w00t!

:kick:

[flashl]

14. I would rec 50 times for 'c' if it could be echoed a thousand times a day.

[WilliamPitt]

16. Don't have a way to do that

...but c) is one of the main themes of the new book I'm writing, for whatever it'll be worth.

Cheers.

[Ignis]

51. Any more teasers along those lines?

I think that the majority of us horrible, evil leftists/progressives agree that C is the root of the problem, so I'll bet I'm not the only one curious about your angle on this.

Of course, don't scoop yourself. ;)

[mmonk]

18. All good

as long as we take nothing for granted and stay up to speed. The fight won't be over this election and I'm afraid some think it will just because bush will leave office.

[WilliamPitt]

20. Yeah, cuz everything got all better once Reagan/Bush Sr. were gone.

:banghead:

Citizenship is a lifetime occupation.

I hope enough people remember that.

After '09.

:toast:

[mmonk]

28. Yes, essential.

Sleep is for the lazy.

:toast:

[sellitman]

86. Will, Dimes to donuts...

no one here is going anywheres after 09.

This place is a good habit.

And your posts are like chocolate.

Thanks for your words and thoughts. Wishing you and yours a Merry & a Happy.

(and next time post more often so your posts won't be so darn long.) :yourock:

[CrispyQ]

22. An excellent & educational rant.

"C" is what we need to educate the people about. "C" is the crux of our problem.

k&r

[HughBeaumont]

25. "Corporations and the wealthy run the world. It's a puppet show and the joke is on you."

So if change is nothing but a fantasy, then why even bother?

[alfredo]

45. Read Gore's "The Assault on Reason."

[liberalnurse]

26. Lovely post...

Goes great with my morning coffee at the Clinic.

[Fiendish Thingy]

27. Excellent summation of the fine mess we find ourselves in, however...

because of 2c & e, the only 67 seat majority (a SEVENTEEN SEAT GAIN FROM THE PRESENT!) that will make a difference is one that is comprised of NEITHER Democrats nor Republicans. You don't seriously believe that the simple fact of having 67 senators with a (D) after their names means a return to constitutional rule of law? I mean, it could happen, but it's not a lock by any stretch of the imagination...if we can't get 50 Democratic + 1 independent (Sanders) Senators to act in unity to preserve the Constituiton, how do we get 67 do enforce the people's will?

If the effort that DU and all the other grass roots netizens put into getting a Dem in the White House were instead channeled into Lamont vs. Leiberman style challenges of incumbents who have "signed-on-the-dotted-line", challenges to all the Vichy Dems who supported the Military Commissions Act, Confirmed (or missed the vote on confirming) torture-enabler Mukasey, the FISA rewrite last August, telcom immunity right now, all that Constitution shredding stuff, then we might have beginnings of what you could call "taking our country back". We wouldn't even need a 67 seat majority to begin with. How about 10 incumbents, both Dems and "moderate" Republicans (hear that Snowe & Collins?); replace them with 10 Senators who WILL filibuster every Unconstitutional piece of crap that the unitary executive or the Corporate Empire tries to pass. If these 10 Senators have Neither a D or R after their names, then we're talking about a revolution...

Start with Diane Feinstein, my Senator, please (unless she's retiring in 2010 to enjoy a life of luxury as a shill for her husband's defense industry cronies- oh wait, she already is.)

[bigtree]

29. It's still going to be the difficult and uncertain slog it's always been

. . . aggravated by electronic voting irregularities and apparent manipulation, and the usual media manipulations. But, we have no choice but to exercise every lever of democracy we can get our hands on. The Democratic party is still the best coalition of our concerns that we've been able to manage. So, you are right on, Will.

One typo I noticed:

"Your candndiate can't and/or won't . . .

[formercia]

30. We're stuck with Junior, like it or not.

Get off your asses and make sure the right candidate wins in the Democratic primary. It won't do any good if your candidate is another corporate lackey.

The last thing we need is to re-energize the wacko GOP base by making him a martyr.

Junior may turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to this country. He has pissed off so many people that change WILL happen.

[sinkingfeeling]

31. Very well put, Will. I'm with ya, but I doubt that the great wave of change to give the country back

to the people will not occur during my lifetime (I'm almost 60). I fear that the country will have to continue downward and hit rock bottom before enough of the population becomes aware that the American dream has died.

[tom_paine]

32. As always, you speak good common sense, Will.

It might not work, be we must try and stay unified for this reason.

[AngryAmish]

33. I think we would be better off destroying every Rethug in the nation

Justice for all.

[Usrename]

34. I understand your observations, but your solution escapes me.

Let's call the problem you are describing corporate fascism, or for better shorthand and clarity, we can call it the "Bush Doctrine." By that I mean this systemic process of reversing all of our constitutional guarantees of freedom and liberty. Others here have already pointed out how this systematic approach of creating complete lawlessness and complete control of the citizenry is eerily similar to the approach used in prewar Germany. But all that aside for a moment, lets just call this process the Bush Doctrine.

Now, the solution that you seem to be promoting is to gain a veto- and filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. As if that might have some tangible effect on our future. I don't understand how you could think that would make any difference at all. How would that change anything, except to make it more difficult to protect the Constitution and the people?

Let me make it a little more clear about what the real question is. Forget party affiliation for just a moment, and instead let's say that the Congress (and particularly the Senate, because the right to filibuster) breaks down into two groups:

Group 1 = those opposed to the Bush Doctrine

Group 2 = those that support the Bush Doctrine

This has absolutely nothing to do with party affiliation for this thought experiment (or, AFAICT, in the real world). Now, please explain why having a veto-proof majority in either Group 1 or Group 2 would gain us anything at all? Wouldn't we gain at least as much, if not more, by just having a president that belonged to Group 1, and who opposed the whole Bush Doctrine?

And the second point to consider is that we could easily end up with a Democratic super-majority and still have a super majority in Group 2, which is the real clear and present threat to the human race.

All in all, I do like your explanation of where we are and where we are headed.

Right now we have enough Dems to stop Bush if they were all opposed his program. It's not just a matter of having the numbers, but how the numbers can be counted. I think that with all the power that resides in the executive now, if we could somehow shoehorn a candidate in that really opposes the Bush Doctrine, then that single individual could do a hell of a lot more to put us back on a constitutional footing than a whole lot of Dems in Congress could do (if we could keep that person from getting assassinated, that is).

[WilliamPitt]

46. Fixing or even ameliorating the larger problems

is going to take a generation of work just to start to begin to start to scratch the paint. I won't live to see that task completed, but that doesn't matter one bit.

This is focusing on bringing back into relevance one foundational beam of Constitutional law, a part of the vital infrastructure at the core of the very idea that is America itself.

That's the thing. These Bush bastards figured out the secret. This governing principle of ours, and every right we hold dear, only have real force and power when the rule of law is respected and maintained. That rule of law, as has been proven, survived this long mostly on the good will of powerful officials who agree to obey it (more or less, of course).

Nixon eventually complied with the Supreme Court. He didn't have to, not really, which is what Bush & Co. have proven. But he chose to submit to the rule of law, because if he didn't, he knew he'd obliterate it. Clinton ordered the appointment of his own Grand Inquisitor. He didn't have to, not really, as we've learned. His staff were served with enough subpoenas to make enough confetti for a ten-year-long Canyon of Heroes tickertape parade. They showed up as ordered by those subpoenas. They didn't have to. Not really. As we've learned. They chose to submit.

When powerful officials choose not to submit, period, bite me, take your subpoena and cram it sideways, that's the only thing required to doom the rule of law. They tell the idea to go screw, and we all get screwed. The idea has force and power when submitted to, obeyed and respected. Otherwise, it's old parchment covered with old ink and nothing more.

So the idea of a Senate majority that can overmatch the Executive if it chose to, just the idea alone, is restorative to an enormous degree. This is all about the ideas. The country is an idea. Putting this particular idea back in the Constitutional process is what matters, at least in my opinion. The powers that have been claimed and asserted by this Executive are what is doing the most damage to the rule of law. Overmatch that Executive, and those powers will wither significantly, which will bolster the rule of law as the same time.

Whether or not that Senate majority ever actually confronts the Executive is beside the point. They wouldn't have to. Presidents can count noses, too, and a President who counts to 67 is going to approach legislation, nominations and all other dealings with that Senate carefully, because he/she will have to, because the Senate can overmatch the Executive. White House staffers might still defy subpoenas, but Capitol Police won't defy arrest warrants, search warrants...and those 67 noses can in fact nullify nearly every facet of an Executive's agenda, from the omnibus budget right down to what the Presidential salary should be.

The idea is what we save, and it has a whole bunch of power to it when there are 67 noses involved. Save that one idea, and a bunch of others will follow it to the party. Or so it is to be hoped.

:toast:

[DeanDem10]

35. Great post, but....

"67" only means something if they vote together. We know from bitter experience that Joe-mentum didn't. We know that dozens of Dems were willing to censure Move_on, but not the CEO for the P-O-S he's unleashed on the nation. They turned on their own, ate us for lunch, and spit us out, all of we members of MoveOn.org (millions of us). They devoured the very organization that defended Bill Clinton against impeachment, supported Al Gore, and fought to get the truth out about the war BEFORE it happened. Move-On was right. But our side of the aisle crapped on us. This isn't a minor thing. And it's symptomatic. They'll protect a dissembling insider, but oh, no, not the citizens the Constitution is supposed to protect. For an ad, for Crissakes. And they let Bush keep on keeping on.

So, what I am asking is: wouldn't we be crazy to ever assume a voting block because these reps swear allegiance to themselves and their Congressional system (and those they'll party with and golf with) and not really Americans? They throw us a bone now and again. Yeh, sure, they are better than the other side on some domestic issues. But they NEVER (repeat NEVER) will get off the crapper to actually deliver affordable (emphasis affordable) universal healthcare. What did Hillary do when the going got tough. She never tired again. She had years to do so. But she didn't. But they'll (several candidates) mandate a portion of our paychecks be handed over to insurance companies anyway.

I know the press release of Pelosi and Emmanuel about their accomplishments. Big Whoop. They are the bare minimum they should be doing. When it comes to the issues of our time: a hideously immoral and seemingly unending war, Constitutional government, the so called Patriot Act, torture, spying on their own citizens, destruction of evidence, impeachment, habeas corpus, and so many more issues, they are worthless.

You know, Will, I'd have been happy enough if they all voted as a block on war funding or anything else important. But they didn't. Too many voted with and for the Bush administration.

The biggest mistake the Democratic party ever made was to drive liberals out of the party. It means scrapping for the conservative vote and "buying" votes by pandering with a right tack. If we hadn't lost the Greens, Hillary wouldn't need to be partied by Rupert Murdoch. Pols give liberals nothing but shxx, scorn and contempt.

I didn't leave (and I doubt I could ever vote Green). For a time, I foolishly bought they DLC line. That was fifteen years ago. Now I've wised up. The hawkerooo Dems (which is just about all of em, whether they admit it or not) drove a truck through us because they live in paralytic McGovern phobia. They wedged grassroots Dems, marginalized liberals and permanently made it tough to win and tough to get anything done. Have you heard about the word-smithed DLC proposal from "Dream accounts." BHAWAWAWaha. They sound just like the GOP. Greens receive far too much blame. I used to blame em. Now I see that we pushed them out. It was our misdeeds and our misfortune. We handed off a piece of our party. The GOP never does that!!!!! And because we'ved pretty much kicked em out, it is so much harder to be a 67-member delegation. And if we do the membership will be DLC rich, I can promise you. And that, Will, is what I think is the problem. If we want "67" we have got to bring the Greens back and if we want to do that we have to give them something to come back for.

McG phobia is too funny because McG actually lost because he (absolutely) stunk as a candidate, not because he was "liberal." He may well be a nice man, but he was incompetent as a national campaigner. He had nothing, but a Margaret Thatcher-like sneer. He was cold. When he shook your hand he didn't look you in the eye, but rather over your shoulder to the next person. He couldn't inspire in speeches to save his life. Oh, and then there was the plumbers, spying on Nixon's enemies, dirty tricks (sound familiar?), elections called early by a compliant media, as if it was all over before those in the west even voted. And there was the Southern Strategy (hate). No positive lesson to take with us there. But you could count on southern Dems to believe a southern drawl was essential here. BS. (Did ya notice Hillary sprouts a drawl in the south?) Too funny and sad at the same time. Superstition is a really damaging thing. It gives us false reasons for why things happened and we shape our future responses around them. Campaigns, just like sports teams, are loaded up with superstitious practitioners (campaign staffers--don't beat me up here).

A candidate wins and so the campaign staff assumes everything they did was right. Victory may have had nothing to do with the laundry list of practices. For example robo-calling backfires in our area. Voters despise it. Try telling that to a campaign staff. They know everything. It "worked" last time, after all. Similarly, candidates behaviors are superstitious. When they win a second term they are SURE they are doing everything right, never mind that voters never think their reps are 100% anything.

What you are outlining here isn't enough to make me car enough to do those tasks I hate more than anything. Cold calls to voters, door-to-door GOTV. Stuff I can't stand, but have done because I care about my country. They want us to do their scutwork, and then they censure us. And honestly I hope I can move beyond that, but I promise nothing.

[KoKo]

39. "They want us to do their scutwork, and then they censure us."

Yes....that's what's very demoralizing for many of us. Interesting post. :thumbsup:

[rox63]

36. Powerful stuff, Will

I'll meet you on the barricades. ;)

[byronius]

37. This is the beginning of FIFTY YEARS of DEMOCRATIC DOMINANCE,

And high time, too.

[EVDebs]

38. Make all Republicans read Kevin Phillip's book Wealth and Democracy

Then, having come to their senses regarding the fate of our democracy, and fully understanding that, as Voltaire put it :'An ideal form of government is democracy, tempered with assassination', these malefactors of great wealth hopefully will put off using their weapon of choice knowing that to do so would be to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

The M/I/Congressional complex seems only capable of assassinating liberal/progressives, so the sooner we get the facts out to the military and the praetorian guard the better since one of our own will soon inhabit the Oval Office.

"You can have great wealth or a democracy, but you cannot have both"--Louis Brandeis.

[rucky]

40. If we have a Democratic prez, we won't need the 67 Senate seats.

Because the republicans will also be open to the possibility of reducing the powers of the Executive - at least enough of them.

[bleever]

41. I knew there was a pony in there somewhere.

;)

Seriously, not only is this a though provoking post, it was quite enjoyable to read.

Happiest of Holidays to you, Mr. Pitt.

[rhett o rick]

72. Though provoking at the least. Must say i like your signature flag. nm

[bleever]

75. "Thought" provoking was what I meant,

but maybe it means the same thing.

[rhett o rick]

76. yeah i knew what you meant. just givin you some stuff. nm

[bvar22]

42. Now we need a Veto-Proof Majority?

67 Democratic Senators won't do anything if they are simply corporate assholes masquerading as Democrats.

If we had 67 Feinsteins, Clintons, Pryors, Lincolns, Nelsons, Liebermans....we would STILL have

*more Perpetual WAR

*more Privatized Commons

*more For Profit HealthCare

*more Corporate Owned Government


The OP mentioned a "victory" for LABOR in the Clinton Administration, Family Medical Leave Act. THAT is the ONLY piece of legislation that moved the Country back to the Left in an 8 year Democratic Administration that included 2 years with a Democratic majority in Congress. Unfortunately, the Family Medical Leave Act affected LESS than .5% of the adult working population, and the benefits were so small as to be imperceptible to "Management".

The problem isn't that we don't have a "VETO Proof Majority".
The PROBLEM is that the Democratic Party no longer represents American who WORK for a Living.


It is becoming increasingly evident that TRUE reform will NOT be achieved by working within the Democratic Party. I personally witnessed the entrenched Corporate powers torpedo the campaign of a grassroots Populist Democratic candidate in the Primaries, 2004. They did this by buying the Primary and directly threatening the financial supporters of the grassroots candidate. (Minnesota, 2004..Scott Mortensen...DCCC "Kingmakers")

I'm getting older and increasingly jaded.
The performance of the Democratic Majority elected in 2006 is pretty much the last straw.
I no longer believe that the Democratic Party simply needs more money, and more seats, and then everything will be just peachy.

2 Years ago, we were told that IF we (the Democrats) have a majority in BOTH houses, we could STOP the NeoCon machine....so just send more $money$, GOTV, and "Trust Us".

NOW, we need a "Veto Proof" majority.....THEN everything will be peachy...so send more $MONEY$, work harder to get our friends elected, GOTV...and THEN everything will be peachy!! ...Trust Us.


The ANSWER is NOT simply to elect more "Democrats".
The ANSWER is to find a way to force the asshats already in Power to represent the People who elected them.

I DO have a glimmer of hope.
In 2006, the "nutroots" were able to defeat Joe Lieberman in the Democratic Primary.
It was a national effort co-ordinated over the "internets".
The other Democratic incumbents noticed.

Instead of just electing moreDemocrats, we need to use our collective power to hold our existing Democrats accountable. Eventually, they will be forced to start throwing us some crumbs.
If the Democratic Party starts to show some visible response to the Will of the People, the 25 Million registered Democrats who no longer bother to vote can be romanced back to the polls because it will actually MEAN something!







The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[WilliamPitt]

47. Take a look at post 46

Let me know what you think.

And what would you say to the idea that matters are too dire for letting anything become "the last straw"?

You aren't wrong, but what you propose (and I agree with) is a life's work that we won't see near to completion before we pass. Part of that has to include keeping guys like DeLay and Frist and Lott and Gingrich and Cheney away from majority power and Executive power. For a long time to come, that's going to mean fighting like tigers to elect better Dems, but it's also going to mean enduring and supporting and casting votes for crap-ass (D) people we need to keep these GOP winger maniacs marginalized. If we fail to keep them out of power, we will suffer cataclysmic setbacks in this long fight.

That should not be something we'd even consider allowing to happen.

Has this Dem majority done enough of what is required of them? Hell no...but they are not as bad as the doom-loving alternative. On a long enough timeline, and with sustained effort, there will be less and less crap-asses to put up with, and more quality officials replacing them as part of the accountability you seek...

...better officials whose priorities and legislation and judicial nominee oversight, over enough time, can start to slowly wean this nation off it's well-trained suicidal tendencies to support the authors of their misery. It can show them a better way, especially if something they assumed was either impossible or wrong (such as universal health care) makes their lives better...and now we've really got them thinking. :)

And getting them thinking, combined with re-regulation of media ownership rules along with bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, will start to provide actual news and facts to expand and give details to that thinking. The longer we do this, the less bastards we will have to endure as thinking people vote them out in favor of thinking people...

...and yes, these things are what I won't live to see, so for now and a long time to come, you are totally right, but so am I. Your ideas will fail without including mine, and vice versa...and it's going to take a long time to do either and both well enough to make a difference. Never mind that it's also one hell of a long-shot chance even in the best of circumstances. But it's also what has to be done, no matter what and even if doomed. These are things to fight for because they are worthy of our life-long efforts.

Thoughts?

[Truth2Tell]

49. What makes you think

67 Dems would re-regulate media rules and bring back the fairness doctrine? :shrug:

Your point c correctly describes our political perpetual motion machine. I'm all ears for creative ways to break the cycle. Is this one it? I'm thinking..... no. But keep trying.

[WilliamPitt]

52. I'm not talking about these current assbags.

It'll take time to clean house, as I said above. As for creative ways to break the cycle, it'd be pretty creative if progressive activists are able to sustain the effort needed to sucessfully achieve a long-term congressional election strategy. It'd be creative if those activists and their efforts ultimately lead to the ability to enact several major and fundamental reform efforts to fix several majorly and fundamentally fucked-up problems with this country.

It'd be creative because that kind of long-term strategy-guided effort hasn't been pulled off by progressives for a long time. And you know how true that is. This activist base barely able to work together for a single election cycle without going sideways. Infighting in the Green Party. Infighting in a bunch of other progressive/liberal activism groups. Infighting between groups. And even worse, the loss of a lot of involved people if we have the rotten luck of winning an election, as we saw when Clinton won. ("rotten luck" was a joke, of course)

I'm casting no stones, because by that time a lot of very good people were just exhausted from twelve years of trench-fighting against Reagan/Bush Sr. No blame, but that happens too. Winning one won't do it. Winning 10 is barely a beginning. That's some heavy shit to keep working on for the time required.

We're not as good at that kind of thing anymore, for all sorts of reasons. Creative? Yeah, that'd qualify. In the meantime, another creative thing would be to figure out how to adhere to a progfressive vision and still win elections in today's putrid political arena, i.e. how to do both at the same time without going crazy, failing utterly, or selling out one for the other eventually. I've been working on that one for years, and I'm still stumped.

:toast:

[Truth2Tell]

58. how to adhere to a progfressive vision and still win elections

See: Sherod Brown 06. See: Edwards finally opening the play book in Iowa.

Populism sells.

[Sam Ervin jret]

43. My mother told me "every GENERATION THINKS IT INVENTED SEX." point coming.

I guess the same is true for simple polyscience.

My mother also used to say, "you vote for the democrats because with them at least you get the scraps that fall from the table." She went through that Big War and that depression you may have read about(google it if not.)

I feel another point coming.

I feel there MAY be another solution to the power grab you have so eloquently if verbosely outlined.

Impeach, indict, convict, imprison the President the Vice President and all those under them who did their bidding and broke the law and set these precedents. This will roll back much of the damage done to our constitution and is the reason many of us have been crying out loudly against the roaring silence of "mass media" for so long and so hard.

Thank you for your contribution and keep people thinking!!!

[alfredo]

44. Help us in Kentucky to Ditch Mitch. Support Andrew Horne in 2008.

http://andrewhorne.org/main/

Our state organization, Change for Kentucky has endorsed Andrew Horne.


Change for Kentucky is part of Democracy for America.

[WilliamPitt]

48. How's he polling against MCConnell?

That't be a booming victory. McConnell has a lot to do with why it has been well-nigh impossible to get any GOP Senators to break ranks, even though several want to if only to salvage their chances in the coming election. Mitch apparently made it clear that if they do break with Bush, they'll be raising campaign cash by selling pencils on the Capitol steps, cuz they ain't getting money anywhere else.

"In October 2006, the Lexington Herald Leader published a series of articles based on a six-month examination of McConnell's fundraising.<9> The paper reported that McConnell had raised nearly $220 million during his Senate career. Most of the money went to the campaigns of his GOP colleagues; in return, the paper said, those colleagues "have rewarded him with power." "He's completely dogged in his pursuit of money. That's his great love, above everything else," said Marshall Wittmann, a former aide to Senator John McCain and a Christian Coalition lobbyist in Washington."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_Mcconnell#Fundraising.2C_contributors_and_influence

If they break, he'll cut them off. Facing a tough election with proper campaign funding is hard enough. Facing one with no dough and nobody returning your phone calls is a calamity in slo-mo. That's the weight McConnell swings, so burning his little feifdom down would be worthy of a statue on the Mall.

(you know this of course, alfredo; I'm putting it up so others can see how important your race is to the larger sceme)

[alfredo]

54. I haven't heard of any polling. If you want to stay on top of this

I can give you some contact info . I'll IM you a good contact of a Change for Ky officer.

[WilliamPitt]

55. PM or email instead, if that's OK.

IM drives me batshit.

And thanks.

[alfredo]

56. IM PM same to me. It should be in your inbox now.

[kentuck]

50. WillPitt, what most concerns me is that...

The Democrats will find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory...or is it the other way round?

But there is no way in the world that the Democrats should lose the next Presidential election but at the rate they are going, it is a possibility. In fact, I would say it is a probability.

The American people have an attention span of a gnat. By the time the next election rolls around, it will be the Democrats that are the "big spenders". It will be the Democrats that are preventing "victory" in Iraq. They are the "do-nothing" Congress with all the earmarks.

I have zero faith in our Democratic leaders at the moment. They have no ability to communicate or they simply refuse to use it. They have difficulty describing this huge pile of shit that George W Bush and the Republicans have left us.

[WilliamPitt]

53. This idea doesn't depend on them. Check post 46, tell me what you think.

They're just noses, and nothing more.

And real fixes are going to take a long time. These current gomers won't be in the mix, for good or ill.

Roll, wheel.

:toast:

[kentuck]

61. I don't think it's an Executive problem as much as it is

this particular Executive that totally disrepects all laws. He has a history of doing that from I have read an studied.

"This governing principle of ours, and every right we hold dear, only have real force and power when the rule of law is respected and maintained."

That is exactly right. I think Bush is an exception to the rule. He don't give a big shit about the laws. He has proven that. He and Cheney are the ultimate Machivellian schemers. They cover their tracks very well. They think like criminals. Most people don't think the way of criminals - they do.

[WilliamPitt]

78. "I think Bush is an exception to the rule"

That is the single most optimistic sentence I have read on this site in a long time.

Brother, I pray you are right.

But I keep thinking about one of the basic axioms of human history.

Q: What has always followed bad?

A: Worse.

:(

[kentuck]

85. I pray you are wrong...

But power is forever hungry.

[Kurovski]

57. "This is our common calamity..."

Something to keep in mind when the water doesn't turn into wine overnight.

K&r.

[undeterred]

59. So Will Pitt, why don't you shut up and run for office?

:shrug: really :shrug:

[Fire Walk With Me]

60. So your basic point is "vote"?

[Sam Ervin jret]

63. Stay engaged and educated as to the facts not the fiction being created for you. Then VOTE.

I must re-state my belief that only in punishing by the LAW all those involved with this power grab will we gain any of our constitutional stability back. Votes to do that are of course needed. But getting a majority of people who simply want the rule of LAW to return may be in the best interest of all.

This power struggle has fractured the psychotic "Sybil" personality of the republican party. Are they getting their votes from the religious right who expect the end of the world to come via assistance from the President of the USA?(why else do you think evangelists push for pro-Israeli legislation?) Are they fiscal conservatives? There are still a few "poor souls" in the republican party who think they are. Are they just the party of "old fashioned ideals"?(that means every thing was great back in the "old days" - if you were a white man) Or as it seems, are they really the face of a mix of what is a post cold war military industry and the new world order non-nationational(not international)mega business complexes using the latest in media manipulation and pop psychology to get disgustingly rich at the expense of the world and every other living thing in it?

I believe and I hope that this divided beast will turn on itself and help in it's own demise. We need balance and law abiding people in a two or more party system or this whole experiment will end. The writers of the Constitution gave us the tools to make it through this crisis. Again I hope and believe we will use them.

But then again, what do I know, I'm from MA. We voted for McGovern.

[WilliamPitt]

82. Go Pats!

;)

"Don't blame me, I voted for McGovern"

Remember those old bumper stickers?

:toast: to Wayland. Nice town. :)

[Fire Walk With Me]

92. They are forcing us through a two-part process.

1. Create wars and rumors of wars. Cultivate continuous fear, a "may happen again at any moment" psychology.

2. Present a solution (that you've had waiting). Religion. Where do people turn to for comfort in times of fear? Are there atheists in foxholes?

Create a problem so that you can present the solution of your own choice. Want to control people? Get them afraid and then offer them a tried-and-true solution. Glassmakers throwing stones through windows to create business...

Winning is easy when your victim is desperate.

This is basic psychology. I'm astonished that more psychologists have not stood up and described this process for everyone to hear.

This is also basic sadism. I've said before that these people -enjoy- torture and utterly dominating others. Seems that they've had to burn videos of torture which happened to be in Cheney's offices. Now we know who gets off to what.

Google around for "headspace" and "topping" to learn more about the tactics of sadists. Combine basic behavioural psychology and a belly full of visciousness and you've got BushCo, and the problems that we must understand and solve.

And these problems are not going to simply end with the next election. They have screwed us via the international marketplace and have stacked the deck regarding resources. Watch for more housing loan defaults, the dollar to shrink further, and their profits to increase (both financial and the "rewards" of creating destruction).

The Alice Miller books are a good place to begin.

[rhett o rick]

95. Of course vote, but voting is not the answer. We have to convince many people that

merely voting is not enough. In many if not most cases by the time you get to vote you have a poor selection and you rely on the lesser of evils. This is not helping the problem. We need to participate in the process to get good qualified people into the process that has become corrupted. We have to convince the Party Machine that we are not sheep and we will not support them if they do not become more representative. This might require drastic measures but is essential for our wellbeing as a nation.
1. Be informed
2. Participate in the local and state party organizations.
3. VOTE
4. Maintain direct contact with your representatives.
5. Never ever vote for anyone that doesn't support your principles, including in a lessor of evils situation.

[existentialist]

62. Doesn't filibuster proof require a MERE 60?

This is actually meant as a point of encouragement?

I think this one aspect of changing things is just a little bit easier then as stated.

[kentuck]

64. Filibuster proof but not veto proof.

So there would be no use for Democrats to try and pass anything since it would be vetoed anyway so they would need 67 votes to vote straight Party line in order to be voth filibuster-proof and veto-proof.

[existentialist]

67. yes,

But if that we also have a Democratic President. . . .

[Vilis Veritas]

65. Man...I read your words and...

I just say to myself that the this feels an awful lot like the farmer calling the cows while standing at the door with the knife behind his back.

Two sets of corporate overlords both vying for power, heavy industry and soft commodity. It has been that way for nearly 100 years. One of them just pulled off the gloves and showed us that they have no respect for the cogs that turn their machine. The other bunch is standing on the sidelines 'DOING NOTHING' and trying to make us think they are any better.

Only one solution left. Cut the Corporate umbilical and send them back to where they were when the Nation was created. Remove person hood for corporations, revoke their rights as individuals.

THEN...AND ONLY THEN...WILL THIS NATION HAVE ANY F'ING CHANCE TO RECOVER.

PERIOD.

[WilliamPitt]

80. "Cut the Corporate umbilical"

Righteous. Awesome.

Now...HOW?

I offered a plan. You made a demand. Um...

Top me.

"Just do it" isn't a plan, FYI.

Go.

[razors edge]

87. How about a class action law suite?

Whereas the nearly 300 million plaintiffs have proven standing from the continued deprivations inflicted upon them from over a century of illegitimate law that established a privilege of person hood to an inanimate entity free from the responsibilities and accountability instilled upon the individual citizen.......

Name the Federal Government and all corporations.

It may never fly far, but it may wake up some of the sleeping, and a "class" action in a class war is an apt framing of the debate.

[lonestarnot]

88. AMEN!

[flying_wahini]

68. thanks - I needed that! k&r

(followed by slap in the face) remember that ad] and I think a lot of us do
;)

It helps to remain focused..... now all we gotta do is
get them elected!

[southerncrone]

69. Your are correct, sir.

Items c & e are the root of our current problems. How can we possibly get "honest & non-corruptible" congresspersons if they must first build a reputation by climbing the local & state political ladders. The problems that exist on the federal level also exist locally. (Corporate or big donor funding of campaigns.) By the time they are "primed" for federal seats, they are already addicted to the "funding whores" & skilled at playing the game to keep that $ support coming.

Federally funded elections with equal time required of all media outlets for EACH candidate, regardless of their notoriety.

I pray for a miracle daily. We desperately need one.
:yourock:

[ScooterFibby]

70. Supermajority!

Supermajority, Supermajority Supermajority!

Yes, yes, yes!

[GMFORD]

71. Yep, you hit the nail right on the head.

The congress is more powerful than the president, or should be. I too care more about electing a veto-proof majority in '08 than who the liar-in-chief will be.

Having said that, I'd sure like to see Biden win. He's charismatic and gives a dandy speech. ;)

[WilliamPitt]

81. Welcome to DU.

:toast:

And thank you.

[rhett o rick]

73. Very interesting post. But I am a little slow and had a hard time finding the point.

If the point is that we need to win more elections, then bravo I'm in. But to me the first step is to develop a strategy. I am having a hard time finding anyone talking about strategy. We in DU have some influence, let's us it. Establish a strategy and then tactics. Pleeez we have enough rants.

[WilliamPitt]

79. Including this one.

"Pleeez we have enough rants."

;)

You first. I'm all ears.

[rhett o rick]

89. i must have been tired when i wrote that. Don't mean that at all. I do as much ranting

as anyone. Can I take that back. And I wasn't intending to be critical of your post but would like some discussion of solutions here. Strategies that we can start implementing. There is a large audience here and people so much smarter than myself. For example, Qwest refused to cooperate with BushCorp re. spying on citizens, we should acknowledge that. ATT did knowingly violate the Constitution. We should acknowledge that also. The strategy being to hit the corrupt corporations where it hurts them the most, in the pocket book.

I would like to see in DU open posts that follow a specific issue to it's death. What's the latest and the plan for each of the major investigations, etc.

Pleez excuse my post, i need to think before i type.

Have a good holidays.

[WilliamPitt]

90. Same to you.

:toast:

[rhett o rick]

96. Thanks. Please see post 95, link in message, I think I did a better job

of stating my thoughts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2509430&mesg_id=2519532

[OnyxCollie]

77. K & R .

Wonderful. If fair elections can be guaranteed, this just might happen.

[barbtries]

83. i was too late to recommend this

but, you made it worth reading. well done.

[frogcycle]

84. bravo Will

Rarely in the course of history, if ever have tyrants been removed peaceably

Sure there have been plenty of cases of "the overthrow of..." but those were not systematic corrections under law - they were people with pitchforks

But then again, there has never been a country like this with a Constitution like ours that found itself in this situation

We are, clearly, at a point in our nation's young tenure that the Founders may have envisioned; they seem to have tried to provide for it an actual SYSTEM capable of self-correction. It's called We the People. The collective wisdom of the organism that is all the people is hoped to be sufficient to get the critter to pause in its tracks as it heads into danger; think for a moment, and then slowly turn and go another way.

Ant colonies, schools of fish, flocks of geese are all composite organisms. We are too; its just that the individuals have more differences and thus the flock behavior is less evident. Why do we speak of the behavior of "the market" as if it were an organism? It is nothing but the collective decisions of millions of individuals (some of those automated electronically, but following human-defined rules). And yet pundits speak of the moods of "the market" as if it were a beast.

Well, the beast that is the US Government, like the stock market, is overdue for a correction. The pendulum must swing, if it is to be preserved, else it will fail to turn and go another way but, rather, it will tumble off the precipice into the abyss of feudalism toward which it is headed.

To quote that eloquent philosopher, Yogi Berra, "When you come to a fork in the road, take it."


What you speak of is many of the forks in the road already encountered in which an ill-advised choice was made (eg, corporate personhood) and the several steps short of outright revolution the organism can and must take to get off the path into the abyss and find a better one. The organism in its collective wisdom will always have second thoughts - unlike ant colonies, it consists of critters with more intelligence and more independence, so its behavior tends to appear more schizophrenic. It is up to the enlightened members of the society to educate the others as you do in your writing, to influence, and to lead.

This critter is sick - very, very sick. It has cancer. The autoimmune system has been suppressed by continuing doses of stupid administered by the invaders. They have taken over one of its last defenses - the "free and independent press" - which is supposed to sound the alarm, alert the white blood cells and t-cells to fight this disease.

Keep up the good fight - keep thinking, and communicating, and sounding the alarm, and pointing out the actions necessary to man the ramparts.

See, I can ramble almost as much as you!

[BeFree]

91. The point is

I saw you on a video the other day... a brief shot. Were you really wearing an ear-ring?

Anyway, yes, it's best we elect democrats. Overwhelmingly so. 67 or so.

Don't worry, my Pitt boy, We'll do what we can. One man, one vote, and all that. But throw out the electronic vote counters, first, then we can talk. Otherwise we're just pittin' in the wind. Eh?

[Stuart G]

93. correct..

Needs to happen. hope it will............(nt)

[LaStrega]

94. "... slaughtering so many words along the way."

I like it when you do that. You do it really *really* well.

I regret I didn't see this sooner or it'd get a big fat rec from moi ... alas all I can do is kick.