Resurrect LBJ? I got nothin’.

Still voting Democrat. I’ll take incompetence over straight up evil any day.

Move to Australia, we have cake.

i am sort of thinking the commune people might have the right idea. you know, just go hang out on the farm and get stoned while the world melts down around you. you can’t do anything about it anyways. lol.

I’m not enraged at Obama, more so at Republicans for getting in the way of progress and at people who made him their golden calf.

Chris Hedges: Death of the Liberal Class

We yearn for a meritocracy while the polity deludes itself with visions of a democracy. The concepts are mutually exclusive.

BTW, the *Constitution* does *not* enumerate a separation of Church and State. The _Bill of Rights_ comes as close as the Founders came

_Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof_

The *operative* words are “establishment” and “prohibit [free expression]“.

IOW: The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are *not* the same Document.

This sums up what happening here in usa.

Klepsacovic:

I’m not enraged at Obama, more so at Republicans for getting in the way of progress and at people who made him their golden calf.

Not really fair to blame the republicans when it was the democrats holding up there own agenda. They didnt need any republican support to pass any bills as they held the majority.

What we need now is some common sense governing. I own a business and i cannot pay my bills and im going further it debt by the day what do i do? Take out another loan on my business to pay my bills and raise my prices making my costumers leave or cut my overhead and run a sale to bring in more business and get new costumers.

Well ask New York what happens when you raise taxes. Same will happen to the USA those that can afford to will leave ie the “rich”.
Then who will pay the taxes and what will they do with there business?

Wow Lum – I agree with you almost completely.

Stupid greedy Republicans not willing to pay the bills but still spending money. And stupid Democrats trying to waste even more money.

While we all argue about who is a witch and who used the word”‘retard.”

Contrary to some of the smug kvetching by conservative commentators or the lamentations of liberal apologists and Administration mouthpieces, much of the American left is profoundly disappointed with our current President, not because of his failure to be the Black Jesus or because he simply wasn’t able to solve the greatest financial crisis this country has ever faced with a fine speech, but rather because he sold us a bill of goods. For, in fact, Barack Obama, as the centerpiece of his campaign, promised us that he represented that for which we wished for most. No…not two chicks at the same time. The other thing. He gave us hope, for perhaps the first time in many of our lives as voters, that we weren’t electing a politician.

The excitement surrounding Obama the candidate had precisely nothing to do with any policy prescription, any promised legislative priority, any solemn pledge regarding government programs. Nor did it have to do with simple charisma- the recognition that here was a guy that could, at least, really turn a phrase. It wasn’t even precisely the promise of “change”, as represented by damn near anybody who wasn’t either George W. Bush or Dick Cheney. At it’s core, the appeal of Obama was that we desperately wanted somebody who would be truthful to us, regardless of the political consequences, who would solemnly tackle the multiple third-rail issues of American politics without demagoguery, without extremism, without absurdist red-meat talking points, and who would, in essence, provide strong leadership in lifting the political discourse of the country out of the crude depths to which it had sunk. Boy, were we duped.

The President and his underlings have spent a great deal of time blaming the expected upcoming Republican electoral landslides on “apathy” amongst the liberal base. This represents a profound misreading of the left-leaning electorate. Apathy suggests that the fault lies with the base itself…that their sloth will doom Democrats and, by extension, Obama himself, undeservedly. Disappointment, on the other hand, suggests the responsibility lies with the leadership itself, a leadership that, contrary to all promise and hope, has repeatedly put politics before principle and, invariably, when faced with opportunities to show the courage of conviction that might serve as a needed counterpoint to the worst of the demagoguery and hysteria infusing much of our current social and political fabric, has instead chosen the path of meek, milquetoast, focus-grouped defensive posturing. On issue after issue such as gay marriage, don’t ask don’t tell, Guantanamo, the cynically misnomered “Ground Zero mosque”, the Wall Street bailout and many others, the cravenness with which Obama has failed to make a strong appeal to the better nature of humanity or to spend any political capital in the cause of a higher ideal than party politics has been far more crushing to those energized by the Obama campaign than any electoral loss. Even those supposed cornerstones of the Administration to date, the health-care reform bill and the financial reform bill represent, at best, minor tweaks at the margins of issues calling for bold, transformative action. The fact that the right has pointed to this turgid legislation as evidence of a significant American lurch towards socialism, a charge that has left has felt the need to dignify with our trademark repeated sputtering, is simultaneously humorous and deeply depressing.

In the end, the very real risk is that the legacy of the Obama Presidency is likely to be lasting bitterness amongst the moderate and left-leaning factions of the American electorate, the increased cynicism in regards to government and the hostility that will greet the next candidate who promises to rise above the hyperpartisan political fray and actually grapple with the most pressing issues facing the country. When our political Messiah finally does come, how in the world are we to recognize him now?

I have to admit, I’m conflicted. My first instinct is to vote for the biggest lunatics, whichever party they run under, so we can get to the complete disintegration phase (i.e. Civil War II) faster.

After all, that gives us our big war to “save the economy”, our religious war to purge the heathens/Jihadists/atheists/Christianists/Moonies/whatever-floats-your-boat, and we get to use far more of those trillions of dollars of weaponry we have piled up before it rusts away, all faster than under almost any other realistic option.

Talk about Full of Win (except for the rivers of blood, of course… unless you’re into that kind of thing).

All that pent-up anger can finally let loose on those who deserve it… i.e. our former countrymen who won’t capitulate and agree with us completely.

That said, I’ll still be voting a straight Dem ticket, aka Republican-lite. I think it’s an important academic question to be answered, whether the Banksters/MotU’s pro-active greed and stupidity can destroy the country faster than our own collective passive ignorance.

Taking the shortcut by going with the party the banksters apparently favor might muddy the waters.

It’s an answer that might help the remnants of the rest of the world, once it all shakes out. A legacy, if you will.

And besides, I’ve always been a big fan of post-Apocalyptic settings.

AUSTRALIANS ALL LET US REJOICE
FOR WE ARE YOUNG AND FREE

Politics as a lifetime career – caused by the lack of term limits – is the fundamental flaw in our system. It causes government to not be about governance for the good of the nation, but instead mires it in the petty machinations of maintaining a lifetime in office.

Unfortunately the only people who can enact such term limits are the ones who oppose them the most – the career representative or senator.

I would love to see (combined with term limits) a “none of the above” category on all ballots which disqualifies both candidates from re-running for that office for that term and requires another election with new candidates.

Of course neither will happen, but one can dream.

So tl,dr: The Republicans are all nuts, with the Tea Party being the new black shirts. And Democrats are being weeny an impotent as usual.

Who do you vote for?

…I feel sorry for you America.

(…this is first time posting here. I hope my icon is pink. )

To put it another way, we are currently down towards the Allies / United States corner of the triangle, but China is FURIOUSLY pumping influence into our little flag shifting us towards their corner, hoping to strike some sweet deals for energy and resources.

Yes, term limits are needed, but there’s also another part to that equation: “winner take all” needs to go. We need instant runoffs as well.

Let’s say there are four candidates for an office; one of them is “almost perfect,” two of them are “OK,” and one of them is “terrible.” I really want A to win, but I’ll settle for B or C. Who do I vote for? “Sensible people like me” (IMO, of course) are going to split their votes on the three competent candidates, while the “lunatics” are going to vote for the worst possible candidate. In a winner take all system, that could lead to (and has lead to) the worst possible candidate being elected with considerably less than 50% of the vote.

If we had a system of runoff elections, I could vote my conscience in the first election, then settle for whichever successful candidate came closest to matching my standards in the final runoff.

Sadly, the current system leaves the American people at the mercy of the Republicrat Party (because frankly, there’s no real difference between the two parties, they both are terrible at handling national finances). There are other factors that lead to the dominance of the two major parties, but “winner take all” guarantees that one of the two major party candidates will almost always win, since many voters will be afraid to “throw away their vote” on someone who has “no chance of winning.”

Flaime, I think it’s more that the most extreme members of the political Right have latched onto the Tea Party movement as a means to advance their agenda. Most people I’ve met who like the Tea Party care more about the message of fiscal conservatism than anything else. Are there racists, bigots, and loonies involved in the Tea Party movement? Absolutely. But there are plenty of bigots and loonies on the political Left as well.

More importantly, this two-dimensional Left – Right spectrum really doesn’t adequately represent the bulk of the electorate. I have a feeling what most people want at this point is a party that is fiscally conservative without being saddled with hypocritical “family values” and the shadow of bigotry. Unfortunately, our system makes it very difficult for third parties to have a real impact (yes, a John Anderson or a Ross Perot can affect the results of an election, but it’s not clear that either had a “positive” effect).

Maybe its time to think about switching the system to a direct democracy?

It bugs me that, at least in Ohio, where there is a ‘big’ decision, like changing property tax rates, library levies, etc, its put up for a direct vote.

So the legislature is for ‘lesser’ laws? Why have them at all?

Now *that’s* how to write a political rant. Thanks for the read, Scott. I really want to disagree with your assessment and spout off some “hope” and “change” slogans or something, but….. I got nothin’.

This problem is both Democrats and Republicans.

I’m not that strong on economics, but if I understand it correctly the U.S.A is financially secure so long as the Dollar remains the world’s “reserve” currency. I think that basically means that everyone else keeps so much of their currency reserves in Dollars that no-one can afford to call in U.S. debt, no matter how out of hand it becomes, for fear of rendering their own currency worthless.

No other country wants its currency to become the Reserve. Japan has spent decades working to prevent the Yen taking the role on, which has looked likely now and again. China certainly isn’t interested; it’s doing far to well shadowing the Dollar.

Unless I misunderstand it, it’s effectively impossible for the U.S. government to “go bankrupt” under the current circumstances, as there is no meaningful limit to the amount of debt it can incur.

None of that’s going to help with the social unrest and potential political instability that massive, prolonged unemployment could bring, though.

There is a disturbing about of people here that think war will fix things all functioning under the faulty assumption that they will some how survive it. I’m sure a few of you are trying to be funny but still, it’s a bad meme to invoke.

Joe:

…Um, am I the only one who thinks that Obama’s actually done this?

No, there is undoubtedly plenty of other insane people out there or those who haven’t been paying attention and think everything is all hunky dory. In case you didn’t know, his administration has expanded the war on terror, revived the patriot act, sold us out to the chinese, and pretty much has done nothing of substance based on the ideas from which he campaigned on. Are you posting from an alternate dimension perhaps? In this dimension, the sky is blue. When you stick your head out the window, what do you see?

@JodiMae, I believe in fiscal conservatism, and I think many others believe in this as well. Budda once said your view of the others is just a reflection of you, there is some truth to that.

And because wealth is created, properly lower tax rate will increase wealth. And you don’t always need higher taxation to balance the budget, you can also cut spending. That is what normal people do. The landlord can only squeeze so much out of his peasants to support his life style.

The problem with both parties is that both of them want to spend more money, because spending will get people happy, and they want the next in line to worry about the consequences.

Government can’t be too big. When people see roads been build by the stimulus money, they think it is from the government. But in a small village when they want to build a road and each family has to pay a small portion of it, people will ask “Is this road really needed?”

The Claw:

Move to Australia, we have cake.

Love too. Except that Australia makes it nearly an act of divine intervention to move there and get a job. You have to have the job first, from a company willing to do the paperwork to get you in. Even then its not a sure thing as there are limits to how many per year. Apparently being a 6 USD figure a year earner, with cash in the bank, isn’t enough to even make me vaguely interesting to Australia as a person. Citizen, temporary worker, or anything beyond short duration tourist.

When the Republicans/Tea Party is elected in November and they take office the first of 2011, how do you think they are going to reduce taxes to anyone but the top 1%? The tsunami of debt generated by the three previous administrations and illicit wars will wipe out all of us who have not already had it happen in 2008. We are facing the reality of Social Security being privatized-think the volatility of the stock market-Medicare being phased out and the elderly left to fend for themselves; after all in this country they are dispensible. We will be on the road to One World Government and financial control. For some time the “Federal Reserve” has been owned by the financial industry, not the U.S. government, and when things get tight they simply print more money that makes it worth less and less. The cost of living index is and has been a farce, manipulated however the ruling factor wishes. If you vote GOP, there’s to be no weeping and wailing when things don’t go your way after 1/11. You earned them.