Two decades later, "1984" (pulls no punches)

Status
Not open for further replies.

jsalcedo

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Messages
3,683
By Vin Suprynowicz


Why are the Democrats -- the party of my youth -- so widely dismissed as pathetic poseurs these days?

Let's see. George W. Bush makes a big speech about how America promotes democracy throughout the world. How do the Democrats respond? By pointing out that our Founding Fathers purposely set us up with a Republic, while strongly warning against direct "democracy" as nothing but "mob rule," likely to vote the constitutional rights of minorities out of existence at the first opportunity?

Of course not.

Do Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi -- sitting there stiff-backed, our modern equivalents of Herman and Lily Munster -- calmly acknowledge, "OK, if Mr. Bush can figure out a way to promote participatory government in the Mideast, we'll admit that's a good idea and we'll do what we can to support him, even if we think selective bombardment and invasion under false pretenses should not be our preferred opening gambit.

"But let's be honest about this: It was a Republican administration that sent in Major Smedley Butler and the U.S. Marines to overthrow the democratically elected government of Nicaragua, forcing the legislature in Managua to sign a peace treaty in English as American warships loomed offshore, a treaty giving us the right to run the Nicaraguan railroads under the laws of the state of Maine.

"It was a Republican administration that overthrew the popular government of Mohammed Mossadegh, the 'weeping mullah,' in Iran in 1953, re-installing the Pahlavi shahs, whose secret police surely ranked them among the most repressive despots in recent history.

"Let's not even get started on the regime-change assassinations we backed in places like Chile and Vietnam, as little as 30 and 40 years ago. And if we're so in favor of democracy and self-determination, why is President Bush making nice with KGB assassin Boris Putin, when just last week the Russian special forces murdered Aslan Maskhadov, the last elected president of independent Chechnya?

"If we're really going to change our stripes now, a good start might be to acknowledge to our own people the things we did that caused our government to be so widely feared, hated and distrusted, out there in the world at large."

Do the Democrats say any of this? Not in public, they don't. And why? Because they're complicit. The Democrats have signed on to the old way of doing things; Bill Clinton set out on many a foreign lark (albeit far less effectively, being the distracted dilettante he was). They have no principled alternative plan or world-view to offer.

Loyal opposition? The only thing the modern Democratic Party can find to "oppose" are such irrelevant cosmetic features as the churchgoing habits and adopted Texas drawls of the ancient Connecticut banking family known for more than a century as the Prescott Bush clan, while shrieking about "tax cuts for the rich," when this other set of elite millionaires who hasn't done their own grocery shopping in decades secretly defines any private-sector slob who works hard enough to own a house as "rich."

The only guy they could find to run against Bush was another, less adept Yalie poseur from Skull & Bones, and the only "agenda" they have to offer is to require us to ban smoking, use helmets and seatbelts, sort our garbage into different colored baskets, and hand over our foreign policy to Jacques Chirac and Kofi Annan. Meanwhile, they block economic development anywhere in this country under the rubric of "smart growth" and protecting any "geographically distinct population" of scraggly weed or bug their babbling ecofreak subsidiaries can locate.

Oh, and -- of course -- ever higher taxes.

Some "alternative."

-- Las Vegas police Lt. Steve Franks is concerned about the midnight smash-and-grab theft of 1,700 blank Nevada driver's licenses from the DMV office on Donovan Way on March 7 -- along with a digital camera and all the other paraphernalia necessary to turn them into realistic IDs -- asserting last week the purloined documents could easily be used to pass through airport security checkpoints, etc.

Kind of like the way all those Arab hijackers got through our security checkpoints by showing their fake IDs, three-and-a-half years ago?

This follows the conviction last year of a Nevada DMV clerk who took $300,000 in bribes to sell unauthorized licenses and IDs to some 1,000 illegal aliens -- that they know of.

So, do we have this straight?

1) All that billion-dollar "check-your-ID" crap at the airport has improved our safety and security not one iota, instead accomplishing nothing but creating jobs for thousands of new blue-gloved butt-gropers-in-training while further conditioning the American populace to be ready to show our "government-issued photo ID" on demand, any time, anywhere, and ...

2) The "driver's license" is nothing of the sort, but rather constitutes the nine-digit nationally coded "internal passport and travel document" which Franklin Roosevelt solemnly promised our Social Security numbers would never be turned into?

Just checking.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Mar-13-Sun-2005/opinion/774547.html
 
"Why are the Democrats -- the party of my youth -- so widely dismissed as pathetic poseurs these days?"

Is this a rhetorical question or does he really not know?

JT
 
Notice how he doesn't mention the party in power when we were supporting corrupt regimes in Chile and Vietnam 30-40 years ago. I guess that would show that the Democrats have been every bit as bad in their choice of friends, only less adept at using them to further US interests.
 
Lost in the rediculous semantic word games and ancient history, he completely missed the real answer to the question:
Why are the Democrats -- the party of my youth -- so widely dismissed as pathetic poseurs these days
The answer is simple - the Democrats of today are not the Democrats of your youth.
The Democrats of today are left-wing socialists: anti-capitalist, anti-religion, anti-gun, and anti-freedom. A real old time Democrat would be horrified at what the party has turned into.

In fact, a strong case can be made that today's Republican party is pretty much the same as the Democratic party of the 1950's and early 60's.
 
"a strong case can be made that today's Republican party is pretty much the same as the Democratic party of the 1950's and early 60's."

Thank you, Rebar. Hope you have better luck than I convincing the modern Democrats of this. Gee, Kennedy escalated a war in a far off country where we really didn't have a clue. He lowered taxes to help fight off a recession.

Lots of similarities......
 
My opinion:

Many people who voted for Bush are not that thrilled with his actions, myself included. We voted "for" him because we thought John Kerry would have been worse for the country. Classic "lesser of two evils". This judgement is inherently subjective, depending on an individual's core values. For me, I know in my heart that John Kerry, and the rest of the current Democratic leadership, would have enacted major gun control in the next four years had they been in power. This single issue cost the Democrats my vote.

Keep in mind that I am not making excuses for the Republican's actions; they are reprehensible. The sad fact is that I honestly do not think the Democrats would have acted any better. I make this conclusion after years of observation - it will not change over night.


I think that the Democrats are missing a major opportunity to capture a big chunk of the vote by embracing gun control. They could use this opportunity to "reinvent" themselves (for real, not just rhetoric) and develop a consistant ideology of individual liberty rather than selectively choosing which rights to defend. As long as they pick and choose they cannot be trusted. I do not trust the Republicans for this reason as well.
 
Sheesh! The Democratic Party cannot "reinvent" itself so long as the same people are in power and running their show. The people who've created the present structure believe in their deal, their views, their policies, etc. They believe!

You think Sens. Kerry and Clinton are gonna take up IPSC competition and book elk hunts in Montana? That Pelosi is gonna call for smaller government and less welfare?

This general group of maybe a thousand people at state and federal levels, and including the Hollywood set and the George Soros types, are all contributory to what the Democratic Party is right now. Unless they go away, there will be no real change beyond mouth music. There cannot be real change; people do not change whatever core beliefs they have, particularly when they also have political power.

The only way I see for change to be possible is for more rational people who are basically Democratic Party in their fundamental views to begin running for office at local levels and state levels, and replace the ultra-left over some lengthy period of time.

How else can there be meaningful change?

Art
 
What does this have to do with 1984? I'm re-reading the book right now actually.

This is one of those arguments that really didn't need to be written. Both sides are screwed up, the author knows that. He's not bringing any new info to light, and he is offering no solutions or ideas. He's just ranting. He should start an LJ account or something...
 
The Democratic Party cannot "reinvent" itself so long as the same people are in power and running their show.
The problem is, the democratic party has no room to reinvent into, even if they wanted to. The republicans have pretty much swallowed up the "traditional" democratic positions. Many people say there isn't much difference between them as it is, if the Democrats move back to their roots, there will be none at all.
 
hooray! someone is paying attention out there.

i will say however, with 9-11, most of these airport regs would hav ebee nput in no matter what, AND although there are pages and pages of worthless regulations on air travel, some of them are good, and i really don't think a 9-11 situation will happen again, or at least it will be much much more difficult, or else we would already have seen more planes crashing.

security was weak at airports, it is a bit better now.
of course, ANY admin would have done that, and none of them did it in time.

we can also think of "osama determined to attack in US" and our current admin ignoring that.

overall , i agree- this supposedly "freedom oriented" republican party does not appear to be so at all. i thought repubs were against big government?

Democrats real faults are anti gun (which i still dont understand, i say this because i consider myself a dem, in favor of liberal freedoms , and seems to me RBKA fits in there),

and dems are pro all that stuff we shouldnt mention , which again i don't understand pro gun more freedom people being against.

oh well
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top