The Obligatory Political Thread - December 2007

[Kris@WLP]

OK, since I'm thinking political thoughts right now, here's a thread to discuss the obviously volatile 2008 elections- starting with a poll.

I'll have more to say about my own politics in a few days... waiting for various reasons.

[Kris@WLP]

[MrPaladino]

It's come to this, hasn't it. I don't know what else to say... "hopelessly corrupt" is such an apropos descriptor for the Democrats and the Republicans given the fact that it's almost a certainty that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee, and Barack Obama will be selected as her vice presidential candidate. To me, this is an interesting, but ultimately losing proposition. Aside from moving the entire Clinton clan back into the white-house, Mrs. Clinton's politics have shown a DRASTIC move to the Right, far beyond the moderate policies of her husband's administration. And Obama himself is barely viable as he is a Freshman in every sense of the term. On the Republican side of things, I'm hearing that the candidate to watch for if you wanted "decency" is Huckabee. But truth be told, I can't substantiate that claim except to say that people following things much more closely than I have suggested that Paul is a kook on an order that David Kucinich couldn't touch, Guiliani is a putz (the amount of personal baggage he brings with him makes me leery. [previous statement retracted.]) and the rest are hopelessly out of touch with reality. Tough choices... and these are supposed to be the "front-runners" in the biggest election in the land. God... help us all.

[Crunch Jackson]

[Dvandom]

[bar1scorpio]

Well, Clinton is a vote getter of people who feel guilty about the oppression of women.

Obama will get votes form people who feel guilty about the oppression of blacks.

Huckabee will win, because he used to be a fat guy. And obesity crosses racial & gender lines.

[K-MacK]

(Sigh) I'm still researching who is the least damaging of the candidates.
Most of the Democrats are straw-men, who will work to get either HELL-ary or O-bamma elected.
Ditto for most of the Republicans. They're straw.
None of the other parties have a snowball's chance of anything happening.

Take a good look: Every one of the front-runners supports the extreme end of their party. Nobody gives a damn about the average-centerist-American citizen, who just wants good government and a break from the "Gott mit Uns" rightists and the "We'll save you-our way" leftists. Right now, the United States political system is (what we deserve) like a big tree with a rotted-out heart. There in nothing in the center-zip, zero, nada. One of these days there will be a wind stonger than the bark can support, and boom! We're down and the concept of representative government dies with us.

It looks like the Libertarians have become like the Communists, ie; an economic philosophy trying to be a political philosophy and failing miserably.
Maybe that's what we need: a government that is so bad that the People decide to actually get involved in running this country again; even though it means they have to miss Jeopardy or As the World Turns to do so. Maybe this is the dose of salts we need, to get the process re-started.

[Crunch Jackson]

[Kris@WLP]

Incidentally, I come out here on that quiz:



As you can see, I'm not well represented by any of the major candidates, by this measure anyway...

[Crunch Jackson]

If I remember my positioning on the poll correctly, I was about midway between the center line and the left border, and pretty close to the dividing line between libertarian and authoritarian.

Not as far to the left as I thought I was, but still vastly farther leftward than any of the candidates. I was also surprised by my position on the lib/auth axis -- I always had myself picked as being more authoritarian than I apparently am...

[K-MacK]

What's the most annoying is the fact that virtually every candidate except for two of them are high in the Authoritarian/Conservative area; as in- they Like their Power, and they not only want to keep it, they want more!

Talk about choosing between a rock and a hard place...
Either way, you're gonna hurt, afterwards.

[tyrant]

[K-MacK]

I wonder what the "Usual Suspects" are going to say to the Supreme Court's partial decision on the Second Amendment? That may be the thing that decides me as to the lesser of the evils to vote for.

[Kris@WLP]

[Kris@WLP]

[K-MacK]

[Wizard_of_odd]

[K-MacK]

Perhaps this election will sting the electorate enough that they take some interest in the governance of the nation fpr a change, although I doubt it. Fact is, most people are quite happy to bitch, moan, gripe and complain, then just mark the same damn party they've always marked.
A lot of people have been conditioned into political helplessness, thanks to their Parties; when the opposite is the truth--the Parties should be the ones helpless in the face of the People's will.
Something to consider here: Back in the days of Communist Russia, the Russian Constitution actually gave the Russian People more liberties than our own Constitution gave us*; but the Governmant simply ignored them on some pretext or other, usually Security. Sound familiar? We're headed there.
The only way we'll achieve change is to let our local Party people know we're not going to settle for the status quo they've established, and that won't be easy. Necessary, yes; easy, no.
Either we do it, or like I've said; We're ROME all over again ( and the barbarians are out there just waiting).
We can achieve change for the better; but it's going to take work, resolve, and a willingness to stand up to smear campaigns. We can do it, though...if we want this "Grand Experiment" to survive. We damn well have to.
*I know, Constitutions recognize, not grant Freedoms; but that's what people understand and that's what I'm writing for...understanding.