AOC gets it right

[Big RR]

I'm not a big fan of AOC; I agree with her on some things, disagree on others, but she seems to go out of her way to piss some people off. That being said, she got it right about the censure of Paul Gosar and the cowardly republicans refusing to vote to condemn his behavior:

It is sad, it is a sad day in which a member who leads a political party in the United States of America cannot bring themselves to say that issuing a depiction of murdering a member of Congress is wrong.

And Liz Cheney, one of the two republicans who bucked the republican pressure and voted for censure said something similar:

The glorification of the suggestion of the killing of a colleague is completely unacceptable. And I think that it's a clear violation of House rules. I think it's a sad day. But I think that it's really important for us to be very clear that violence has no place in our political discourse. And that is his actions were completely unacceptable and and demanded censure.

I'm pretty ashamed to see that the vote was not unanimous; there's absolutely no defense for such asinine behavior and it deserves to be condemned. But party politics just get in the way, time and time again. Sure, it has worked, and continues to work, both ways (and dems have, in the past, proven to be as cowardly as republicans here) but when a party system encourages elected representatives not to vote to condemn an idiotic action like this (not to expel him from Congress, not to suspend his voting privileges, merely to condemn the behavior and issue a rebuke), I seriously wonder about our future.

[BoSoxGal]

There’s no uncertainty about our future; we are devolving into fascist minority rule. One party is psychopathological and the other is a blundering mess.

[Big RR]

I sincerely hope we'll see the way and correct our course; but I am becoming more and more pessimistic.

[Sue U]

U.S. politics has devolved to tribalism because that's what sells, and the political marketing business is capitalizing on it. Our culture has no appetite for thoughtfulness or complexity generally, and this brutishness has been well infused into our politics. I think this is nothing new for America, although it may intensify and wane over the years, and I think the "two-party system" that evolved through the 19th Century is the direct cause of our difficulties today, as it drowns the spectrum of public priorities and potential policy choices and drives an us-versus-them approach solely focused on wielding political power. And that's without even getting into the issues of how culture-war politics obscures the actual legislative agenda of the moneyed interests controlling the public discourse. It is long past time to dump this system in favor of a more fluid multi-party approach that promotes transparency, collaboration and coalition-building rather than opacity, conflict and division.

[Big RR]

Sue--it may be "nothing new", but in the past I have seen the legislators pull together when they had to, from WW2 to the 60s civil rights acts; now the parties can't even agree that posting an asinine video like this deserves censure, and there appears to be monolithic party loyalty, focusing more on not letting the other side "win" (even when there is no argument that there is only one proper vote), than in doing what is right for the country. And that I see as something quite new.

FWIW, look at the censure of the Joe McCarthy; the repblicans evenly split in voting for and against the censure; nothing even remotely like that happened here.

[Sue U]

When legislators (and their patrons) believe there is some threat to their power and personal well-being greater than the political scuffle of the day, that's when they'll "pull together," but it won't be because of any high-minded principle. Remember, there was real and significant political pressure to keep the U.S. out of "Europe's war" right until the attack on Pearl Harbor.

[Big RR]

I guess the biggest problem is that the electors don't make any demands on them, so they don't see any reason to do anything. But I do think there was some higher principle in enacting the civil rights acts; they were never really popular (although turning dogs and fire hoses on children did make a difference), but the legislators did work together and compromise when pushed by LBJ. There may have been a general mandate to do something, but they went a lot further; ditto for medicare.

[Sue U]

There is currently a general popular mandate to do something about a host of issues from infrastructure to healthcare to child care to minimum wage to college debt, yet there is insufficient threat to the obstructionist puppets of the capitalist class to accomplish much of anything. In the federal government, less than 5% of House seats are actually in play in any election, so the overwhelming majority of legislators don't have to worry about what their constituents think, only their donors. Ronald Reagan avidly campaigned against Medicare as socialism and tyranny, and he still got elected president -- twice -- with even more stupid ideas.

[Big RR]

Well you hit it correctly, most people just vote for the same person again and again without even looking at what they are doing; which is part of the problem.

As for Reagan and medicare, note that a repeal was never really attempted; it makes good sound bites, but repealing it would likely be political suicide (as much as seniors bitch about it, mot use it extensively). Indeed, the only thing that plays well i cutting taxes, and this is notlost on either party, bloating the deficit year after year. We don't even try to pay for the "wars" we fight.

[Econoline]

There’s no uncertainty about our future; we are devolving into fascist minority rule. One party is psychopathological and the other is a blundering mess.

I sincerely hope we'll see the way and correct our course; but I am becoming more and more pessimistic.

I am reminded of this "Quotable Quote":

More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.

— Woody Allen, “My Speech to the Graduates” (New York Times, August 10, 1979)

[liberty]

This country is slowly moving towards a war. The reason for that is the hatred on the left for anyone who is not a leftist. She,AOC, sees anyone who’s not on the left as a racist. She, along with Meade, would consider me racist even though they can’t point to anything I ever said or did that would indicate I’m a racist. I must be a racist because I won’t accept things that black people do wrong without comment. Evidently, I am a racist because I will not submit and take an inferior position. She says that whites feel their superior because they’re white; well, that’s crap. I don’t feel superior to anyone; if anything, I feel inferior. I’ve struggled all my life to overcome the negative programming of a vindictive stepfather who resented me because my father was half Mexican, so I don’t feel superior to anyone. I have to struggle to feel good enough.

Some people feel that the country will unite if there’s a foreign threat, but I’m unsure. We will see what will happen when Putin invades Ukraine. I suspect there will be many secretly rooting for Putin just because Biden is president. What about all those leftists who rooted for the Iraqi insurgents because Bush was president. What goes around comes around, and each time, a little more of the house burns. Before long, we will be homeless.

[MajGenl.Meade]

e, along with Meade, would consider me racist even though they can’t point to anything I ever said or did that would indicate I’m a racist.

Well that's not true. I point it out all the time. You constantly dredge up bad news stuff and either snark about "liberals" or "blacks". In fact, you delight in posting things which reflect badly upon a black person. You either fail to do the same for non-blacks or you substitute the word "liberal"

Your dog whistles are clearly heard by non-canines. But let's not argue about that. It rather derails the subject of this post and the balance of your message below (or above) is mostly on the subject.

I would happily vote against Occasional-Cortex and her ilk, if given the chance. But she (and they) are more on the side of the angels than race-baiting Republican friends of Donald.

[Big RR]

What about all those leftists who rooted for the Iraqi insurgents because Bush was president.

What about them? You should know, they exist only in your mind.