Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

How the Democrats Blew It in Only Eight Months

By Alexander Cockburn, The Nation. Posted August 10, 2007.


Thanks to the Dems' inaction on Iraq and compliance with Bush on the FISA bill, the Democratic-controlled Congress now has a "confidence" rating of 14 percent, the lowest since Gallup started asking the question in 1973 and five points lower than Republicans scored last year.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Alexander Cockburn

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Led by Democrats since the start of this year, Congress now has a "confidence" rating of 14 percent, the lowest since Gallup started asking the question in 1973 and five points lower than Republicans scored last year.

The voters put the Democrats in to end the war, and it's escalating. The Democrats voted the money for the surge and the money for the next $459.6 billion military budget. Their latest achievement was to provide enough votes in support of Bush to legalize warrantless wiretapping for "foreign suspects whose communications pass through the United States." Enough Democrats joined Republicans to make this a 227-183 victory for Bush. The Democrats control the House. Speaker Nancy Pelosi could have stopped the bill in its tracks if she'd wanted to. But she didn't. The Democrats' game is to go along with the White House agenda while stirring up dust storms to blind the base to their failure to bring the troops home or restore constitutional government.

The row over the US Attorneys and the conduct of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has always been something of a typhoon in a teaspoon. The Democrats love it, since they imagine it portrays them to the public as resolute guardians of the impartial administration of justice, a concept whose credibility most Americans sensibly deride. The Democrats now plan to track Gonzales's firing of the US Attorneys back to that comic opera villain of the Bush era, Karl Rove, another great provoker of dust storms.

The one Democrat acting on principle in the Gonzales affair has been Senator Russ Feingold. He at least tried to dig into the visit of chief White House counsel Gonzales, as he then was, to the bedside of Attorney General John Ashcroft, to get him to sign off on the illegal wiretaps. And how did the Democrat-controlled Congress deal with Feingold's efforts to nail Gonzales for his efforts to undermine the Constitution and for his prevarications under oath? It promptly legalized the eavesdropping.

Just as the Democrats work tirelessly to demonstrate to the voters that it makes zero difference which party controls Congress, the political establishment forces all candidates for the presidential nomination to sever any compromising ties to sanity and common sense.

Right now they're hosing down Barack Obama because he said in the YouTube debate in South Carolina that he would be prepared to meet with Kim Jong Il, Hugo Chávez, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Fidel Castro to hash over problems face to face. The pundits whacked him for demonstrating "inexperience." Experienced leaders order the CIA to murder such men.

Then Obama drew even fiercer fire by saying he would take nukes off the table in the war on terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. "I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance," Obama told the AP on August 2, adding, after a pause, "involving civilians." Then he quickly said, "Let me scratch that. There's been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That's not on the table."

I'm beginning to respect this man. He displays sagacity well beyond the norm for candidates seeking the Oval Office. He comprehends, if only in mid-sentence, that when you drop a nuclear bomb, it will kill civilians. He also realizes that strafing Waziristan with thermonuclear devices in the hopes of nailing Osama bin Laden is a foolish way to proceed.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: congress, iraq, democrats, fisa, public opinion

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
That's what happens when you put a woman
Posted by: gistre on Aug 10, 2007 8:41 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
who's an AIPAC lackey in charge. But Pelosi sure looked good putting on that show with all those kids at her swearing-in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: of course :) Posted by: werewolf
Impeachment doesn't count?
Posted by: nc green on Aug 10, 2007 9:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you think there's actually going to be an election in 2008, I guess it doesn't.

Good article, but impeachment is just as important as all the rest. There can't be a Chancellor Bush if he's not around to declare martial law when the next hurricane or virus or terror attack hits. If the investigations get started now, we might have a chance of uncovering enough to get rid of him while we still have the chance.

Congress oughta be working 18 hours a day on every item you mention, including impeachment. But of course they won't. They'll dick around thinking they've got the next election in the bag until a "state of emergency" postpones the next election. Or until the Democrats look like such fools that they can't win an election.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Impeachment doesn't count? Posted by: clvngodess
» RE: Impeachment doesn't count? Posted by: edgar_michel
Vote Democratic- Get Republican
Posted by: NoPCZone on Aug 10, 2007 9:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before the lights get turned out, let's get a couple of facts straight:
1- In a real democracy workers can organize without fear of employer reprisal.
2- In a real democracy citizens don't stand naked before the power of the state.
3- In a real democracy civil liberties are non-negotiable and no government has the right to infringe or suspend them.
4- In a real democracy the elected do the bidding of those who voted and pay the bills.
5- In a real democracy corporations do not have the standing of persons.
6- In a real democracy every vote counts and every vote gets counted.

There is a truckload of evil to be undone and until then we are just pretending that we live in a real democracy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Well... Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Well... Posted by: shanaza
» RE: Well... Posted by:
» RE: Well... Posted by:
» RE: Well... Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Well... Posted by: HoboHomo
» RE: Well... Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Well... Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Well... Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Well... Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Well... Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Well... Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Well... Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Well... Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Well... Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Well... Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Well... Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Well... Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Well... Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Well... Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Well... Posted by: Lincoln fan
» Cockburn's Nadaritis... Posted by: Wells
interesting
Posted by: daniel1982 on Aug 10, 2007 9:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As stupid as everyone claims Bush is, he is stringing Democrats along. They're doing everything he wants!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: interesting Posted by:
IT IS ON PURPOSE
Posted by: american on Aug 10, 2007 9:28 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Democratic "leadership" is cloaking their support for the war under the guise of flubbed failures and procedural rigmarole.

The vast majority of America wants out! Why are we still there! This, among so many other examples of treachery against the American people and the US Constitution in recent times, illustrates the fact that there are a groups of people pulling the stings from both the "left" and the "right," Democrat and Republican whereby we witness the continuity of the outlandishly absurd path this country has been going down.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Which is the AIPAC Posted by: werewolf
You're asking the American people for their opinion?
Posted by: LMNOP on Aug 10, 2007 9:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As abysmal as the Democrat (sic) Party and Congress under their majority control are, they are still nowhere as bad as the Republicans and Bush White House. The difference is as vast as the difference between sins of omission and sins of commision.

So why does Congress have a much lower approval rating (about 14%) than Bush (about 28%)? Easy.

The Republican voters are told what to think. Two-thirds of us find the Democrats unacceptable, but almost all of them do, so they bring what would have been a 25-30% approval if they voted naturally down to 14% on instruction.

Likewise with Bush, who would probably be at about a 10-15% approval rating if only people who were voting their own minds voted. But you've got the Borg expressing approval in large numbers.

It's pointless even polling the Borg. Just ask their handlers what they think.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not so much. Posted by: ABetterFuture
Eerie silence on this article
Posted by: mercianomad on Aug 10, 2007 9:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm honestly completely unsurprised by congress here. Most Democrats talk and talk and talk, but they're still coming out of the same ranks as their opponents, and they clearly have the same dreams and motivators (and financial backers).

I am, however, flabbergasted that these dreams and motivators are so widespread - that these people can't see how horrifyingly twisted and ugly this world has become as a result of their decisions. The only reason I can see is because they don't have any demonstrable soul. It's a sweet world for the soulless if they happen to have money, mansions, vacations, power suits, self-approved pay-raises, nice haircuts. Such a world is tailor-fit to serve their ilk, but how could they overlook humanity as a whole like that? Can't they see the suffering around them? Ahh, yes, no soul. Just a shit-eating politician's smile and empty promises.

America's primary motivators are greed and gluttony - the two ugliest of the seven deadly sins. Wrath, sloth, envy, lust, and pride can all be justified to an extent, but greed and gluttony are truly hideous in their nature from the bottom up, and they are the defining markers of our nation and times, along with the eighth sin: lying, in all its attendant forms: Untruth, skewed truth, or the new favorite - completely ignored truth.

As I see it, elections don't matter anymore, because the enormous majority of politicians do NOT listen to the people. They couldn't give a damn about public opinion or what is right. These folk care about two things: Themselves and the hand that feeds them, which is theoretically supposed to be the people, but is actually the smallest segment of the people - corporate donors and lobbyists.

So again, elections don't matter. The same goes with writing letters to congress, gathering in the streets and yelling, or any of the other methods we have been using.

It seems there are only two solutions to this problem: The first is outright revolution (unlikely, given our absolute lack of cohesion and manufactured antipathy to violence or guns, as well as the probability that any attempt would be squashed or infiltrated immediately).

The second solution is easier, and requires no formal body. It means hitting the enemy where it hurts: Their wallets. For the moment, I advocate the latter. Research everything you buy, no matter how much you want it. And curtail your use of resources as much as possible. If something has the slightest hint of ugliness to it or if its manufacturer is contributing to the government process, don't buy it. It's harder to educate yourself than to remain dumb about what you buy, but it needs to be done. They need their power stripped, and this is looking like the only way.

Our money is the only democratic voice we have in this corporatist fascism, because clearly our actual desires are being ignored and we are all seen as a threat. Money is hugely important to these people. It matters to them transcendentally more than your opinion about anything does.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: There is a third solution that is even easier. Posted by: Annie Loyd for Congress
Surely you're not serious!
Posted by: wireup on Aug 10, 2007 9:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Why all this clamor to launch a proceeding surely destined to fail, aimed at a duo who will be out of the White House in sixteen months?"

Surely, you can't be serious? If these bastards are NOT impeached, tried, and imprisoned then what message are you sending to anyone else who will occupy the White House in the future? What you are telling them is that it is PERFECTLY okay to break the law, perfectly okay to do what you want - there are no consequences to your actions - there is one law for you and one for the rest of us!

Is this what you want?

These bastards can do a HELL of a lot more damage in 16 months - including the nuking of Iran in another war.

Is this what you want?

These SOBs NEED TO BE IMPEACHED, TRIED, AND IMPRISONED or we have had it.

Do you understand?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Surely you're not serious! Posted by: northforker
Run Cindy, Run
Posted by: Nick on Aug 10, 2007 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pelosi is a treazonous b..ch

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Run Cindy, Run Posted by: Xynyx
» RE: un Cindy, Run Posted by: freethink7
We need a full court press against Pelosi
Posted by: PaulC on Aug 10, 2007 10:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pelosi is a spineless coward who has repeatedly betrayed all Americans:
* appointed Dingell to chair Energy and Transportation. His first act was to torpedo any chance at getting an increase in CAFE standards in the energy bill
* bows to Bush's every whim on Iraq, has been invisible as regards using her position as a bully pulpit to oppose the insanity and dishonesty surrounding the conduct of the war. Has she even had a press conference since taking office?? I read the paper every day and watch Mathews and Stewart but I don't recall even seeing her timid shadow.
* refuses to confront Bush on his undermining of our fundamental rights, allowing the gutting of FISA, failing to go after the Republican thugs with a full court press, including invoking the RICO statute, to push them back on their heels and ultimately land them all in jail.

Pelosi is, hands down, the weakest House Speaker in the past 50 years. She needs to go. Any news about Cindy Sheehan running against her? We need a leader who remembers what the phrase "standing on principle" means! We need a leader who does not look like a frightened deer-in-the-headlights at the podium!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Americans - ThE MoSTesT DUmB KiDs oN THe BlOCk!!
Posted by: MAD on Aug 10, 2007 10:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Isn't it obvious what the Dems are doing? They're simply riding it out until '08 (no different than most cowardly, chicken shit Americans). They won't even consider touching this hot potato until a duly elected Democrat occupies the oval office. Then and only then will someone begin to gingerly touch what is this disastrous foray into Iraq.

See, the Dems will lose either way. Demand a pull-out too quickly and they risk turning off those slimy, flag-waving red neck pieces of shit who think we need to stay the course for integrity, foolish pride, etc. If they don't pull out, they're seen as weak and unwilling to confront the Neocons. I'm rather in the latter camp. I think they're all worthless pieces of excrement who never should have been voted in to begin with but *sigh* what do you expect from the dumbest people on earth? And those politicians who probably would do something are ostracized by useless idiot Americans because they're too short, balding, not as charismatic, etc. You're all pathetic and you get precisely what you deserve.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Partly so Posted by: american
» Well ... Posted by: skoog5600
System is Terminally Broken
Posted by: Red Harvest on Aug 10, 2007 10:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People need to wake up to the reality that as long as the bought-and-paid-for corporate "two-party" duopoly remains in place, nothing of significance will change. Both the Democrats and Republicans serve the same masters, which is why both are essentially indifferent to public opinion. Because obviously, that's not the opinion that matters.

Working within the system for change, by supporting supposedly progressive-minded and populist Democrats, is an exercise in futility. Either they are fakes, or else their candidacies are purely symbolic, as in the case of someone like Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel. All candidates like that do is provide a veneer of legitimacy by offering the illusion of real choice, where in fact none really exists.

What I suggest as an alternative strategy is: Become a (peaceful) revolutionary. The political rulebook embodied by our Constitution, its interpretation, statutory laws and practical realities, is highly regressive and unfair. It effectively guarantees the perpetuation of a system in which the wealth class enjoys a complete monopoly of political power, and is able to continue their policies of militarism, environmental degradation, and the financial exploitation and victimization of the lesser classes. Among so many other outrages and abuses.

Turn your backs on the fakery and false promises of the Democratic Party, and begin the process of building an independent progressive movement dedicated to a dramatic overhaul of the American Constitution. Our current version (AC v1.27) represents a political operating system that might have made sense for the America of 200 years ago. As we move into the 21st century, it is badly outmoded and in need of major renovations. To believe otherwise, and to continue to expect deliverance from the soulless and corrupt *by* the soulless and corrupt, is -- in Ralph Nader's words -- a snare and a delusion.

Then again, I recall Charlie Brown never was able to resist the siren call of Lucy offering to tee up the football and not snatch it away at the last second, no matter how many times previously she'd betrayed the same promise. Sad to say, at the moment the activist/progressive segment of the American citizenry seems to be stuck in the same kind of delusional mindset.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: System is Terminally Broken Posted by: Annie Loyd for Congress
And you think the Dems are different...
Posted by: BJT on Aug 10, 2007 10:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Democrats are no better than the Republicans. They are both part of the same agenda.

The Democrats gave the President the domestic spying powers his own party wouldn't give him. Who is on whose side here?

This isn't about Democrats or Republicans being in power. They're both the same team in different colors, scrimmaging in front of you in different colored jerseys, putting on a show. It may look like there is some kind of conflict over which way they are going to take the country, but the true conflict is not along party lines. This is between the vast majority in Washington who want more expansive government powers, versus a tiny minority who still comprehend liberty, with a considerable amount of noise thrown in from the dimwits in the system who still think there's a difference between D and R.

The Dems keep conceding to "Republican" ambitions.

The "conservative" War on Terror is nothing more than super-aggressive, liberal Wilsonian foreign policy.

Changing the party in the oval office will accomplish nothing. Changing the philosophy will.

Ron Paul '08!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Even More.. Posted by: werewolf
Kaixo
Posted by: lasarte-oria on Aug 10, 2007 10:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't help but see all of this [discourse] as white noise.

Historically, those in power seek to get more of it - only on rare occasions [usually as a result of civil conflict] do concessions get made.

The US, at this moment, possess a climate which makes it very difficult for the hoi poli to organize. What working American would organize if it could cost him or her their job? Even as sorry a life it is working paycheck to paycheck, it is better than living out of your car or under a bridge. Providing universal healthcare and a greater welfare benefits would undermine the very threat of being poor. The threat of poverty is awesome and with so many of us seeing it lurking behind us, it in itself motivates the many into such servile positions.

To prove that nothing will be done, look into the election frauds first. Where were the independent investigations? Where were the mass protests? Thirty years ago, when a person made 15,000 a year and a home cost $40,000, people could afford to stand up for their country. These days home prices put that poverty spectre right in the backseat.

I believe it takes re-thinking what a citizen of this country is and should aspire to. The many illegals should actually be admired in their 'take the money and run' posture. What a philosophy - work like a slave, send the money back home where it can go three times (or more) as far as the US, then go back home and live well.

Right now, we don't get much out of the social contract and I believe that history will once again put its patterns to work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Kaixo Posted by: Wessex
Alternet: why are you not reporting on Kucinich?
Posted by: american on Aug 10, 2007 11:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Democrat for president.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Me too. Posted by: justaguy
» Know why? Posted by: werewolf
» I agree as well Posted by: indradawn
» Agreed Posted by: EKSwitaj
» wow Posted by: Iconoclast421
Hopelessly optimistic
Posted by: drmflorida on Aug 10, 2007 11:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps I am hopelessly optimistic, but perhaps what we are seeing is not another swing of the pendalum, but a train coming off of both rails (sorry for the mixed metaphors).

I am a democrat through and through, but I give congress the same rating. As others have pointed out, the little that they have done is for show, and does not represent the type of change that is needed. (Like the insulting raise of the minimum wage. I would like to see any of them live on 6 bucks an hour for one month.)

Of course. The democratic party has been hijacked by corporatists, just like the republican party. The bosses have turned our political system into a hedge fund. Of course. It is stupid to even say it out loud because its obvious.

I'm not sure the polls result is a bad thing. If they had indicated approval, it would show that America's anger was an inch deep, that all we wanted was a change of hats. It would validate all of the lobbyists who are switching allegiance in anticipation of democratic gains in 2008.

No. America's anger is not leading to a climax in 2008. It is leading to something much more significant. When the workers and middle class begin to realize they are on the same side, something dramatic will happen. It may be at the ballot box, or it may be something else. But it won't be business as usual.

Keep your minimum wage increase. I'll take the class war instead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hopelessly optimistic Posted by: Old Me
» possibly Posted by: Iconoclast421
Economic terrorism
Posted by: wrd on Aug 10, 2007 11:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would call the dynamic alluded to by "lasarte-oria" in the previous entry ("Kaixo") ECONOMIC TERRORISM. More needs to said about how the current system is terrorizing the middle class with the fear of poverty and rendering them impotent in the wake of ever bolder attacks on their freedom, security and overall quality of life. It is a beautiful complement to the fear of "standard" terrorism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: conomic terrorism Posted by: drmflorida
Climate expert tries his hand at sociology
Posted by: ScottP on Aug 10, 2007 11:33 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is this the same Cockburn who can't figure out what happens to the gas he puts in his car's tank? The man who thinks that suddenly sunspots are driving the most dramatic change in climate in the past half million years, rather than the dramatic change in the composition of the atmosphere due to burning fuel? And now we're supposed to forget his inability to understand atmospheric sciences but willingness to write about it, and we're supposed to think that he might know something about his current topic of interest?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» second that! Posted by: thoughtcriminal
They Blew it way more than eight months ago!!!!!
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Aug 10, 2007 11:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1972 to be exact. That was the begining of the blending of the two Parties. The Democrats for Nixon Campaign. Imagine that democrats backing a crooked president? That's why they are still doing it today. Yes, our president IS a crook. The Congress is too. Did'nt matter it was republican run for twelve years,these fecless flechers already had been working together for years. The current crop just proved it again.
Because they were bold enough to say 'We'll do more in the first 100 days....' put the press heat on them. What did we see? Just what they wanted us too. NOTHING!!!! They had the ability to overturn everything Ol' Bushy boy did. They did not.
They went for a bunch of grandstanding bullshit to make it seem like they were actually doing something. They did Not.
This is the reason no one from any of these two parties of thieves should be re-elected. They are totally corrupted and no longer function with the best interest of the People in mind.
There was this document they used to make us recite. It started out with 'When in the course of Human Events...' and if the events were bad enough we could cancel their right to govern.
I believe the events have caught up to us. It time to sweep out the trash!! You sitting at your screen reading this...YOU should have some say in things. You don't. You could do a better job than any of the clowns we now have. Maybe that's the real answer. Get out in you neighborhoods and talk to you neighbors. I bet you'll hear more you agree with than what comes out the T.V. or some paid politician's mouth. So elect,Draft, do whatever to get the folks you agree with in office. If they ain't taking donations to speak,they're probably much better people than what we have now.
Draft Jeffrey7 for Prez...it's the only vote that counts

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I'd go back to 1963 Posted by: Iconoclast421
Give up and get out
Posted by: Serafim Tkachuk on Aug 10, 2007 12:54 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hoodwinked by the Republicans and betrayed by the Democrats, there is only one option left to you: give up and get out. You may think you can save the country the world once admired and loved, but its soul is quite dead. Only a miracle will be able to breathe life into its fly-blown corpse. While the Republicans may have opened the many doors to fascism, the Democrats have been nigh equally seduced by its dark power. All that is left for you who remain behind is to weather as bet you can the grim storm we see brewing. Is there any hope? No. We awoke from the dreams of our last election to find ourselves living the same tired nightmare. Only the insane can now imagine that the coming election will bring anything different.

The only comfort that remains is absurd fantasy, the depressing mental opium akin to the sad entertainments of the poor who buy lottery tickets week after week after week ... just in case, maybe, this time ... (whimper) ... please, this time?

Maybe we shall welcome a President named Kucinich. Maybe we shall see the House utterly dominated by progressive Democrats, and the Senate too. Maybe progressive Democrats will govern every state of the Union. Maybe much needed constitutional and electoral reform will resurrect the stone-cold dead. Oh, go ahead, buy your electoral lottery tickets. Maybe you'll win big this time and strike it rich.

Give up and get out. While you still can.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I did and AMEN! Posted by: skoog5600
» RE: Give up and get out Posted by: bluebirdella
» Sympathize with your plight Posted by: skoog5600
» RE: Give up and get out Posted by: richholland
» there is no place to go Posted by: Iconoclast421
Alexander Cockburn is no longer a reliable information source.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Aug 10, 2007 12:59 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
His atrocious denial of global warming science mimics that of Big Oil interests. Plus, his pimping of Obama ignores the fact that Obama's main financiers are the financial/real estate sectors - see opensecrets 2008

Alexander Cockburn seems to prove that George Orwell was on track when he defined a liberal as 'a power-worshipper who is out of power'. It's pretty shameful - and the website that he's involved with, CounterPunch, refuses to allow reader commentary - just like the New York Times. Even the Washington Post has comments section - so why not counterpunch?

Hmmm... could it be that Cockburn wants to control the message in the same way that the NYT does? A global warming denialist who pimps Obama... atrocious.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» 911 as blowback Posted by: wrd
Ya' know... If a dem Really wanted to be president...
Posted by: ~Fiona~ on Aug 10, 2007 1:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...They'd call themselves out as "bi-partisian" and Kick Rethug Ass Every Chance they Get!

I know I'd vote for someone who finally held somebody accountable for a change instead of falling in line with the ongoing debachery just so they can go home for the whole month of August...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Will the liberal please stand up!
Posted by: Conservasaurus on Aug 10, 2007 1:23 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First Mr Cockburn... will the liberals be able to influence the dems..THEY ARE THE DEMS!!!!

It didnt take a genuis to see that the dems ( liberals) were going nowhere fast.. first 100 hours - petty fights with repubs, personal attacks on Bush - they looked pretty much like a bunch of kids finally let into the candy store and filled with such emotion couldn't decide which candy to take first!!!

As many have said, there is NO difference between repub and dem - show them the money (donations) and they will jump to almost any tune!

As for surveillance - what is so hard about this.. suspected terrorist communications vs someone reading my mail.. read my mail.. who cares - progressives need to get off this wagon ..it's a minor inconvenience – people are in Iraq/ Afghanistan fighting to contain terrorism, over 3,000 died in 9-11 and you’re worried about someone reading your emails!!!

No wonder the approval rating of congress is below that of Bush!!!

As for Pelosi - what color drapes did she finally use in her office??? important stuff first!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Will the liberal please stand up! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Will the liberal please stand up! Posted by: Conservasaurus
That the Democrats even won anything last year should have been a surprise given their Seinfeldian
Posted by: maxpayne on Aug 10, 2007 2:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"do nothing" plans that were showing through the cracks last year. But here's a better idea as to why neither political party will actually do anything true and honest these days.

INSIDE THE FALL OF THE DEMOCRATIC - AND REPUBLICAN - PARTIES

WHAT REALLY HAS HAPPENED, AND WHY IT CAN'T BE FIXED ANYTIME SOON

by

Samuel A. Stanson


P.S.: Yes, I know it came out in late 2004 but seriously, the content of the article is NOT outdated one bit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What d'ya expect?
Posted by: Doggycuny on Aug 10, 2007 2:39 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is what happens when people don't pay attention to politics in their own country. Americans are too lazy and dumb to know anything about their own country's politics. Alternet.org readers are above average intelligence, but unfortunatley the majority of Americans are retarted. Dems and Neocons are both corrupt. They both serve the same master. Things will never change until you abolish the 2 party system. And guess what? Your leaders that rape you every day have known this for a hundred years!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jumping on Dems
Posted by: Maryanne on Aug 10, 2007 3:06 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think we are all agreed that the Democrats have not done the job they had advertised they would do prior to their becoming the majority party. But before you jump on the Democrats you must take into account that the Republicans stop at NOTHING to get their way- either as majority or minority- and have often sabotaged the attempts Dems have made to start a change. Even with this, Democrats have made some minor gains. And much that is being asked of them is beyond their ability to prodcuce. (ie succeed in impeaching, although this is is overdue)

Al Gore, in his recent book, "The Assault on Reason" gives a complete, clear, concise explanation of not only why the Democratic Party but also the Americans have so difficult a time dealing with the present situation (crisis). It is really worth a read.

If it is any comfort to those who comment here, Al Gore notes that it is the Internet, the people who make comments on articles such as these, who have their own blogs, who join organizations such as MoveOn that are having house parties to share ideas with each other on an issue, and those who send in petitions are those who will in the long run be the ones who can save our Democracy. He says in essence to be of good cheer- you all are the roots from which good will eventually come - because you are THINKING.

There are those in Congress who are not corrupted. It has been said repeatedly in recent months that the American citizenry are way ahead of the Congress in knowing what needs to be done. We need to let those in Congress know when they do what is of benefit to this country and also when they fail. If they care, they will listen. It has taken years (since R Reagan) to get to this point- we cannot expect that the Democrats will be able to change all this in such a short time, especially with a president who fights them every day.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Jumping on Dems Posted by: VZEQICVA
» that's right Posted by: Iconoclast421
Heh, heh...
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Aug 10, 2007 3:23 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remember a while back when a bunch of Alterneters were saying Pelosi was going to change everything, make things happen and blah, blah, blah, because she's the first female speaker?...

How's that working out?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Heh, heh... Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Heh, heh... Posted by: DaBear