The War Against Democracy

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Of course, 'no government' is impossible. If you tear down the current government because you think you want 'no government,' that's not what you'll get. You'll get a new government, and it will clearly demonstrate how silly it was to think of the current one as a 'tyranny.'

Precisely the point I have been trying make to government haters. The question they hate to hear is, "What do you think will replace it?". Because something WILL replace our current form of government. Most likely something that does not involve the ability to vote out tyrants..............

Dave

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

Picking sides in the political battle isn't going to fix this. I really think we're at the point where we need to disassemble the machine, give it a thorough cleaning, and then put it back together so it works correctly.

It may come to that, but I much fear it.

The metaphor you choose, the 'disassembled, cleaned, and reassembled machine' suggests radical change, by someone with the power to totally stop and remake the government. Under the Constitution, that could only be done by a new constitutional convention.

If that is not possible, the only other option would be some sort of extra-constitutional means, some sort of coup or violent revolution. Would you support that idea?

And that word 'clean' in there really scares me. In the political context, 'clean' is usually an euphemism for 'kill.'

[BlueStreak]

Better to turn to the "elected class" than the "unelected" class. The unelected class is responsible to no one and never goes away.

Corporate style oligarchy is Fascist tyranny.

Dave

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

It may come to that, but I much fear it.

The metaphor you choose, the 'disassembled, cleaned, and reassembled machine' suggests radical change, by someone with the power to totally stop and remake the government. Under the Constitution, that could only be done by a new constitutional convention.

If that is not possible, the only other option would be some sort of extra-constitutional means, some sort of coup or violent revolution. Would you support that idea?

And that word 'clean' in there really scares me. In the political context, 'clean' is usually an euphemism for 'kill.'

What's interesting is that these sentiments to disassemble, clean and reassemble didn't come to the fore until Obama won the Presidency. Where were they when their government (under Dubya) sold us a bill of goods to support their ill-conceived, ill-managed and ill-fated trillion dollar war while ignoring malfeasance and criminal activity on Wall Street?

[whell]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

Better to turn to the "elected class" than the "unelected" class. The unelected class is responsible to no one and never goes away.

Corporate style oligarchy is Fascist tyranny.

Dave

If we turn to ANY "class", then it becomes some other group's or person's problem to fix. What's wrong with turning to "our" class?

[MikeG22]

The government doesn't need to be replaced or eliminated it just needs a few good sprays of deoxit.

How about starting with the elected class not all being wealthy individuals. The only way to be elected anymore is huge amounts of money and almost always money brings corruption and special interests.

[Rajoo]

citizens United and Mccutcheon rulings have pretty much sabotaged the election process permanently. Term limits are still an option.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

What's interesting is that these sentiments to disassemble, clean and reassemble didn't come to the fore until Obama won the Presidency. Where were they when their government (under Dubya) sold us a bill of goods to support their ill-conceived, ill-managed and ill-fated trillion dollar war while ignoring malfeasance and criminal activity on Wall Street?

Oh BS! You continue to want to be petulant about this, and perpetuate idiotic and dis-proven narratives.

Conservatives have been increasingly concerned about the scope and reach of government for years. That's why there's still a fondness for Reagan: he may not have been successful in achieving his stated goals, but his message still resonates. Conservatives fired Bush Senior in 1992 by either staying home or voting for Mr. "I'm all ears". What the hell do you think THAT was about? We later had the Contract with America that resonated not just with conservatives but centrists as well. We then proceeded to watch Gingrich and company become corrupted by Washington and piss it all away.

We haven't had an election cycle that advanced core conservative principles since 1994. Dole? Not hardly. Bush Jr.? At best, Bush was a moderate, and conservatives had plenty of disagreements with Bush. McCain? A train wreck. Ronmey was a conservative wanna-be, but governing in MA and his inability to clearly articulate a coherent message damaged his candidacy.

Spare me the "this is all about Obama" crap. You can't be that blind.

[whell]

Originally Posted by MikeG22

The government doesn't need to be replaced or eliminated it just needs a few good sprays of deoxit.

How about starting with the elected class not all being wealthy individuals. The only way to be elected anymore is huge amounts of money and almost always money brings corruption and special interests.

This goes beyond a strategic appliation of deoxit. We need an EchoWars - style restoration!

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

We haven't had an election cycle that advanced core conservative principles since 1994....

Might it be that a majority of Americans want nothing to do with the type of jagoffs spewing on about core conservative principles? The clown show of the last GOP Presidential primary made this pretty clear.

GOP fetishism over Reagan is silly, weird and counterproductive. He's dead and what you're left with is a bunch of silly, unappealing idiots trying to pass themselves as conservatives (Cruz, Paul, Palin, Cain, Santorum .....). The truth is that only about 15-20% of Americans buy into this core conservative principles malarkey (the Teabaggers). Most others are smart enough to realize that governance is done through compromise between those of differing viewpoints/interests. This is lost completely on today's conservative movement.

And yes, Dubya was indeed a conservative. Disowning him once he screwed the pooch doesn't change that fact. His foreign policy has the distinction of making Obama's feckless foreign policy look intelligent and nuanced. You really want the GOP/conservative foreign policy apparatus (read NeoCon's) back in power?